HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 11-12A G E N D A
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOVEMBER 12, 1991
ITEM:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 8, 1991:(APPROVED)
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1991: (APPROVED)
1: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT BY MARLA WEST: (APPROVED)
2: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR REZONE BY SAM
ZENOR: (APPROVED)
3: PUBLIC HEARINCt: REQUEST FOR REZONE BY SELLS, PATCH & GIBSON:(FINDINGS TO BE
PREPARED)
4: PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION FOR ACCESSORY USE PERMIT BY KATHY
ROOT: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED)
5: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY & FINAL"PLAT ON FIELD OF DREAMS
SUBDIVISION: (APPROVED)
6: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST W/ PRELIMINARY
PLAT ON KEARNEY PLACE SUBDIVISION BY GORDON`& PEGGY WOODS: (FINDINGS TO BE
PREPARED)
:fERIDlAN_]?LANNING ~x_ZONING____ _.__,. _.NOV._1^^<~l_991
The Regular :leeting of the tteridian Planning & Zoning Commission
,aas called to order by Chairman Sim Johnson at 7:30 P.I1..
2~~lembers Present: Charlie Rountree, Ploe Alidjani, Tim Hepper:
1-lembers Absent: Jim Shearer:
Others Present: btarguerite Patch, Helen Gibson, Gloria Sells,
Helen Sliarp, Aaren Sharp, Daie Sharp, Denise Hilbard, Don Bryan,
Burke Borup, Hal Leifson, Dan Ylood, L1. Barnes, Valerie Davidson,
Gary Lee, Doug Crabtree, Lee Stucker, Sam Zenor, llayn2 Crookston,
Lee Sells, Kathy Root, Pat Tealy:
P4INUTES OF THE FREVIOUS ]`QEETING HELD OCTOBER S, 1991:
The notion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Rountree to approve
the minutes of the previous ;Meeting held October 8, 1991 as
F7r1 tten:
Piotion Carried: All Yea:
t4INUTES GF THE SPECIAL A4EETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1991:
The biction was made by Alidjani and seconded by Hepper to approve
the minutes of the Special Meeting held October 29, 1991 as
written:
Pdotion Carried: All Yea:
ITEM #l: FINDINGS GF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY MARLA WEST:
The Plotion ;gas made by Rountree and seconded by Aiidjani to approve
the Findings of Fac*_ and Conclusions of Lae:.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Absent;
Al idjar;i - Yea;
Motion Carried: Ail Yea:
The [-lotion ~;aas made by Rountree and seconded by Hepper that the
t]eridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of P4eridian that they approve the
Conditional Use Permit request by the Applicant'.
tPOtion Carried: All Yea:
ITEiI # FINDINGS GF FACT & CONCLUSIONS ON REQUEST FOR P.EZONE BY
SAIut ZEN OP--.:
A'IERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1991
PAGE 2
The tfotion eras made by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani that the
leridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions and conveys a favorable
reccanmendation to the City Council.
Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Absent;
Alidjani - Yea:
Plotion Carried: All Yea:
ITEFI #3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE BY SELLS, PATCH &
GIBSON:
Johnson: I tai11 now open the Public Hearing. Is there a
representative present, if so please come forward.
Lee Sells, 1323 E. 1st St., yeas sworn by the attorney.
Johnson: Basically c~~e have all the documents in front of us if you
just want to highlight cahat you want to do.
Se11s: ive don't plan to do anything. It will remain the same.
Marguerite is living in her home. Gloria and I have our residence
there but we also have a Conditional use Permit at the present time
for an office behind and Helen Gibson is using her home as a
residence also. Our purpose would be just to, we are bordered on
both sides by commercial right at the present time to the north and
to the south of us and across the street. The Post office is going
in across from us and tae look to see E. rust Street really go
basically as a commercial part of P9eridian and we just feel that
it is proper at the present time to put our properties in the same
prospect as the rest of the properties on E. First Street, or most
of the properties on E. First Street.
Johnson: Any questions?
Hepper: Have you seen the ACHG comments?
Se11s: Yes I have.
Hepper: Do you have any problem with any of those?
Sells: T sure don`t.
Johnson: Is there anyone else from the public to testify? No
response. I will close the Public Hearing.
IdERIliiADI PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1991
PAGE 3
The Pdotion was made by Rountree and seconded by Hepper to have the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared for this
application caith a favorable recommendation to the City Council.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
ITE14 #4: PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION FOR ACCESSORY USE PERI4IT BY
KATHY ROGT:
Johnson: I wiil open the Public Hearing. Is there a
representative present, if so please come forward and be sworn.
Kathy Root, 1255 Darrah, was sworn by the attorney.
Root: I wanted to start a day care at my home so that I could take
in a fesa kids. I am trying to get my day care iicense and in order
to get that I have to have the permit. 1•ly license would be for six
children or Less. Since P4eridian is yrovaing so much there is a
need for a quality day care. I would have health and fire
inspections. The children that I babysit would be in my home or
in my i.~ack yard. They wouldn't be out running in the street, I
wouid be supervising them at all times. Ny yard is completely
fenced. I have a six foot cedar fence all the way in the front and
the sides and the back has a five foot chain link fence. I have
a feca more letters to enter into the record in favor of this
request.
Aiidjani: Does your back yard have a fenced area?
Root: A six. foot high cedar fence around the front and the sides
and then the back is a five foot chain link fence.
Rountree: The accessory use caould a11o~r up to five children.
Root: I tirould have five or less.
Hepper: How many of your ocar, k-.ids?
Root: I have three of my own, two in school.
Hepper: Is there a gate in your back. fence?
Foot: No.
Hepper: 5o there i5 no cagy %hey cai; get Doti'
Root; T'.O_
PIERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1991
PAGE 4
Hepper: vlhat hours would you operate?
Rcot: Seven until six in the evening.
Hepper: what about on weekends?
