Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 10-07~~ __ ~. . ., • • ~ ~ A G E N D A MERIDIAN CITY COUIVCIL OCTOBER 7, 1985 ITEM: ' MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 16, 1985: 1. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON ANNEXATION & ZONING ~. REQUEST BY MOE ALIDJANI: (APPROVED)(APPLICATION DENIED) 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT W/.VARIANCE FOR FAYE BREWER:(APFROVED) ( APFLICATION DENIED) 3. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE REQUEST BY KENT BARNEY'FOR LOT LINE • ADJUSTMENT AT THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE SUBDIVISION # 1: (APPROVED) ~ 4. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLAT , LOCUST GROVE MANOR, CHESTER & LORRIANE HOSAC: (TABLED UNTIL 10/21~85) 5. PRETEEtMINATION HEARING: WATER/SEWER/ TRASH DELIQUENCIES:(APPROVED) 6. APPROVE THE BILLS: (APPROVED) • 7. APPROVE THE JUDGES & CLERKS FOR THE_UPCOP~IING ELECTION: (APPROVED) ~ 8. DISCUSSION ON REQUEST FOR ONE ACRE SPLIT BY BOBX LAMPE:(APPROVED) 9. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: „ „ ~ • • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 7, 1985 Reqular Meeting of the Meridian City Council called €o order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Bill Brewer; Ron Tolsma; Bert Myers; Bob Giesler: Others Present: Mrs. Andrew Wolfe, Betty Wolfe, Opal Farrington, Julie Tolsma, Linda Mitich, Genvieve Moore, Art ~ioore, Blanche Wolff, JaAnne LaCrasse, Vera Hornbacker, Max Yerrington, Bob Mitich, Steve Gratton, Pat Fabricuis, Elaine Smith, Lawrence Smith, Martin Fabricius, Keith Jacobs, Lloyd Howe, Bill & Jan Clark, Harry Jensen, Chet & Lorraine Hosac, Roy Porter, Mary Rhoades, Leonard Rhodes, Moe Alidjani, Kenny Bowers, Gary Smith, Steve Hosac, Darwin Buchanan, Faye Brewer, Gary Haa;, Peggy Harr, Peggy Wood, Lee Roy Nelson, Gary Schaffer, Miriam Barr, Aline DeNardi, Wayne Crookston, Bob Spencer, The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the minutes of previous meeting held September 16, 1985 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: , Item #1: Findings of Fact and Conclusions on Alidjani application for annexation & zoning. Mayor Kingsford, Council Members you have had these Findings for a few days, are there any comments or questions of the Council? Councilman Brewer, I want you to know Mr. Alidjani that there are no personal feelings connected with your request and we respect you very highly as a member of our community, however it is my personal feelings a~ao__n going back to the comments of the neighbors and making reference to items 8 through 12 of the conclusions , I beleive are enough to substantiate a no vote on this request. Councilman Tolsma, basically I had about the same thing, even though he did conform to all the laws an~ ordinances and the uses, the fact that he was very honest with the people about what he was going to put in out there created the biggest drawback to getting the annexation and zoning. Even though I am probably going with a no vote, the fact remains that he has a business to run and sooner or later it is going to have to be somewhere in the City Limits. The public testimony was overwhelming against this and I would have to support the Findings of Fact and Conclusions on this application . Councilman Myers, I know the public testimony was very much against this proposal however, I feel where that property is located, there is land ~ outside that already zoned industrial and I do not see any problem zon- ing this property industrial to bring it into the City. It is not way out and the services go right by this property. I think this would be controlTed growth. I believe this is not a bad location for what Mr. Alidjani had planned. I have no problem with this annexation even though there was overwhelming testimony against this type of oper~~ionl '~ going in there. The way the Planning & Zoning came up with their recommendations and conditions that were involved with it was very stringent and very well done and I would have to vote against the Findings ' and Conclusions of Law. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL• . OCTOB~R 7, 19.85 PAGE # 2: • Councilman Giesler, If we did not have the public hearings our system really would not work that well, but we do have them , I think that the opposition that we had at the public he~arings, phone calls and letters was overwhelming, if in the application it was to zone and annex this ' property to move a shop out there, move his trucks out there and keep inside as the applicant has stated during his testimony, I would not have a problem with that, I believe it would be a good area for that. The problem I do have is the transfer station what he had in mind and what the application is about. I do not feel a transfer station should be located in that area, I realize in our plan it says it is allowed in industrial area but we use that as a guideline, I think this is a poor area for a transfer station. I would have to go along with the findings. Mayor Kingsford, I might just make the comment which is the same thing I said at the public hearing that logically that should be a industrial zone, I think on that amount of land he could operate it well but I would also agree with the Council tYi~ee members when you have a public hearing you have to be responsive, I think it would be unfortunate for you people out there if that or any other business that can be used with- out any kind of public hearing, you will not have these controls as I ~ stated previously at the public hearing, I think you may have done yourE self a diservice but none the less I think we have more than adequate industrial land annexed. There were no other comments. The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Tolsma that the Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves the Findings of Fact and Concl- usions as prepared on the request by Alidjani for annexation 7 zoning. Roll Call Vote: Brewer, Yea; Tolsma, Yea; •SMyers, Nay; Giesler, Yea: Motion Carried: The Niotion was made by Brewer and seconded by Giesler that the Meridian City Council hereby decides that this Annexation & Zoning request by Mr. Alidjani be denied based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions ~ as prepared. Motion Carried; Brewer, Yea; Tolsma, Yea; Myers, Nay; Giesler, Yea: Item #2: F'indings of Fact & Conclusions on Conditional Use Permit for Faye Brewer: D~ayor Kingsford, Council you have had these Findings for a period of ~ time, is there any comments or discussion? Councilman Brewer, Mr. Mayor, I will abstain from voting on this appli- cation due to conflict of interest. I Councilman Giesler, the application was for a Conditional Use Permit, ~during Mrs. Brewer presentation I felt it should be a rezone, I still ~ believe this should be handled with a r~zone, Mrs. Brewer stated that a rezone would change the atmosphere and I can not believe it would. Also you did not know if you could get signatures for rezone, you did get the signatures for the Conditional Use Permit, I do not know why it would change on obtaining the necessary signatures for a rezone. You are adjacent to Commercial property., we have had a lot trouble with Condit, ional Uses, if I had my way I do not think there should be Cond~~~Q~~l Use Permits , we just seem to have a problem with these, therefore I CITY COUNCIL • • OCTOBER 7, 1985 PAGE # 3 would have to go along with the Findings we have received, that it be denied, but there again I would say I have no problem with your project as it stands and if you want to start over or whatever, I have no problem but feel it should.be handled under a rezone~. Mayor Kingsford, Mr. Giesler for your information a rezone does not require the petition signatures, it only require the mailings. It was my recommeridation when you started Mrs. Brewer that you go for a re- zone, I do not have any problem with that, I personally think the Conditional Use is the wrong way to approach this. It'~~ would be My recommendation to the Council if you decide to go along with these findings and deny the application that you consider waiving the fees and so forth on a rezone. The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Giesler that t~he Meridian~ City Council hereby adopts and approves the Findings of Fact and Conclu!