Root: No weekends,
Alidjani: Do you have any idea shat age group?
Root: I have been babysitting at my home since July and the age
group that I have now is three toddlers that are age 2 and then I
have a kindergartener that lives in our neighborhood and I have two
four year olds.
Rountree: Are your clients generally within your neighborhood?
Root: i have four parents, two live in my neighborhood and one
comes from P4eridian P4anor and the other one comes fror~i Eagle.
Hepper: How many parking spaces do you have?
Root: I have a tmro car garage. Then cae put in some more cement,
probably three in my driveway and then in front of my house.
Hepper: So you have three off street parking spaces.
Root: Right.
Hepper: During the time that you would be open, how :navy vehicles
of your own would you have there?
Roo`: Just one.
Johnson: The driveway has been extended and there is three spots
at least in front of the home.
Crookston: If you can, characterize the traffic in your
neighborhood.
Root: tdoderate to light.
Johnson: Thank you very much. At this point we do have three
letters that are not opposed from David & Tina Clark, Patrick &
Kimberly Igo and Deborah Rabehl. These are entered into the record
as not opposing t his request. Is there anyone else from the public
to testify:
hIERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1991
PAGE 5
Denise Hibbard, 1232 Darrah Drive, was scaorn by the attorney.
Hibbard: YJe think this area should stay as a residential area and
niy husband and I oppose this request.
Johnson: Anyone else from the public' No resper.se. I will close
the public hearing. This is an accessory use permit so it is a
situation that we approve or disapprove.
The tiotinn caws made by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani to have
the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Laca with
approval of the application for accessory use.
llotion Carried: All Yea:
iTEPI #5: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIP4iNARY & FINAL PLAT GN FIELD OF
DREAMS SUBDIVISION:
Johnson: I will Hera open the public hearing. Is there someone
representing the applicant?
Pat Tealy, 479 P4ain Street, Boise, was sworn by the attorney.
Tealy: Z've read the comments and recommendations as prepared by
the City Engineer. t^]e have no questions on these. I'd be happy
to ansaaer any questions.
Hepper: Does this include the variance for the pressurized
irrigation?
Johnson: That's correct.
Clerk Niemann: The variance is really only heard by the Council.
Hepper: These lots twill be ready to be built on for residential
houses?
Tealy: Yes.
Hepper: If there aras FHA financing, FHA does not allow flood
irrigation. It looks to me like flood irrigation around a house
could be a real problem.
Tealy: It could be and I really don't have an anse~rer for that.
They do have access to the ditch and they can put a pump in to pump
out of the ditch.
Hepper: If they did receive the variance would they be willing to
contribute to a water resource fund for a near vaell?
IdERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING
NOV. lam, 1991
PAGE; 6
Tealy: We ~~ri11 preserve the existing system and supply crater to
each lot as it is irrigated note.
Hopper: 6^]hat square footage? City Ordinance is either mixed
footage basis or else 1300 sq, ft..
Tealy: That's pretty hard for us to say right noc~r. the really
can't dictate as a developer tahat our exact square footage would
be. If there is a minimum square footage of 1300 sq. ft, then I'm
sure that condition will be met.
Rountree: Have you seen the comments from RCHD?
Tealy: Yes.
Rountree: I assume that the Davidson's are adiacent to this on
Leisure Lane crith some consideration given to a utility easement
across this subdivision to provide for future se~~rer and crater into
that area.
Clerk Niemann: There is already one coming in from Dunten Place.
Johnson: Anyone else to testify? 1JO response. I c>>ill close the
public hearing.
The 1lotior caas made by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani that
meeting the conditions of the City Engineer and ACRD that ~~re
recommend a approval.
notion Carried: All Yea:
ITE1.1 #6: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEYATION & ZGNING REQUEST
W/PRELIbIINARY PLAT ON KEARNEY PLACE SUBDIVISION BY GORDGN & PEGGY
WGODS:
Johnson: I will nos=r open the public hearing. Is there someone
representing the applicant?
Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 2SG So. Beechc~rood, Boise, taas sworn by the
attcrney.
Lee: Handed out to Commission a revised preliminary plat for
review. The major change on that drawing there rs the extension
of a stub street northerly off of Devlin Drive. It is nocv tied to
the north boundary. This request is for annexation and zoning to
R-8 and a preliminary plat for 79 lots. The property is bordered
to the west by Chateau 1leadoors Easi Subdivision and also Ili rage
tteadolrs lays south and westerly of our southti~rest corner. This
1fERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1591
PAGE 7
property being adjacent to the existing city limits. The property
is about 20 acres in size, tae Have designed the preliminary plat
for 79 single family residential lots. That result=: in a density
of just a ii*_tle under four units per. acre. Zoning requirement for
F-4 ie. four but .ae vrauld like to go to an R-8 in this case to allow
fo.. a little srnailer frontage on some of the Tats. Some of the
square footages cvili be a little less than 3,000 in the R-4
requirement, so that is the reason for the R-8 request. This will
be similar to Chateau lteadoors. The price range ,gill b2 in the same
neighbarhaeds, probably $86,000.00 to 5220,000.00. House sizes
wi 11 be 1 X00 sq. ft. and up. There wi 11 be tcao and three car
garages cn most all the lots, with of minimum of two car. The
improvements far this project s-rill be again an extension cf the
Chateau Meadows Subdivision on the west boundary. Streets will
meet reith ACRD Standards. For the first stayer of this project,
we would like to provide a terr~porary emergency vehicle access that
trill front itself on Dixie Lane. It eaill be a graveled, all
weather raadway that can be used for emergency vehicles. our storm
~~rater eri 11 all be retained ors site. we oai 11 have landscaped burros
at the entrance on Chateau Drive. t<le've determined erith Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District is that we ~:'ill fence along their
right of way line and leave the ditch rider road as is. The
irrigation system itself will be phased out as the subsequent
phases of the project are developed. P1e've met with the property
owners that may be affected in the area concerning drainage and
spoke faith Mr. Aschenbrenner about his fields to the east and have
coordinated t-rhat will be required to take care of the irrigation
and storm water runoff in these fields. I'd be happy to answer any
questions.
Hopper; I assume that the irrigation pipe on the southerly end
there is sized and everything and that will be put in by the
develop. Is that correct'?
Lae: That's correct. We will put in pipe for each phase as it is
being developed.
Rountree: On that emergency vehicle access: road the 12 ft. right
of tiray your going to block out of there, how are you going to
propose to keep that from being an access point for the residents
back there:
Lee: we could probably install some break ac-aay gates if there eras
an emergency vehicle coming through there.
Rcantree: Questioned drainage.
Lee: 1Je are going to sat up se~reIls in the set back. areas running
along and adjacent to the streets.
hiERiDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. 12, 1951
PAGE 8
Rountree: ACHD has agreed to maintain those?
Lee: 1^]e've been caorking with ACRD on that on just hosa it's best
to set that up. They c-~i11 have some involvement on maintenance.
Rountree: what is the plan of events as far as phasing tt'iis?
Lee: The first phase we are looking at next spring for
construction.
Johnson: Is there any common ground in here?
Lee: No.
Johnson: Gary have you had a chance to discuss the School District
blo. 2 letter regarding a suggested $500.00 per lot for the
developer to pay'?
Lee: We talked to 1^4r. Babe not to long ago about some of the
concerns the school district has about gro,rth. At tha*_ time the
X500.00 fee didn't come up.
Johnson: He has caritten a specific letter for this project.
Lee: Yes.
Johnsen: Rnyone else to testify?
Don Bryan, 207G N. Locust Grove fid., was sworn by the attorney.
Bryan: I have numerous questions. The first concerning traffic,
are they going to put the traffic of 70 residential lots down
Chateau Lane along c~ith all the other traffic that goes into that
subdivision? From 7:OG to 7:3G AM. I can't get out onto Locust
Grove Road. Have there been any studies relating to traffic on
Locust Grove: I also have a reai problem with the drainage. They
say they are going to put in storm water retention, I don't know
[chat t'r,at is but I have pictures of a flood from last spring, the
water from the two subdivisions come dos•m to the front of my house
and they back up tc that storm drain_
Fit YlLU LI(< F'Lfti lal~l F:~L 2 rL)Ill tai L;
>t~IUV. 12, 1591
i~4i Lit `l
Hr-yan: R new s-.rbdivision is only goln
was told by i.he Hosac Developers that
for my orchard for all the run-oft.
alter it ail backed ~_rp and went into
ACHD, I~M1D, and the developers, they
fault. They have since put in a dr-~ain
g to add to the problem. I
they would supply a drain
They never pi.,t it in so
my Casement Lhen I tailed
all said it wasn't their
for the orchard.
Alidjani: This problem with the flooding was that within the
last six months or last spring o'r when`:'
Hryan: It was approximately the end of J~.me, first of J~.,ly.
Rlidjani: Haw long have you been there?
Hr^yan: Six years.
AlidJani: Ttus is the first trme you ever hatl a problem''
Rr^yan: The only time I had a pr^oblem is when that subdivision
came in.
Hepper^: Didn't the irrigation district, developers and the City
Engineer have a meeting t0 get this resolved?
Rr°yan: They had everybody out there having a meeting to try to
figure a~.rt how to alleviate the problem. I haven't heard
anything since. They decided the drain pipe in Chateau Meadows
is inadequate, but that will J~_rst provide more water coming down.
L'iscussion. (Tape on file)
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else to testify
John Harnes, IN 4 Justin F'lace, was sworn by the attorney.
Rar°n es: 1 wor_rld like to speak in favor ofi this development.
Ihis is the Gest use for this property. The whole project is
designed well and will make a nice neighborhood.
Johnson: Rnyone else to testify%
Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was swot°n by the attorney.
Sharp: i am opposed to this development for many reasons. The
Woods are very goad neighbor^s. Voiced concerns about the
temporary emergency vehicle r^oad being installed and additional
=hildren in area. r^eally think we need to plan for this. I
believe in progr^ess but 1 have to question if this is progress.
•
(*iENltl ti-±N t~L biNi~lihlG fl BONING
NOV. 12, 1991
i1AGE 1~~
Rlid;anx: I don't see why a s+_rbdxvision is against children`'
Y!h at are yo!: prapcsing"'
Sharp: The high density pap~_rlation in a given err^ea that crawds
the schools In the immediate area.
Hlid,)ani: What ea we do with them"~
Sheri^p: If the homes aren't mere they won't move that^e.
Alid.7ani: Then where do they live?
Sharp: I'm asking that yo~_i do a little bit mor^e planning -.gip
front sa that schools have a chance to at least absor^b a little
bit slower° than what they are having to do.
Johnson: Anyone else to come forward?
Dale Shar^p, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the attorney.
Sharp: I have some of the same concerns including the traffic
impact. My property goes across the irrigation road, it's the
ditch rider road there antl there is a ditch on the other side of
that ditch rider r^oad and that also belongs to me. They are
talking about p~_rtting a 40 foot right of way, what does this
encompass and are they going to put signs up they^e so people
can't ~.rse that ditch rider road other than people that have
reason to use it? At the pr^evious meeting I voiced the problem
with the irrigation also. You p+.rt another^ subdivision in there
and you will have more pr^oGlems.
Johnson: Thank you. Rnyone else to testify?
Dan Wood, b:'8 Lawndale, was sworn by the attorney.
Wood: I will try to answer same of the g+_iestions asked.