~s- ions on the Brewer application for Conditional Use Permit wit-h~Varianc:e. Roll Call Vote: Brewer, Abstain: Tolsma, Yea:,Myers, Yea: Giesler, Yea: Motion Carried: The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers that the Meridian City Council hereby decides that the Applicant's request for Conditiona.l Use Permit and Variance be denied based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions. Motion Carried: Al1 Yea;with Brewer abstaining: Item #3: Variance Request for Kent Barney, Lot Line Adjustment: i t~r. Kieth Jacobs, Loveless Engineering was present to represent Mr. Barney's request. Mr. Jaaobs explained the purpose of this request, reguest is two fold one to adjust the lot line away from the transformer for the pump on the west side of lot #8 and also the lot lines that front on the fairwa„y , of the golf course to have them abutt the planted area. , Mayor Kingsford, opened the Public Hearing, there was no testimony, the~ public hearing was closed. Any questions of the Council? There was some discussion on this. It was explained this was necessary to correct the original plat which was in error. The Motion was made by Brewer and seconded by Tolsma~to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions on the Variance request by Kent Barney`. Roll Call Vote: Giesler, Yea: Myers, Yea: Tolsma, Yea: Brewer, Yea: Motion Carried: The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Tolsma to approve the Variance request by Kent Barney for a Lot Line Adjustment at The Lake at Cherry Lane # 1 Subdivision: Motion Carried: All Yea: MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL• • OCTOBER 7, 1985 PAGE # 4 Item #4: Public Hearing, Annexation & Zoning Request with Preliminary Plat by Lorraine & Chester Hosac: Mayor Kingsford opened the Public Hearing, anyone fr,om the public who would like to make comment on this application? Mr. Dave Powell, Hosac Engineering was present to re~present this reques,t. Mr. Powell was sworn by Attorne.~ Crookston. , Mr. Powell, the development as it was submitted to P'lanning & Zoning was approved with the stipulation that we comply with all requirements of ACHD and the remaining questions of the City Engineer. We met with ACHD today and they have tenatively accepted our preliminary plat, they will) have it before their meeting on Thursday to formerly adopt the layout.~ Mr. Powell had brought copies of the new tenative preliminary plat for the Council to view ~nd explained what changes they had made to satisfy ACHD. ACHD had a problem with Dixie Lane which is a private drive on th~e original plat. They did not feel it was proper to dedicate a portion o,f this that bounded our property as public right-a-way. They wanted devel;op- ment set up so that was left as private drive. They also requested temgor- ary turnarounds on what we have called Alder Lane. They also requested a forty foot right-a-way along the property fronting Locust'Grove Road. We have also eliminated Lots 1-2-3 of Block 2 from the proposed develop- ment, we basically had a problem with these lots facing Locust Grove as~ we did not have enough frontage on those lots. We ha~e gone from 34 uni~ts down to 31. Willowbrook now deadends at our East property line, we have~ proposed to ACHD to allow that access to go to Dixie~Lane at that point the public right-a-way will end. Homeowners on Dixie Lane will have choice of useing Willow Drive or Dixie Lane. We have moved the culdesac so no lots frontage on Dixie Lane. We have shifted the streets down one set of lots in order to give the lots that fronted on Dixie Lane acces~s off of public righ~a-way. We have agreed to all the City Engineers request with the exception of the size of the water line. Mayor Kingsford, any questions of the Council? Councilman Brewer, it seems like there were additional questions possibly- by some of our City Departments and our City Engineer, I might ask the ~ City Engineer do you feel the Hosacs' are they ready to proceed tonite or are they going to need a little more time? Smith, I have looked over a rough draft of these changes, there is still the water line issue to be resolved. Mayor Kingsford, am I clear on that the lots that are being dropped from the plat is also being dropped from the request for annexation? Powell, that is correct. There was more discussion on this. Smith, it might be appropriate to include in annexation so not to end up with enclave. - ,. i"jERIDIAN GITY COUNCIL• • OCTOBER 7, 1985 ! PAGE ~ 5 i ° ' Tolsma, has the Fire Chief had a chance to look at this? ' Powell, he has not see?ai the revised tenative p1at.I believe the only com- ment was on the turn-a-around and they are to ACHD specifications. Mayor Kingsford, is there anyone in the public who wishes to testify at this time? There were none. Public Hearing was closed. Mayor Kingsford, for the record I might make a comment, with regard to conflict which I have in my own mind, that relates to the fact the City, already has lots of residential property annexed, I have confli.ct in annexing more, if people are interested in developing we should take a serious look and go ahead and approve of those. Councilman Giesler, I have to many unanswered questions, just receiving this plat tonite, I would maybe like to table this if Hosacs have no problem with that. Hosac, we have no problem with that. The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Myers to table this request until the October 21, 1985 meeting. Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #5: Pre-Termination Hearing Water/Sewer/Trash Deliquencies: Mayor Kingsford, You have been informed in writing, if you choose to, you have a right to pre-termination hearing, before the Mayor & Council, to appear in person to be judqed on facts and defend the claim. made by the City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain Counsel. Is there anyone present who wishes a hearing? No one was present. Due to their failure to pay their water bill or to present any valid reason why the bill has not been paid, their water shall be turned off on October 16, 1985. In order to have their water turned back on, there will be an additional fee of $10.00. You are hereby informed that you may appeal or have the,decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judi- cial District Court, pursuant to Idaho Code, Even though you appeal, the water will be shut off. I The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the turn- off list. ' Motion Carried; All Yea: . ~ Mayor Kingsford, announced the total amount of the turn-off list was $6,853.60: ~ Item # 6: Approve the Bills: The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Giesler to approve the bills. Motion Carried: Al1 Yea: MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL• OCTOBER 7, 1985 PAGE ~ 6: • , Item # 7: Approve Judges and Clerks for upcoming Election: `' The Motion was made by Myers and seconded by Brewer to approve the names of the Judges & Clerks for the November 5, 198''5 Election as ~ submitted by the City Clerk. ~ Motion Carried: Al1 Yea: Item #8: One Acre Split request by Bobby Lampe: Mayor Kingsford explained the circumstances involved, in this request. This property is part of the City Limits. ~ Councilman Brewer, I see no problem with this as lon,g as the City Ordinances are complied with. There was discussion by the Council on this request. Crookston, under the Ordinance the Council has the authority to do this~ but I would recommend that the Council require some kind of record of survey be recorded so you had some record of how this was done. ' The Motion was made by Brewer and seconded by Giesler that the One Acre~, Split request by Bobby Lampe be approved and that the record of survey be recorded and the City receive some kind of notification that this has been completed. ' Motion Carried: All Yea: Department Reports: ~ Mayor Kingsford, we have been approached by AT&T for a new telephone ~ ~ system, our old system is very aniquated and I have felt for some time , this should be updated, AT&T has quoted us the Merlin System on which the payments over 60 month period would be very litte more than what the City is paying for a lease now and at that time we would own the system. This system could be easily moved to new location. We are , paying $181.55 now and for the Merlin System it would be $200.02. per month, this system would also give us an additional three lines if we desired. This also includes maintenance for the first year. The Motion was made by Brewer and seconded by Tolsma that the Mayor and City.Clerk be authorized to negotiate and excute a contract with AT&T for a Merlin phone system for the Meridian City Hall. Motion Carried: All Yea; Mayor.Kingsford, one other thing there is a major business looking at locat~~~ somewhere in the valley and they have approached Meridian, the Chamber is putting together several land sites. We have received an offer from Mr. Norm Fuller to give the City thirty acres of land which in turn we could sell or give to this prospective business. I would~ like for the Council to come and look at this proposal at your earliest convience and make a written recommendation to me. .. . . ,, ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL• , • OCTOBER 7, 1985 ~ PAGE # 7; ' Being no further.business to come before the CounciT the Motion was made by Niyers and seconded by Tolsma to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. I~ Motion Carried: Al1 Yea: I (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ~ GRANT KINGSFORD, YOR l ~ ATTEST: . ~ , ~ ~~ ~ ~I c ~~.,Niem n, ity Clerk pc: Mayor Council P & Z Commission Fire, Police, Eng. Stuart, Ward, Mitich Kiebert, Atty, Hallett Valley News, Statesman ACHD, ACC, ACZ, APA NIMD, CDH BRA File: (6) Mail (5) i - ~ ` -~ - ~, ._ ~ - ~- _~,. , ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL SANITARY SERVICES, INC. r~NNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ,. ~ • The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for final consideration on August 5, 1985, at ~ approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 728 Meridian Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Commis- sion having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant, appearing in person, and having duly considered the matter, the Meridian City Council makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of the public hearing on the annexation and zoning application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing scheduled for August 5, 1985, the first publication of which was 15 days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the August 5, 1985 hear- ing; that copies of all notices were made availabl,e to newspaper, radio and television stations. ~ 2. That notice of the public hearing is'~required to be sent to property owners within 300 feet of the external bounda- ries of the land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E, of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. 3. That the final hearing was held before the Meridian , Planning and Zoning Commission on June i0, 19.85, and after receiving both oral and written testimony, the. Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the annexation and zoning application be granted under certain stated conditions. At the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 2 ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ a , ~ ~ City Council hearing on August 5, 1985, both oral and written I ~ testimony was received. { . I ~ 4. That the property included in the Application for I a Annexation and conditional use is described in the application, ~ ~ ~ and by this re€erence is incorporated herein; that the property ~ is generally known as 1800 East Pine Street, Meridian, Idaho; ~ ~ that the propert is y presently zoned by Ada County as Agricultur- J ~ al Preserve (AP-2); that the land is titled in the name of ~ Herbert c. and Lillian Reaman; that Donald Harris and Mary T. 1 ~ Rhoades are contract purchasers from the Reamans. l a 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the ~ present City limits. ; 6. That the property included in the annexation ~ j application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.~ ~ 7. That the entire parcel of ground is included within a ' the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service ~ ~ i Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. ; ; ' 8. That the application for annexation requests that ~ the parcel be annexed and zoned (I-L) Lignt Industrial with a ~ i proposed Phase I use of the operation of a solid waste disposal ~ business and eventually in Phase II a solid ~waste transfer ~ station; that the A licant's j PP present business location is 423 W. ~ Broadway, Meridian, Idaho which area is a predomi~nantly residen- ; ~ tial area, even though zoned industrial, containing mostly single i ~ family dwellings of an approximate density of four units to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 3 I ~ ~ -- ± ~' I • ~ ~ i - ; ~ I I acre; that the property has been used in the past ,as agricultural a ; property. I 9. That the subject property is located basically at I ' the intersection of East Pine Avenue and Locust Grove Road; that I ~ the entrance to the property would be by means of a 50 foot ~ ~ easement which would be an extension of Locust Grove Road since Locust Grove Road does not at this time extend North beyond East ~ Pine Avenue; that Locust Grove Road from Fairview Avenue to Overland Road is a minor arterial which includes a portion of East Pine Avenue. ~ 10. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan designates ~ the area within which the Applicant's propert is located as Y i ; being the Eastern Industrial Review Area; Applicant's proposed i , ~ use is an industrial use; that under the Economic Development ~ section of the Plan beginning at Page 16 there are stated the i ~ general industrial ~ policies and those particularl~y pertinent to j this Application are as follows: "1. The development considerations for each of the Industrial Review Areas should be phased and prioritized to provide for orderly growth and development, minimize the cost of provid- I ing utilities and transportation services and promote unified development wi'thin the Urban Service Planning Area. 2. Industrial development within the city limits FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 4 • • should receive the highest priority. 3. An annexation program shall be established in conjunction with the development for each Industrial Review Area. 5. Access to industrial areas from collector and local streets be discouraged. 6. Industrial uses adjacent to residential areas should not create noise, odor, air pollution and visual pollution greater than levels normally associated with surrounding residen- tial activities. ~ 7. Industrial development should not be located ' i adjacent to primary and second~ary schools. 8. Industrial uses that exist within areas planned for other types of uses should be i encouraged to relocate to an Industrial Review Area. 9. Industrial development should be encouraged to located adjacent to existing industrial uses. 10. Industrial areas should be located within proximity to major utility, transportation ~ anci service facilities. 11. Industrial uses which require the storage or the production of large ~quantities of ' FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 5 ~ ; :' ~. • • ~ ~ ; ~ ~ I ~ I explosive or toxic materials should not be { ~ located near residential areas, and should ' , i conform to disposal, spil~l and storage ~ measures as outlined within the 208 Hazardous i I Waste Management Plan. ; 13. Industrial uses should be located where their ; ~ generated water can be properly treated and ; pretreated to eliminate any adverse impacts { ~ ~ upon the City sewer treatment facility and j irrigated lands that receive industrial i ~ runoff water. , ~ 14. Industrial areas should be located where ~ ~ ~ adequate water supply and, pressure~ are { available for fire protection; ~ i 15. Zoning and development with~n each of the ; I industrial review areas should be analyzed to a J ascertain if there are potential problems or ~ l conflicts which would hinder the development ' I of these areas by private industrial and i , business interests. ~ 16. All industrial proposals that pertain to the ~ industrial review areas shall be reviewed and ~ monitored so that approved uses are compati- 1 ; , ble with surrounding uses and preserve the ! integrity of the review areas." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 6 , , • • ~ ~ I ~ 11. That on page 18 of the Plan ther.e are contained i ~ IndustriaY Policies that pertain specifically to the Eastern Industrial Review Area and among those are to promote an overpass at I-84 and the Locust Grove Road and that the ~character, site improvements and type of industrial developments should be harmonized with the residential area to the south {on the upper bench) and the contiguous residential area to the north. 12. Under. Transportation Policies pertaining to the Eastern Industrial Review Area on page 33 of the Plan, it states that access points to the Eastern Industrial Review Area should be encouraged either from Locust Grove Road or Eagle Road. ~ 13. That under Solid Waste Management Policies of the Plan at page 37, the following is stated: "1. Services as provided by the contract holders ~ should be reviewed as growth ~and development ~ continues within the Meridian Urban Service ~ ~ Planning Area to ensure that b;oth the present ~ and anticipated populations are served. 1 ~ 2. The location of a centra~l (Countv or ' Bi-County) solid waste transfer station i . ~ within the Meridian Area of Impact should be ' investigated and coordinated with solid waste ! ~ plans for Ada and Canyon Counties. , ~ 3. Interest concerning the recycling of solid 1 waste should be coordinated with any feasible FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 7 :' ~• • • study for a County or Bi-County recycling plant." 14. Additionally, at page 69 of the Plan under Munici- pal Was-te Water Treatment Policies is states that industrial discharges to the sewage facility should provide pre-treatment as specified by the National Pollutant Discharge Eli;mination System r permit as issued by the EPA. ~ ' ~ 15. That under the Intent and Purpose section of the i Zoning Ordinance in Section 11-2-402 A. 5., it states that one of ~ i the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance is to "protect residen- I tial, commercial, industrial and civic areas from the intrusion ~ of incompatible uses and to provide opportunities for establish- ; ; ments to concentrate for efficient operation in mutually benefi- , ~ cial relationships to each other and shared services." 1 ~ 16. That under Section 11-2-408 B, Zoning Districts, ; the Light Industrial District is outlined as follows: "11. (I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light Industrial District is to provide for light . industrial development opportunities for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; t'o encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale establish- ments which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke or glare and that are operated entirely or almost ~ i i FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 8 , ! i , • ~ entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited for industrial development because of ' location, topography, existing facilities and relation- ship to other land uses. This District must also be in such proximity to insure connection to the MunicipaT Water and Sewer Systems of the City of Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are not permitted, and ~ strip development is prohibited." 17. That Section 11-2-413 B. 1., provides for Commercial and Industrial i7ses, it states that' no land or building in any district shall be used or occupied in any manner creating dangerous, noxious, or otherwise objectionable conditions which could adversely affect the surrounding areas or adjoining premises except that nay use permitted by this Ordinance may be undertaken and maintained if acceptable measures ~ and safeguards to reduce dangerous and objectionable conditions to acceptable limits as established by the performance requirements stated in this section; that the section goes on to set the performance requirements for fire hazard, radioactivity and electrical disturbances, noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, erosion, and water pollution. 18. That the property is contained in a survey section in which a large portion of the land is already zoned industrial; that the land is adjacent to the Upland Industrial Park; that it is across Locust Grove Road and East Pine Avenue from , ~ 1 ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 9 ! i ~ • • 1 i I i industrially zoned property; that it is in close proximity to industrial ground which is being used for an industrial purpose on the corner of Locust Grove Road and East Pine Avenue by a tooling manufacturer. 