F'r^esented a Gook showing homes in the price range of E80,000.041
to E120,QIN0.Q10. My folks have owned this property far twenty
years. Part of the problem we will all somewhat agree would be
the south bo~_rndary of Chat ea+,r Meadows and it wo+_rld be Mirages
north boundary, that pipe that was installed was somewhat of a
problem from the very start. Hopef+.rlly we are going to get that
corrected. With the ponds that we are yoing to have there
sho!aldn't be as march water going down there. The catch ponds
will take care of the water. The other issue that was brought up
was about the emergency vehicle access. Don't see that this is a
problem.
fdt=RLDI(aN pLANNING & [UNINL,
!JCV. lc. i9`i 1
r AuE 11
Wood: T^.e other iss~.re abo~_rt the schools, I can't answer the
q~_restiorr un that one. There rs going to be mor^e growth a~.lt ther^e
no matter. Ftu^ther E>;plan at.i on.
r=+lid~7ani: Did 1 hear you indicating ttrat. there is a pr^oblem with
the piping to oar^row and you will take care of it in the near
f~.lture"+
Wood: No. What I'm indicating is in between Chateau Meadows and
Mirage Meadows with what Don was saying is Chey have plans, 1 was
under the impression this fall they were going to r^e pair the
problem.
1=11 id~ani: So there is a plan that's on the way that would take
care of some of the water problem.
Further Discussion.
.lohnson: Anyone else to testify?
Hurke Hortrp, cb40 Wingate Lane, was savor^n by the attorney.
Horrrp: Why can't we fix t:he water problem and know that it is
fixed before we develop any farther I think we need to fix the
problem then contim.le developing. Another q+.restion 1 have is, 1
don't think the Woods own Dixie Lane in its entirety. My family
moved to Wingate Lane for the quality of life that. the privacy
provides in that area. Nnw if a developer can come in and take a
private lane to use it for ewer^gency access that doesn't have
total ownerstu p, and 1 don't know if they do ar not, what
prevents them f>^om taking Wingate Lane and doing the same thing?
Cler^k Nieman r.: That is only going to be used fur Fire Trucks far
emergency.
borup: Hut yo+_n^ increasing it by 'i x.
Johnsan: Agencies r^eact to gr^owth. Just like we react to
things. We don't have jurisdiction over^ the irrigation water and
I tYrink you 4cnow that.
Porup: I'd like to see the problems iri the area taken car^e of
before furtner-~ development takes ptace.
MER1Dtard l~LAhn~11P~3 ~ zuivlraia
NOV. ! c_, 1991
F'f-1GE Lc
Alid.~ani: Wog-rldn't you say on the other hand that we are going
to penalize Mr. Wood's development beca~-ise somebody else didn't
do their .fob ~_ip front SQ10 yards ahead. It's dust not fair for
either party. Gr^oblems with the school and traffic, the user
pays for ~t. the proGlems go way hack. So far what I hear is
that we have a water problem, the rest of it is supply and
demand, it will take care of rtself.
Johnsan: Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
Aaron Sharp, 696 Fulmer Court, was sworn by the attorney.
Sharp: It's sounds to be that the planning part of this process
has been whitewashed. It's like we've gat growth and we are not.
even planning for it. I think we should plan far rt.
.iohnson: So yotr think we are not doing our .job? We do have a
Comprehensive Flan which is made up or" public input. We want to
attract ind~.rstry and be self-sufficient.
Sharp: I'm all for growth. I think we are building subdivisions
and then worrying about the schools.
Johnson: Our^ Engineer tries to work these things o~-rt with Nampa
Meridian Ir^r^igation. Thank yo~.i for your comments. Anyone else
to testify?
Lee Sty-icker, 2695 West Cherry Lane, was. sworn by the attorney.
Stucker: I think the Commission does p~.it a lot of time and
effort into trying the best that they can to develop proper
plans. I think they are ma4cing every effort to develop a plan
that is appropriate. I can appreciate people wanting prrvacy. I
do think that appropriate planning is being done, we can never
look ahead and see every obstacle that is befor°e us. If we cut
o~_rt development then our grand kids won't be able to live here 3n
the f~.rture. I appreciate the planning and efforts put into
development.
Pryor: I .dust want to say that I don't have a problem with
development. When I had the problem I addressed it to Nampa
Meridian, they said it is City of Meridian's problem not ours. I
asked the City of Meridian and they say it's Nampa Meridian
irrigation's problem. Maybe somebody can take responsibility fur
the problem.
MERIDIRN PLRNNIhIG 8 ZONING
P~fOV. 1~'_, t99t
pRCiE 1
Johnson: Thank yau. Rnyone else? IJO response. 1 wrll close
the public hearing.
Rountree: I have a couple of questions for Mr. Lee. Explain the
Stokesberry Lateral, your proposing a forty foot right of way,
I'm ass~.~ming that's a combination of existing easement and right
of way there for the later^al as well as addit~onai properties put
in easement by the Woods for that right of way.
Lee: Tha±. forty foot dimension is a dimension that was
estabi~shed by Nampa Meridran Irrigation District in their
requirements for easements. They claim they already have the
forty feet.
Rotmtree: The only water coming off of this particular parcel
would be that water that goes through the either piped or
mod~fred or redirected irrigation flows. Rny s~.rrface water that
would be generated by the development in terms of surface run off
Gy code has to be maintained within that development and that's
the only surface water that we can address.
Lee: That's correct.
Stokesber^r^y Lateral for
indicates a fence alon
continle that fence right
that should take car^e of
r^o ad.
I might add another point about that
Mr. Sharp. Our preliminary plat
g our northerly propet^ty and we wrll
across that stub street temporarily and
any direct access to that ditch rider
Crookston: Who owns the pr^bperty that Stokesberry Lateral is on
that runs through?
Lee: The actual ditch is on the parcel north of us.
Crookston: There is no recorded easement and there is no deed
for it?
Lee: Well they recorded easements for ail their ditches in the
County illegally.
Hepper: This temporary emergency vehicle access, under what
crrcumstances would that be used-+
Lee: It's strictly for fire protection and possibly medical
emergency's and police.
Hepper°: It would only be used if the main entrance was blocked.
Lee: That's correct.
MERIDIAN PLANNING $ ZONItdCi
i.iOV. lc, 19'31
FA[sF 2 4
Hepper: Yo~_r said something abo~_it the street st~_rb to the south,
the Woods. don't own the land from there to Fairview, is that
correct?
Lee: That's correct.
Hepper: If I remember right at the time that. Chateau Meadows was
put in there was a ]ot of people on Wingate Lane that wasn't rn
favor of that. I would probably fig~.rre that at some point in the
future that the whole area out there is going to be subdivisions.
Lee: Eventr.rally.
Johnson: Thanks Gary. Okay we will close (tie public hearing.
Rountree: 1 have some questions to Clerk Niemann as it pertains
to tcus drarnage problem. Uo we know if it's all irrigation
water? What's happenrng?
Niemann: The only time that it flooded Uon is when we had that
big rain last. spring and Rschenbrenner was irrigating his beets.
Ther^e is a problem, way before our time, down in Meridian place,
it's my understanding is Nampa 1+7eridian let them put in like a
12" or 14" t he which isn't big enough. Explained further - See
tape:
Discussion:
The Motion was made by Rountr^ee and seconded by Alid~ani to have
the attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
with one stipulation that addresses the issue of drainage and
drainage water problems in the area.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Johnson: No recommendation at this time.
The Motion was made by Rlidjani and seconded by Rountree to
ad,.7ourn at 9:0~ G.M.:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE GROCEEUIN6S)
.., • •
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
NOV. lc', 1991
PAGE 15
AP'P'ROVED:
t` ~~~~
~J I M~ JQHNSOhi, HA I RMAN
ATTES7:
/ JH~ I
I/ i
TY CLERK
hlayor 6 Council, P &~ Z Members,
Atty, Eng., @1dg, Stuart, Ward,
ACHD, NMID, ACC, Hallett, CDH,
Valley News,
Mail (b)
File (6)
6EFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SELLS, PATCH AND GIBBON
REZONE APPLICATION
1331, 1323 AND 1335 EAST FIRST STREET
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROO KSTON
Attornoya antl
Counaelore
P.O. Boz a27
MerlOlan, Idaho
898/2
ulaononaeee~ust
November 12, 1991 at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the
Petitioners appearing in person, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the
evidence and the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and
Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Rezone
Application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to
the said public hearing scheduled for November 12, 1991, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the November 12, 1991,
hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express
comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were
available to newspaper, radio and television stations;
2. That this property is located within the City of
Meridian and is owned by the Applicants and which property is
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein; that the property is presently zoned R-15 Residential; the
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
area in which Applicants' property is located is developed as a
residential area but several of the properties have been rezoned
to commercial.
3. That the Applicants propose to have the property zoned
(C-C) Community Commercial.
4. That the C-C District is described in the Zoning
Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 7 as follows:
(C-C) Community Business District: The
purposed the (C- istrict is to permit
the establishment of general business uses
that are of a larger scale than a
neighborhood business, and to encourage the
development of modern shopping centers with
adequate off-street parking facilities, and
associated site amenities to serve area
residents and employees; to prohibit strip
commercial development and encourage the
clustering of commercial enterprises. All
such districts shall have direct access to
transportation arterial or collectors, be
connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer
systems of the City of Meridian.
5. That the properties have frontage on East First Street;
that one of the properties has been previously used as an
insurance office under a conditional use.
6. That the uses of the properties surrounding the subject
gMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attomaye and
Copnaelora
P.O. Boz 62]
Merltl lan, Itle~o
89802
TalepNOne 8880081
property are for single family dwellings but several of the
properties have been rezoned.
7. That there was no testimony at the hearing objecting to
the Application; that no specific uses were mentioned for the
properties to be rezoned.
8. That sewer and water is available and are connected to
the properties, but the use may require additional charges and
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
fees.
9. That comments may be submitted by the City Engineer,
Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Police Department,
Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire Department, and the
Meridian Sewer Department and other agencies and those comments
will be incorporated herein as if set forth in herein.
10. That proper notice has been given as required by law and
all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been
followed.
CONCLUSIONS
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
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicants'
property.
2. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice
of its own ordinances, other governmental statues and ordinances,
and of actual conditions existing within the City and state.
3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
A~~orneya antl
Counselors
P.O. Boa <ZT
Merltllen, IONo
838sY
TelepNOne BBed~61
conditions upon granting a zoning amendment.
4. That the City has judged this Application for a zoning
amendment upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-
416 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67
Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
', Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which
it can take judicial notice.
5. That 11-2-416 (K) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances
of the City of Meridian sets forth standards under which the City
shall review applications for zoning amendments; that upon a
review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented
and conditions of the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission
specifically concludes as follows:
(a) The property is in an area where commercial and
office uses are likely to desire to locate and there has
been several properties in the area rezoned to
commercial. The new zoning should be harmonious with
and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and no
Comprehensive Plan amendment is required.
(b) The area is on the main street of Meridian where
substantial commercial property is located. A rezone
of the subject property is in line with that use.
(c) The area around in the proposed zoning amendment
is developed in a residential fashion but has had
several properties rezoned. The new zoning of C-C
Commercial should not be contrary to the other uses in
the area.
(d) There has been a change in the area or adjacent
area which dictate that the property should be rezoned
and the area is very likely to be developed in an office
or commercial fashion.
(e) That the property is designed and constructed to
be harmonious with the surrounding area.
(f) Commercial uses should not be hazardous or
disturbing to the existing or future uses of the
neighborhood.
(g) The property will be able to be adequately served
with public facilities, and connection to municipal
AenRROSE, sewer and water is required.
FIT2G ERALD
6 CROO KSTON
(h) Commercial uses should not create excessive
All°~°°Y°°na additional requirements at public cost for public
c°""°el°'° facilities and services and would not be detrimental to
R.o. Rox ezT
rA.na~~m°n° FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
T°IaOnone 888-<081
the economic welfare of the community.