1 19. That there were many people testifying at the , j public hearing objecting to the use of the property as proposed i by the Applicant; that their objections basically related to ~ i possible traffic, noise, odor, debris, and dust problems with 3 some objecting that the conduct of the Applicant's operation 1 - ~ would tend to reduce their i property values; some o;f those persons 1 ~, objecting owned residences nearby and some were quite distant. i ~ 20. That the Applicant testified that his operation i , , ~ ~ would be operated within an enclosed building, that his business ! hours would basically be between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., that ~ ! ~ his operation in the first phase would use about~ 15 0- to 18 0 of a j the eleven acres; that the location of the building would be j approximately 800 feet from the nearest house: that at tnP ~ present time his operation would include his pr,esent business ~ operation, shop, anci a place to repair and store his garbage ~ i 1 trucks; additionally, the ~.pplicant testified that at this time ; ~ he is not planning on a transfer station but would in the future, ~ that his business does not include a recycling operation, and the 1 1 ~ public would not have access to his location for delivery of ; garbage; he additional testified that whatever type of operation 3 1 j he installed regarding a transfer station that i.t would be an FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 10 i i. 1 ~ ~ ~ entirely enclosed system; he testified that the` location would ~ be landscaped and a buffer zone would be provided and that garbage would not be maintained on the premises longer than for a ~ { period of 24 hours. ~ ~ 21. That the Central District Hea~'lth Department ~ submitted a comment sheet regarding the Applicant's proposal; I that the comments did not evidence an objection to the proposal j or to the use; that the comment on the report was that the , a Applicant would have to obtain approval from Central District i j Health and the State of Idaho Division of Environment for a solid ~ waste transfer station and in that regard plans would have to be ~ submitted. ; 22. If approved, the Applicant's proposed land use d , would create objectionable conditions which would adverselv ; affect the surrounding areas or adjoining properties including 1 i such conditions as heavy traffic, increased litter, noise, odor ~ ~ and dust. 23. That the City of Meridian now has a surplus of land within the City limits zoned for Light Industrial Use that is more than adequate to provide for light industrial development within the near future. CONCLUSION 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property i FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 11 , I , i I ~' •• • i • I 1 ~ ~ within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the subject proper- ty. j 2. That the City has authority to annex land pursuant , ' to 50-222, Idaho Code; that the exercise of the City's annexation 1 ~ , ; authority is a legislative function. 3. That the Meridian City Council has judged the annexation and zoning application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies ~ontained in Section 50-222, Idaho Code, ' the Meridian Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, and the record submitted to it and the things of whi;ch it can take ; judicial notice. ~ 4. That the Meridian City Council may take judicial ~ ' notice of its own proceedings, governmental statutes, ordinances, ~ 1 and policies, and ac:tual conditions existing within the City and j State. ~ ~ 7. That all the land withi:n the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 6. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant and is not at the request or initiation of the City of Meridian. 7. That upon annexation, the requested zoning of (I-L) ' Light Industrial would not be in compliance with the Meridian a j Comprehensive Plan, Industrial Policies No. 1„ providing for I ± orderly growth and development; No. 2, providing for industrial 1 { FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONC - 2 I ~ , . • . . ~ • • 1 i ~ ~ ; 1 i ~ development within the City limits as the highes~t priority; No. 5, providing for access to industrial areas from collector and local streets to be discouraged; No. 6, providing that industrial uses adjacent to residential areas should not create noise, odor, air pollution, and visual pollution greater than levels normally ~ associated with surrounding residential activities. 8. That the requested annexation and zoning of (I-L) Light Industrial would not be in compliance with the Meridian Zoning Ordinance; specifically, Section 2-402 A.4., providing for the encouragement of orderly growth and development and 5. providing for the protection of residential uses from the intru- sion of incompatible uses. , 9. If approved, the Applicant's proposed land use would create objectionable conditions which would adversely ~ affect surrounding areas or adjoining properties, including such conditions as heavy traffic, increasing litter, noise, odor and dust. 10. The annexation of the Applicant's property cannot be reasonably assumed to be used for the orderly development of the City. 1 I ~ 11. Under Section 2-413 B, of the Meridian Zoning ~ ~ ~ Ordinance, the Applicant's land would be used or occupied in a i ~ manner likely to create dangerous, injurious, noxious or other- 1 wise objectionable conditions which would adversely affect the ~ ~ ~ ~ surrounding areas or adjoining premises. That acceptable ~ ~ , ~ ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 13 ~ ~ ' ; 1 ' '~ ' ~ ~ ~ 1 measures and safeguards to reduce the dangerous and objectionable , ~ conditions cannot be undertaken and maintained to the satisfac- ~ ~ ~ tion of the surrounding residents. ~ 12. The City Council finally concludes that the ~ annexation and zoning are not in the best interest of the City, 1 ~ and that accordingly the Applicant's request for annexation and i zoning must be denied. ~ ~ , APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ~ J ~ The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ~ j ROLL CALL: I { Councilman Brewer Voted ~/e~ 1 ~ Councilman Tolsma Voted Y~6~ ~ ~ Councilman Myers Voted! ~~_ ~ ~ Councilman Giesler Voted' ~/P~ ~ ~ Mayor Kingsford (tie breaker) Voted. , ; ~ ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 14 ~ 1 ' • i . `, ~ • • i 1 ~ DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION ~ The Meridian City Council hereby decides that this Annexation and Zoning Application be denied based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions attached hereto. MOTION: APPROVED ~ DISAPPROV~ED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 15 ,' ~ , • • The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing September 3, 1985, at approximately 7:30 p.m., the Applicant appearing in person, and the appointed Hearing Officer for the Meridian City Council having duly considered the evidence in this matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclu- sions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That a notice of public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the 5eptember 3, 1985 hearing; that the public was given full oppor- tunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of a11 notices were made available to newspa~per, radio and television stations. 2. That this property is located within the City of Meridian and is owned by the Applicant; that the property is described as Parcel No. 0320 of Blocks 2 and 3, F.A. Nourses 3rd Addition, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and is known as 1303 East First Street, Meridian, Idaho. 3. The property is located within a R-15 zoning classification. 