(i) The proposed use should not involve any detrimental
activity to any person's property or the general
welfare.
(j) Development should not cause a significant increase
in vehicular traffic and should not interfere with
surrounding traffic patterns in that the property has
substantial street frontage.
(k) That this rezone will not result in the
destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic
feature of major importance.
(1) The proposed zoning amendment is in the best
interest of City of Meridian.
6. It is further concluded that the comments,
recommendations and requirements of other governmental agencies
will have to be met and complied with.
7. That any signs placed on the property shall meet the
Meridian Sign Ordinance and shall not be lighted so as to shine
in the eyes of vehicles traveling on East First Street.
8. That since the uses of the properties are not known, any
AM BROGE,
FITZGERALO
&CROOKBTON
Attorneys and
Counselors
P.O. Box IZ]
MerlEisn, IEaKo
Bsaxz
TelapNOne BBBJ~81
uses and the properties shall be subject to design review.
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
P,
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTEDi`haf-_
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED `~~'
~
COMMISSIONER
SHEARER ~/
~
VOTED f~tCfbd(~,n
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED~~`l ~
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
6 CROO KSTON
Attorneys and
COUna810ra
R.o. eoa azT
MerlOlan, IEeno
e~+~
TaleOnone 888-~~81
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Rezone requested by the Applicant for the properties described in
the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of
fact and Conclusions of Law and that the property be required to
meet the water and sewer requirements, Fire Department
requirements, Sewer Department requirements, the Nampa Meridian
Irrigation requirements, the fire and life safety codes, and the
Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of
Meridian, and shall be subject to design review.
MOTION:
J
APPROVED: ~~t -'~'-~'
-~
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACE AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
w
r
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
KATHY ROOT
ACCESSORY USE PERMIT
1255 DARRAH
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
AMSROSE,
F1T2G ERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
Counselors
P.O. Sos A2]
MerlElan, lama
83842
TeleOnone 8864481
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing
November 12, 1991 „ at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the
Petitioner appearing in person, the Planning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and
the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Rezone
Application and the Conditional Use Permit was published for two
(2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled
for November 12, 1991, the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the November 12, 1991, hearing; that the public was
given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence;
and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio
and television stations;
2. That this property is located within the City of
Meridian and the Applicant owns the property which property is
described in the application which description is incorporated
herein; that the surrounding properties are residential homes.
3. That the Applicant requests an accessory use permit for
the operation of a Family Child Care Home; that such use requires
gMBROSE,
FIT2G ERALD
BCROOKBTON
Allomaya and
Counsalore
P.O. Box ~2T
Marldlen, ItlNo
838'2
Telapnone 888-4181
an accessory use permit in any zone where allowed.
4. Ttrat the property is contained in the CAIRNS
neighborhood as designated on the Policy Diagram at Page 7 of the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan; neighborhoods are defined in the Plan
at Page 6 and states as follows:
"Definition: The neighborhood is a residential area
with'- uniform characteristics of a size comparable to
that usually served by an elementary school or a small
business convenience center or a local park. Although
neighborhoods occur in various shapes and sizes, a
section of the City measuring one-half to one and one-
half miles across is usually used for planning purposes.
It has facilities within easy walking distances and
provides the basis for community identification."
5. That the use proposed by the Applicant is set forth
above and the Applicant proposes to care for 5 or fewer children
and indicates that she will be state licensed and is attempting
to obtain that license.
6. That the day care use proposed b•y Applicant is an
allowed accessory in the R-4 and R-8 districts of which the
Applicant's property is zoned.
7. That the subject property is occupied by the Applicant
and her family; that the yard is completely fenced and the
Applicant testified that there was no gate in the fence; that the
property does have irrigation canals or facilities in the area;
that these canals and irrigation facilities are a visible hazards.
8. That sewer and water is already connected to the
property, but the use may require additional charges or fees.
9. That there was written and oral testimony submitted in
opposition to the application; that the reasons cited as grounds
for objection relates to the proximity to Five Mile Creek and to
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
SCROOKSTON
Allorneyf entl
Couneelore
P.O. Boz t2]
MBtltllln, Itle~o
83NI
TeleP~onn BBB~U81
another irrigation ditch, the fact that the Applicant lives on a
dead-end street and as such there is little parking, it was
expressed that the day care would interfere with the residential
character of the area and would hinder the resale of property.
There was no testimony submitted in favor of the Application but
there was one letter submitted supporting the application.
10. That the Applicant testified that the children would be
supervised at all times; that her hours of operation would be from
7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; that she was now caring for 4 children,
two from her neighborhood and two from outside of the
neighborhood; and that she had parking spaces for three cars in
her driveway; and that she lived on a cul-de-sac. That the
Applicant also testified that her license from the state would
allow her to care for up to six children.
11. That the Applicant does not live on an arterial or
collector street.
CONCLUSIONS
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
which abut the external lot or boundary lines of the property
under consideration.
2. That the City of Meridian has authority to grant
Accessory Uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to
11-2-410 D of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian; and
3. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice
of its own ordinances, other governmental statues and ordinances,
and of actual conditions existing within the City and state.
4. That the City of Meridian has authority to place
conditions on an accessory use permit
5. That 11-2-410 D of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances
of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the
Planning and Zoning Commission shall review applications for
Accessory Use Permits; that those standards are as follows:
Family Child Care Home Standards: It is the intent of this
provision to provide for accessory family child care homes
which will not adversely impact surrounding properties due
to children's noise, traffic and other activities, and which
are located away from and properly screened from adverse
impacts to the health, safely and welfare of the children.
The following conditions shall apply:
(1) Secure and maintain a child care license from the Idaho
State Department of Health and Welfare-Child Care
Licensing Division if required.
(2) Acquire an occupancy certificate.
(3) Provide one (1) off-street parking space per employee
which may be the driveway to the home.
(4) Provide for child pick-up are located off or arterial
or collector streets.
(5) Provide for screening of adjacent properties to protect
children from adverse impacts and to provide a buffer
between properties.
(6) Provide for a fence of appropriate height/construction,
to enclose play areas, protecting children from traffic
on arterial or collector streets.
6. That due to the proximity of the irrigation facilities
AMBROSE,
F1T2G ERALO
B CROOKSTON
Attorneys en0
Counselors
P.O. Bos 12]
MarlClAn, IEaNo
83812
TelaPNOne BBB-N81
and waterway nearby to the property, the Applicant keep the
children in the fenced yard at all times except for drop-off and
pick-up times when the parents shall be required to bring the
children into the Applicant's home and come into the home to the
pick the children up. The children shall at no time be allowed
out side of the fenced area when not accompanied by an adult.
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
BCROOKSTON
AttomeYS antl
Counselors
P.O. Boa 627
Meritl lan, Itlaho
&9802
Telephone BB8~0081
That the City has judged this Application for an accessory use
permit upon the basis of guidelines contained above and the record
submitted to it and the things of which it can take judicial
notice.
7. That the State of Idaho Health and Welfare Child Care
Licensing for a Family Child Care Home allows up to Six (6)
children to be cared for but the ordinances of the City of
Meridian only allow up to five (5) children under the Family Child
Care Home. The Applicant shall be limited to a maximum of five
(5) children to be cared for under this accessory use permit.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these
Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED ~`'v'
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED ~7`' -
~-
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED'~~~_.
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED~___
DECISION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves
the Accessory Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the application with the conditions set
forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, which
specifically include the requirements and conditions cited in
AM BROSE,
FITZGERALD
&OROO KSTON
Atlornaya anE
Counselors
F.O. BOY s2T
Marl0lan, Idaho
83NY
TelaOhone BBB-NB1
Conclusions of Law number five (5), six (6) and seven (7) set
forth above, and that the property be required to meet the water
and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, and the
Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of
Meridian. The conditional use shall be subject to annual review
upon notice to the Applicant by the City.
MOTION: ~(,
APPROVED:/'i r, -~ DISAPPROVED: __ROLL CALL
~~~
l~
.^
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GORDON R. WOOD AND MARGARET WOOD
ANNEXATION AND ZONING
NORTH 1/2 NORTHEAST 1/4 SOUTHWEST 1/4,
SECTION 5, T. 3 N. R. I E.
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for consideration on November 12, 1991, at the hour of
7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East
Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Council having heard and
taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant, Dan Wood, son
of the owners and the developer of the property, appearing in
person and through his engineer, Gary Lee, and having duly
considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes
the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning
AM BROSE,
RITZGERALO
fi CROO KSTON
Attorneys antl
Caunaelora
P.O. Box a2T
MarlOlen, Itle~o
B38a2
TeleononeeBBaei
was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said
public hearing scheduled for November 12, 1991, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the November 12, 1991,
hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express
comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were
made available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
AMBROSE,
FITZG ERALD
&CROOKSTON
Attomaye ena
Counselors
P.O. Boa 427
Maritl lan, Itlaho
eas4z
Telephone BBB~4481
2. That the property included in the application for
annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this
reference is incorporated herein; that the property is
approximately 20 acres in size; it is north of Fairview Avenue and
east of Locust Grove Road.
3. That the property is presently zoned by the county RT
(Rural Transition) and the proposed use would be for R-8
Residential but with only single family dwellings.
4. The general area surrounding the property is used
agriculturally and residentially; that most of the residential
property is zoned R-8, Residential.
5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the
present City limits.
6. The Applicant is Dan Wood and he is not the owner of
record of the property but is the owners' son and the owners,
Gordon R. Wood and Margaret Wood, have requested annexation and
consented to the Application.
7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning
application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the
Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning
Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed
and zoned R-8 Residential but that only single family dwellings
will be constructed on the lots; the Application further states
that the minimum lot size will be 7,000 square feet and that the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
minimum house size will be 1,300 square feet; that the present use
of the property is for agriculture and for a residence;
10. There were property owners in the immediate area that
testified and objected to the application stating that there were
water and drainage problems in the area and that those problems
needed to be resolved before additional development is allowed,
that the development would interfere with the rural quality of
life in the area, and that the development would further impact
the school district by the likely addition of children. That the
drainage problem in the area was not likely to have been caused
by the owners or the owners' property, it appearing to have been
likely caused by the Chateau Meadows East subdivision or down
stream development that did not adequately size drainage pipes and
devices.
11. That in the immediate area there are other subdivisions
that have been developed in the past three to four years and are
on-going developments and there is likely to be additional
development of those subdivisions.
12. That the property is in the NORTH CURUE Neighborhood as
AMBROSE,
F1T2G ERAlD
dCROOKSTON
Attomeya entl
Coonaelors
P.O. Boa a2]
McMtlisn, ItlNo
eaeaz
TelePNOne BBBJa81
set forth in Policy Diagram in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan;
that under Housing Development on page 25 and 26 of the
Comprehensive Plan, property inside the Urban Service Planning
Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit
per acre and it is the policy that a density of greater than 1
dwelling unit per 5 acres may not be exceeded outside of the Urban
Service Planning Area.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
13. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan
it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain
in agricultural activity until it is no longer economical to
exclude orderly growth and development to maintain agricultural
pursuits.
14. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population
increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for
agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision
lots.
15. That the property can be serviced with City water and
sewer.
15. Ada County Highway District did not submit comments but
they may, the Department of Health, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District, City Engineer, Police Department and City Fire
Department submitted comments and such are incorporated herein as
if set forth in full. The Meridian School District submitted
comments and they are also incorporated herein as if set forth in
full.