4. That a proper notice has been given as required by law and all approvals and procedures before th~e Meridian City Council have been given and followed; the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, as a result of its hearing on July 8, ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 2 , • • ' , ` 1985, based upon written Findings of Fact and Conclusions, that the Applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit be approved subject to certain conditions and approval of a variance request by the Applicant before the City Council. The City Council takes full notice of the record established before the City Planning ,i and Zoning Commission. 5. Mr. Bob Spencer submitted a letter dated September 3, 1985, which was received into the record at the hearing before the City Council. Mr. Spencer's letter objected to the Condi- tional Use Permit because it violated the Meridiap Comprehensive Plan, did not meet the zoning ordinance requirements for a ~ variance and encroached upon a residential zone. The Applicant spoke at the hearing in favor of the Conditional Use Permit and variance applications. She described the nature of her intended funeral service center and the basis for her variance applica- tion. No further evidence or individual testimony was presented at the hearing. ~ 6. That the property is presently vacant, but has been , used in the past exclusively for residential purposes. 7. That various City officials and public agencies have commented as follows with respect to this Application: the City Engineer has stated various requirements for, parking, water and sewer service, traffic and signage; Earl Ward has commented that commercial sewage rates would apply and ad'ditional hookup fees would be required; Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District has FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 3 • • 1 . - - I commented that surface. drainage runoff must be retained on site and that the irrigation ditch along the West property line must . be protected and maintained; the Chief of Police has requested that adequate off-street parking be provided and that ingress and egress for the property be in compliance with the Idaho State Transportation Department Regulations; the Central District Health Department has commented that the facility must meet all Health Department criteria for embalming purposes and the facili- ty can be approved for central water and center sewer. 8. That the requested funeral service center is located within a medium-high density residential district (R-15) and is not allowed within said district under a Gonditional Use Permit. Although the proposed use is not specifically identified under Section 2-409 of the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian, it would appear to most closely approximate a mortuary land use, which is only permitted in limited office and other nonresidential zones. Various commercial Conditional Use Permits are allowed in the R-15 zone, however, the Appli- cant's request is not within the designated commercial uses that would be allowed under a Conditional Use Permit. 9. With respect to the variance application, the following findings are made: ' a) Special circumstances justifying a variance appli- cation in this case are limited to the location ~of the subject property adjacent to or near commercial property uses. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 4 . • • b) The conditions of hardship in this case are primar- ily self-inflicted and that such conditions will result in inhibiting the achievements or objectives the zoni~ng ordinance. c) The intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance and Meridian Comprehensive Plan would be affected or'altered by the granting of the variance in that the subject use would be permit- ted in a zone primarily for residential use which would be 4 incompatible with the Applicant's intended use. CONCLUSIONS ~ l. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within - 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property and having obtained the consent of 75% of the owners of the property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. ~ 2. That the City of Meridian has the authority to review Conditional Use Permit Applications pursuant to Section 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to Section 2-418 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian; that the City further has the 1 authority to review variance applications pursuant to Section 2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian. 3. That pursuant to Section 2-418 r_ (1)~~ of the Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian, a proposed use must in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 5 - ~ , • • ~ i ~ 4. Section 2-407 D(1) of the Zoninq brdinance of the City of Meridian, provides that: "When a use is not specifically listed as a permitted use, such use shall be hereby expressly prohibited unless by application and authorization (as provided for under Conditional Use) i~t is determined that said use is similar to and compatible with listed permitted uses. Such uses may then be permitted as Conditional Uses." It is concluded that the proposed use in this matter is - not similar to and compatible with other listed permitted uses in the R-15 zone. 5. It is therefore concluded that the proposed use is not permitted as a Conditional Use Permit within the R-15 zone under Section 2-409 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian, and accordingly, does not meet the requirements of Section 2-418 C(1) of the Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian. 6. That to allow a funeral service center in the R-15 zone, the Applicant would have to request a text amendment to the zoning ordinance or be granted a variance to the zoning ordinance by the City Council. 7. Section 2-419 C of Zoning Ordinance of the Citv of Meridian 1 , provides the following with respect to variances: "A variance shall not be granted unless ;(as a result of a public hearing) the Council makes a statement of supportive reasons based directly on~ the evidence presented to it which supports conclusions that the mentioned standards and conditions of this Ordinance have been met by the applicant and unless all of the ~ following exist: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 6 . ~ , • • 1. That there are such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of' this Ordinance would clearly be impracticable or unreasonable; 2. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer because of unusual topography, ,other physical conditions or other conditions .which are not self-inflicted, or that these conditions will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of this Ordinance; , 3. That the granting of the specified variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated; ~. That such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purpose, of this Ordi- nance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan." 8. With respect to the variance application, the iollowing conclusions are made: a) Special circumstances justifying a variance appli- cation in this case are limited the location of the subject property adjacent to or near commercial property uses. i b) The conditions of hardship in this case are primar- ily self-inflicted and that such conditions will result in inhibiting the achievements or objectives the zoning ordinance. c) The intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance and Meridian Comprehensive Plan would be affected or altered by the granting of the variance in that the subject use would be permit- ted in a zone primarily for residential use which would be incompatible with the Applicant's intended use. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 7 ~ , , • • 9. That the Applicant's requested ~Conditional Use Permit and variance would be more properly addnessed through a request for rezone of the property to a commercial use, or other use that would allow for the Applicant's intended use; the Council makes no judgment, however, upon the merits of such a rezone application. i APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: Councilman Brewer Voted ~~I~,.J Councilman Tolsma Voted 6c~ Councilman Myers ~ Voted ,y~ Councilman Giesler Voted ~~ Mayor Kingsford (tie breaker) Voted DECISION The Meridian City Council hereby decides that the tipplicant's request for Conditional Use Permit and variance be denied based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions attached hereto. MOTION: APPROVED DISAPPROVED , i FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS - 8 , i~ fl~ ~ ~l i~ ~ ~ ~' ~, ~ ~ '~ ,~ ; BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ~+ ~3 OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ y APPL-ICATION BY KENY BARNEY BY THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 2 ~ ~ ~ FOR A.VARIANCE f 7 The above entitled variance request :having come on for i ~ consideration on October 7, 1985, at approximately 7:30 o'cloc,k N p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City :Hall, 728 Meridian i ~ Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the City Coune,il having heaxd and ij ~ taken oral and~written testimony, tne City Council of the City of ~ Meridian makes the following: `f ! FfiNDINGS OF FACT ~ F ~; 1.. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was ~' published for two consecutive weeks prio;r to the scheduled 4' ~ hearing for October 7, 1985, the first publication of which was ,j ~, . ~ . .. . .. ~f if~teen (15 ) days prior to said hearinq; that~ the matter was duly .. . .~' considered at the October 7, 1985 hearing; that copies of all ` ~, {j~" - f . notices~ wer;e available to newspaper, radio and television , _, `j , r • : ' ~ stations.~ , , ~ . ~~ ~ ~ - f £ ~~ ~; . . . . 2. That the notice of gublic hearing is required to be ~~ t~ d ' sent to property owners within 300 feet of the external jj ~! boundaries of the land being considered pursuant to 11-9-612, ~ 11-2-416 E and 11-2-419 D of the Revised and,Compiled Ordinance;s ~~ of the City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met. (+ i ~ , ~ q AMBROSE, ~ FITZGERALD ~~ Q CROOKSTON , ' ~ f~ Attorrieysand ~ Couneelot@ ~ ~ P.O.~Box127 . ~ Merldlan, ldaho ~ 83gd2' . . Telephone'988-4t87 ~~ ~~ k ' s:. ~~ ~ , I . AMBROSE, FITZGERALD BCROOKSTON Aftomeys end Counselors P.O. Boz 427 Meridlan, tdaho 83842 ' ` ; - ~ ' - - s. _ , `. ~ - • . : ~ _: :~; ~ ._ . .~., . . _ ,,f . +..... ' I ~ ~ . .. 3. That the Ordinances of the City of Meridian requir~e that a plat be su:bmitteS and approved by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council where land is being subdivided; that subdivis.ion is defined as ""the result of an ac.t of dividing an original Iot, tract, or parcel of land into two o,r more parts." 4. That Applicant proposes to change the bounda.ries and lot lines ~o:f lots 8, 9;& 10 of the Lake at Cherry Lane; that by changing the~lot lines, technically there i,s. a subdivision of lots requiring a plat or an amended plat be f.iled. 5. That lots 8 and 10 a.re owned or u•nder the control of the,Appl.icant; that Lot 9 is own.ed by the City of Meridian as part of the Cherry Lan~e Golf Cour-se. „ 6. That there exists an Idaho Power transformer on the lot line of Lot 8 which if Lot 8 is fenced along the boun.dary line would prevent serving of the transformer. 7. That the Variance request is being processed under Section i1-9-612; that in regard to` the above section the City Council finds that the variance requested does not involve a health or safety requirement; that the variance would not violate provisions of the Idaho Code; that the granting of the variance would not have the effect nullifying the inte,rest and purpose of this Ordiance o~r the Comprehensive Plan. 8. That the testimony at the public hearing was not unfavorable to the granting of t:he variance. , :3 ~ ~~ AMBROSE, '~ FITZGERALD ~~ 8 CROOKSTON i Attomeys and ~ Counselors ~~ P.O. Boz 127 ~~ Meridlan;•.Idaho ~ ~. 838l2.'. ' ~ i Telephone 888-4481 ~~ ft '_ .. • • ~, • , CONCL'US I ONS l. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planni.rng Act and of the Ordinan.ces of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 fest of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant to Section 2-9-612 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. That the City Council has judged this application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the Zoning Ordinance and upon the record submitted to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice: 4. That the Council may take judieial notice of its own proceedings, those of the Commission, gqvernmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the Sta~te. ~ 5. That there are special circumstances and conditions affecting the property such that the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would be impracticable and unreasonable. , 6. ~That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area wher.e the Applicant's property is located; that this is evidenced by the fact the variance is only to adjust lot lines in a previously platted subdivision and does not r- ~ :.~ ~ .. ~.. I, . • . • ~ ~~ ~, , ~ ertain to a health or safety equlation. ~~ ~~ 7. That the variance wi ll not have the eff:ect of altering ~~ ~' the int.erest and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and of the ~ ~ Meridian Comprehensive Plan. ~ 8. ~ That this var.iance shall be personal to the Applicant i; „ and sha1T not be transferred to another parcel of property or to i~ c another individual but shall r un with the land. ' " ~~ ~ ~ 9. That the Applicant shall recorc~ a Certificate of f~ Property Line Agreement so tha ~ t n.otice of the lot line adjustment ~~ 4 shall be provided to all pers ons dealing with lots 8, 9, and 10 ~ I~ of the Lake at Cherry Lane. ~~ APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ~~ f The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and ~ ~, approves these Findings of Fac t. and Conclusions. ~ ~l . • p - . , ` ROLL CALL : ~~ ~ ~ ; Councilman Geisler Voted ~eQ, . '~, " . ~. .~ . . . ~ i " ' ',i ,Gounci lman Myers Voted ~OeQ ` j ~ ~ ' , , ,Councilman Tolsma ' voted Ye~' ~ . i - , ~ ~ Councilman Brewer Voted ~CQ r ~ . ~ Mayor Kingsford ~ (Tie Breaker) Voted ~ ~ I ~, ~,; i~ APPROVED : J- C~ fr~ ~ DI SAPPROVED : ~ ~ ~ AMBFiOSE, . FI7ZGERALD ; ~ 8 CROOKSTON `l Atto~oeysand ~~ Counaelors ~~ P.O. Boz 427 Meridlen, Ida~o ~ i ~2 Tielephone 888~1481 I~ qr ,, ~ . ~r,. ,..,..- ._ , ~ , ~ ~q~~y,+~y.'