16. That the R-8, Residential District is described in the
AM BROSE,
F1T2G ERALO
6 CROO KSTON
Attomeya end
GOUOBBIOfa
R.o. eo. a2T
Menalaa laeno
eaBaz
Teleplrona BBBa~61
Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 2. as follows:
(R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose
the~j District is t~ o permit the establishment of
single and two (2) family dwellings at a density not
exceeding eight (8) dwelling units pre acre. This
district delineates those areas where such development
has or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City and is also designed to
permit the conversion of large homes into two (2) family
dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of
comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water
and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian is required.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
13. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan
it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain
in agricultural activity until it is no longer economical to
exclude orderly growth and development to maintain agricultural
pursuits.
14. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population
increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for
agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision
lots.
15. That the property can be serviced with City water and
sewer.
15. Ada County Highway District did not submit comments but
they may, the Department of Health, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District, City Engineer, Police Department and City Fire
Department submitted comments and such are incorporated herein as
if set forth in full. The Meridian School District submitted
comments and they are also incorporated herein as if set forth in
full.
16. That the R-8, Residential District is described in the
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B GROG KSTON
Attorneys end
Counselors
P.O. Box 02T
MB/Itl lsn, IEano
BTB12
TalaOhone BBB~~~81
Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 2. as follows:
(R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose
the R-8 District is to permit the establishment of
single and two (2) family dwellings at a density not
exceeding eight (8) dwelling units pre acre. This
district delineates those areas where such development
has or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City and is also designed to
permit the conversion of large homes into two (2) family
dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of
comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water
and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian is required.
(FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
AM BROBE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
C.OIIn9810r8
P.O. Boz 02]
Merltllan, Kano
eBS~z
TelePnone BBBJ.t81
17. That proper notice was given as required by law and all
procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given
and followed.
CONCLUSIONS
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
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land
pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the
Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that the
exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative
function.
3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this
annexation and zoning use application by the standards contained
in Section 50-222, Title 57, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian
City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the
record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial
notice.
4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City
of Meridian have been complied with.
5. That the Commission may take judicial notice of
government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions
(FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
~~
AMBROSE,
F1T2G ERALD
6CROOKSTON
Attomeya an0
Coonaelora
V.O. Box 62]
MerlOlan, IEano
836/2
TelaOnone bab-H61
existing within the City and State.
6. That the land within the proposed annexation is
contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and
the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation.
7. That the annexation application has been initiated by
the Applicant, with the consent of the owners, and the annexation
is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian.
8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a
legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions
upon the annexation of land.
9. That the development of annexed land must meet and
comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
particular Section 11-9-616 which pertains to development time
schedules and requirements; that the Applicant will be required
to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the property will be
subject to Site Planning Review and the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance.
10. That the requirements of the City Engineer must be met,
specifically including but not limited thereto, his comments that
the emergency access road must be an all weather surface, some
provision must be made for maintenance of emergency access and
the drainage swales, and a blow-off valve must be placed on all
dead-end water mains. That engineering plans must be submitted
to the City Engineer for his approval for the conveyance of
irrigation water and drainage through the subdivision to meet the
historical drainage responsibilities of the property; that the
.FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
Applicant should co-operate with the City and other land owners
and developers in the area and west of Locust Grove Road to
ascertain the water drainage problem to resolve it.
11. That the requirements of the governmental agencies and
irrigation districts other than the Meridian School District shall
be complied with as a condition of annexation; that while there
no doubt is a school overcrowding problem, which development of
the subject property would only contribute to, such is not the
sole responsibility of the City to solve and any solution, such
as the requested $500 impact fee proposed by the School District,
if attempted by the City without Boise and Eagle and Ada County,
would isolate the City and cause other adverse impacts far the
City. Any solution to the school problem must at least be School
District wide and include all governing jurisdictions and the need
for such solution is imminent and must be pursued as soon as
possible or the failure to reach a solution may cause the
cessation of residential development.
12. That proper and adequate access to the property is
available and will have to be maintained.
13. That since the Applicant's property is in the NORTH
AM BROSE,
FITZG ERALD
6 CROONSTON
Atlorneye and
Counselors
P.O. Boa 62]
Merltl len, Itleno
89812
releononee9e~us+
CURVE NEIGHBORHOOD of the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation and
zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan
and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies.
14. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and
evidence, these Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
that Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned as
requested; that the development of the property shall be at a
density of not greater than four (4) dwelling units per acre; that
the conditions should be those stated above and upon issuance of
final platting and other conditions to be explored at the City
Council level; that such annexation would be orderly development
and reasonable if the conditions are met; that the property shall
be subject to de-annexation if the R-8 density is exceeded and no
dwellings other than single family dwellings shall be allowed and
this restriction shall be noted on the plat of the subdivision.
15. That all ditches, canals, drainages and waterways shall
be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the
property shall be subject to de-annexation.
16. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B OROO KBTON
Ad0lOey5 d00
COUn9el0(8
P.O. Boz d2]
MeriE lan, Keno
Bssdz
TeieonmeeBB+dai
annexation and zoning of R-8, Residential would be in the best
interest of the City of Meridian, however, as requested in the
application, the subject property shall be limited to lot sizes
of at least 7,000 square feet and all structures must be at least
a minimum size of 1,300 square feet.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 8
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED~~~
COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED_~ % i
COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED '%~ ~
COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
AMBROSE,
FIRGERgID
6CROOKSTON
Atlornaya and
Counsalon
P.O. BOR /21
Maridlan, ItlMo
e3e.s
TelaDhone tl8&//81
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the
Annexation and zoning requested by the Applicant for the property
described in the application with the conditions set forth in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the Applicant be
specifically required to the all ditches, canals, drainages and
waterways as 'a ~Qndition of annexation, that the lot sizes be
PR1p,~'"
a
limited tor,7,000 square/feet and the structure sizes constructed
~~ •t~~lc,~t«..--~~!
thereon be at--list 1,300 square feet in size, and that the
Applicants meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian,
specifically including the development time requirements.
MOTION:
APPROVED: f~yZ ;~~ ~~ DISAPPROVED:
~"~~
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 9