~ "j~.ry~YF1 .. .. ~ .. ~ ' -0xJTa-~w,~,i4«~"' ~~1 ... / O ~ ~ ~ / ~~~ //~~~r{ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~k ~ l~ - ~~. ,_ ~__ ,. ~ ~~c~~ ~~ i ~~ ~~~ ~-~ ~ o ` I ~ ~~i 7~~5 - w l - ~ ,~ ;~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ 7~ a , ~ ~3o cv ~ ~ ~ 7 ~~ ~ ~ '"l c~ D S - GU ~ ~ ~ . ~' 0 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ S-« - ~,v - ~ c~ ~ lS9~o ~ ~ 0 a~~ o~ ~ o cv ~,~rn.c. ~ - ii ~ '~~ ~ ~Q G ~. D o ~! ~ ~ ~- -- ~~ ~~~ w ~o~°- ~. - I . ~ ~7 ~ . ~2~1 `~° - ~ . , 8~~ - ~ ~ 3 c~ `~ '~ . .. _ , S~0 ~ ~ ~j ~ Q ;(~(~_ ~~ _ `~ s . ~ `l ~ - -.e~c ~ = . r ^ ~~Q~ 3~3 ~~ ~~~ . . , a~~- w.~~-~- _ . . 6 ~t ~ ~ ~l 6 ~- ~ --= ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~D cv ~~~ , , .... . .A ,. ... . m~i.~a-~ i . . . . . . . . 1 . ~!ti ro ' - _ Y•~ v. . .. . . . . ~ ~ • . . .1-...~.~-:.~~.:.T..•.2p . . . , ~ , . . ~ . ' . ' • • V ~a~`~ ~a- , ~~~ ~~~o ~ ``~~`~-~ ~ - ~ s ~ .~ ~ ~~~° ~~ ~ . ~3 3 c.~ S~ ~ ~ ~ ~~-~~~ ~ . ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ , ~~~ ~ ~- " , 3 ~,° ~ ~~ ~, ~~ o ~ ~ , ~` ~° ~ ~ . 0233 a~ . : -- . - ~- - , ~~SS _ d -= - R~?~ ~~o ~ ~ ~ . .. ~ : _ ~~ q° ~~~ . ~~~a ~~ ~~° . ~3~8 ~ _ _.- Ss~~ ~ l l0 3- ~v, 7 . ~_ ~ `~ S ~i ~ ~(/ ~ ~ _ ~ _ !. `tL 0 7 ° . 2 , ~ ~ ~ ~_ . ~ ' -_ . ~ . . .. -- : .. _ _~ . _ _ ~ . _ . . __~ ~ ~? 6 ~ . . ~~a~ .~ _. . _ . - . . , .~:__ __.l~.~b w `~ :_ - . _ _ .~ . ,. ~~o . ~~ 3~ _. ~. G~. _ - --~`~- . .. ~a~~ ~ ~ ,___ ~. _ ~ . n ;n ,~.i. ,~ 1,..;~. i , -~ , tcr"~„~"?~` ~`' t~~ ~ ":9v~ , . . _ .... ~ ~ . . f .. :r:~ s~ ~ ~~ - _ . . :w."''K° .. .-~, ti,. ~ - • .. . ~ ~ . ~~6 ~ ~ ~ `0!°` ~ ~a~s ~ P~b. , ~ ~ . G~,~- ~c~ sa ~S I ~_.~~~~ w~3~ ~ ~ ~ ' .~~~a ss6 ~ ~ ~ ~ a -~ ~,_ l. 3 ~ a~-~ - ~ ._ . ~~9 ~~- - - ~S8 ~ ~ . r~~~ ~ - .. . ~8 ~S ~ ~ . 1~ z ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ i ~ ~~~o ~ ~ ~ ~Q36 w` _r~-~ d ~~~ ~-~ ~ ~ 3s ~~~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~, ls-~ _ _ ~a1.6-° : ~~ o ~ w,~~ -~ ~ `Q~ 7 ~ ~ a : . ~ . _ . . _ _~_S ~° ~~a ~ _ _ . =-~ . . l U c3 6._Ce.J_ l~~~ ~ ~- . ~ __ _ ~7 ~ l~-~R~ _ C,~l - %-'-iC ~ . .~ ~ ~ c~~ ~v~~. ~. ~ _ . ____ _~._ ~ _ ll l ~- ~. . . w, . ~ ~ ~ . ~ . .. ~` ~B " C~ ~a~ ~~n6 0~ ~ d. ~,. l l ~ . ~i(/i?,~`~i ~ ~~ U ~~ • ,, . 4 . , . ,~~- ~o , `~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ " ~~ ~~q~~ ~ -- ~~ ~ ~l - - . _~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ __ ~sf~ G ~ ~ , ~~oo~o ~to~~ ~3 aS ~. a ~~~ .~~ ~~ ~ ~s---s ~ ~ - _ ~ ,-_ . a~ _ _ ! ?~ . _ ~- . `~ ~l ~. ~~~~?~_.IIC ._ ~'a-.~ ~ . . `~ e l ~_ . . ~ . ~ .~~ r ~ ~- ~2°° ~ll~~°..~ lG~~a `~~ `e /~~`-° . _ « ~ .ll? _ ~ `~~~o . ...,; ~.~ ~ ° u ~ ,~vu y ~ . ~'-~~'' rr ..x~ J~x'X _ ..."`~ . . , . . . - ~ ,. ~ ; ~ .. . ~ • _ . - . , .r . • ~~D o~ G U ~ ..°~~ ~ J ~ ~~j ~- . OV Gt/ ~ ~. ~ ~~ ~ ~ . . ._ - - - _~~6 ° -:.~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~Vd ~ ~~. ~ - . ' ; ~ ~ °_ ~~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~v .w _ `:~ _ _ . _. ~ ~. _ , ~~'~`~ _ ~a.~ ~~ . ~ l ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ . : ~8s~ ~~57~1 ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~I ~~~ o 0 ~~~ 2~ ~7~~ ~q~ ~ ~ a~~ ~'oo~ _ ~e ~~~~ _ ~ `~ ~ N. c;v . l ~'~° - C ~~ ~O `a~~-° ~ ~ ~~~~d ~- ~ ;~ `~ g `~° ~~ ~~~ ~. _. _ ~_ _ . ~ - -. ~~q~~o- ~ ~ o`~~ -_ -- - ~ C~. . .~~.a~:--~'' ~~'__-~--.-~ --.--..-- - . . ~ . - - _ _~ - _._- -- - _ ~~ - -_~ 0~'~ `Q-- - --. o`~ -. l ~_~ ~. __ - _ - __ _ ~ _ ~~d~. _ .- ~.~ _ :._ . . - ~ _ . , ~ ___:~.,___ _ -, . -~a ~ . ~ . .__ __ .. ~ ~ ~c~~ ~ ~-- - ~ -. - _ -1~-~ .-..-.-_ _- - _-- ~ -. . - ~ . •. ~X ~ ~ .. . '^ - ~ ~ • . . . , . ' , . . .. .. ~ ~ . ', , + . . ~ - . ,. • ~ ~ ~ ~ y '~.: r ~~'r~ i~ ~ ~ ~, . ' _ . ~ ~,.~.~ ~'`~,~..,~ ~' ;, ~ ' ~ ~ • ~ . ~' ~~8 ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ , ~ ~/ ~ _ ~ ~l f~`~ . ~~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ c:e~ c~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` - ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ 'Q'a ~~~Oa . ~''~. ~ ~~SS"~S- ~ ! ~ _ . - ~~~a ~~81 ~ ~ ~~~~ul ~ 3 ~~ ~~~~~ .S~ ~- ~ ~ /.,; 9 ~~ 1 ~ ~Q _ `s~ _ : ~S. -- ~' l,~ . .l~~S~ ~ ~~ -~ ~~ `~ s- ~ !-~ ~~~ --- 6~ ~~ ~.~ ~=~ - . , . ~~ f . . ~- . ~~ ~~ `~ - - - . , ~~ 3,~ . _ _-._ Z ~ ~.3 ~ - . ,/ _ . - - _-7l ~.~ _ -. -- ,~ ~ _ . _~ . - - . , _ . ~ . ~3 l. ~_ ~~. ~ _ . . - - - - - _ .~ ~ . - - . . - - ~.._.. _ '~' L ~i~.:~^~~aw-r'.,.G-a«~~'N-3 ,... .~, _ _ . . . . .. .. . . ' ,•~i ~ 'OC . , . . ~ ~ . ~ ~ - ~ ' ' ., . ' . • . ' ~ ~ , : ... • ~ ` '~ ~~~ ~~83 ~v *;~ ~ z~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~ l ~~ ~J,~~,~- .~- ~o~v~ ~°~ , I ~`aZ.~ `~~~r. ~ ~ . ~/ 6 ° , , ~S- 90 ~a~~o ~ ` ~~ _ ~ `3 3 ~ l . _ 'C~`""~ ~o~~ . ~a-~ . . - ~ _ aa:3 ~ ~~ ~ ~S ~ ~ ~ ~~~C ~a~~o ~~8'D ~ ~ ~ _ ' ~_ 4~~ ~1/a ~ ~. ~,1~1 ~~)~v - ~ o~s ~: ~°,~ .. ~~ _ . ~ a ~ s ~v . ~ ~° ~ . -- ~~~~1% -~~%2~ ~l ~ ~ . c~~ ~~ . _ ~~c~ . sSg° ~ lS~ ~6 l a.,~ ~ a ~~ om ~~70 ~ ~~o ~:: ~ ~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEI' . f A Good Place to I.ive ~ OFFICIALS JACKNIEMANN,~~~Y~~e~ ! CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ A. M. KIEBERT, Treaaurer" '' BRUC@ D. STUART, Water WoAis Supt ~ WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., nno~~ey . 728 Meridian StI'E2t EARL WAND, Waete WaterBupt. KENNV BOWERS, Firecnie~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO ROY PORTER, Pollce Chlef 83642 GAfiY SMITM, City Enpineer Phone 888-0433 GRANT P. KINGSFORD ~ Mayor OCTOBER 3, 1985 MAYOR COUNCIL COUNCI~MEN BILL BHEWER RONALD R. TOLSMA J. E. BERT MVERS ROBERT GIESLER BOBSPENCER Chairman Zoning 8 Planning I NEED YOUR APPROVAL OF THE BELOW LISTED JUDGES AND CLERKS FOR THE UPCOMING ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 1985: PRECINCT # 1: JUDGE: Judy Johnson, 2229 N.W. 14tfi CLERK: Ermon Page, 908 East 5th Alice Bills, 929 Storey Ave Claudia Waller, 1085 Chateau PRECINCT # 2: Judge: June Pack, 524 West Carlton Darlene Rundell, 1121 West 5th. Robin Roberts, 202 West Washington Eloise Stemple, 1114 West 6th. Alt. Deborah Sienknecht, 223 Camellia. The above Judges and Clerks have presided at pr~}or City & .. County Elections and should be well qualified, Your approval of these Judges & Clerks will be appreciated; Jack Niemann City Clerk ~ ~ .l MAYOR ,,~ `~ .. COUNCIL ATTORNEY ., MR. BOBBY LAMPE WOULD P,PPRECIATE APPROVAL OF THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL ALLOWING HINI TO SPLIT ONE ACRE WITH THE HOME ON IT FROM THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1500 N. BLACK CAT ROAD. THIS IS PART OF THE LAMPE ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND MR. LAMPE WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN DEED TO THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY~. ATTACHED IS LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SURVEY OF THIS PARCEL. ! -- :Q~ POTTER AND SUR ~ Surveying £t Mapping • Planning Ft Design ~ Bo //~ , , 8 August 1985 Bobby Lampe 1500 N. Black Cat Road Meridian, Id 83642 Re: 85-143 ( 1 acre spli±) VE ING Jarr~es V. Potter, L.S. undary Cons rlting ~~~r~~~£X~~~XX: Dear Mr. Lampe, Enclosed are three copies of our record of survey plat, for the one acre split we recently performed for you. This coincides with the legal c~escriptions furnished you earlier. Also enclosed, is our invoice for these services. Thank you for selecting our firm for your survey needs. incerely, , rYY~ ~ - ~ Jarnes V. Potter, L.S. ~~ _ ~~ rn ~ V Reply To From Other ldaho Locations - Dial Garden Valley - 1-800-982-6222 Ext. 1451 Meridian - 1-800-982-8222 Ext. 1322 Main Office Suite 10, Country Square Crouch H.C. 76 Box 2160 Garden Valley, ID 83622 208-462-3232 ^ Meridian Branch 916 E. 1 st Street Meridian, ID 83642 208-888-5491