Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-09-09e4mended ~~8/0>3 II~IAN -- CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, September 9, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Counts/ are expected to be truthful and honest to the best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. pledge of Allegiance: Led by Tanner Dillon 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter with Treasure Valley Worship Center 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 5. Consent Agenda: Approve A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 08-005 Request for Variance to UDC 11 2A-6 which requires building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from the back of ribbon curb for 12 lots, located on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague ay and Genoard Avenue in Messina Meadows Subdivision No. 1 for Messina Meadows by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south side of Deerhill Street approximately '/ mile west of South Eagle Road and approximately'/ mile south of East Victory Road: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MFP 08-005 Request to Modify the previously approved Final Plat (FP 05-076) by removing the requirement fora 5-foot detach®d Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -September 9, 2008 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents andlor hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. A~~~~~~ ~i~l®~ sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, which are located on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue for Messina Meadows by Tuscany Development, Inc. -'/ mile west of South Eagle Road and '/ mile south of East Victory Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08- 007 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT to C-C zoning district for Shoas at Victory by LDR-II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 08- 006 Request for Preliminary Plat for 3 building lots on 3.68 acres in a proposed C-C zoning district for Shoas at Victory by LDR- II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-011 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval for a drive-thru pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence per UDC 11-4-3-11 for Shoas at Victory by LDR-IVDMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 08-001 Request for Preliminary /Final Plat approval of 2 single- family residential building lots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-8 zoning district for Fullmer by Jeffrey Fullmer -end of E. Carlton between E. Fifth Street and Cathy Lane: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08- 008 Request for Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services by The Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-015 Request for Conditional Use Permit for an Assisted Living Facility consisting of 2 residential treatment buildings and 1 administrative building in a proposed R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services by The Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane: I. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 08-001 Request for a Miscellaneous application to modify the Development Agreement to remove the requirement for cross-access between the properties located at 125 W. Cherry Lane and 1645 W. 1~ Street for Mittleider by Dr. Dan Thieme -125 West Cherry Lane: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -September 9, 2008 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • • Meridian Citv Council Meeting September 9 2008 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:03 p.m., Tuesday, September 9, 2008, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and David Zaremba. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Keith Watts, Joe Silva, Jeff Lavey, Clint Dolsby, Steve Siddoway, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba O Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. Thank you all for joining us here this evening. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. And, for the record, it is Tuesday, September 9th. It's a few minutes after 7:00. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight we will be led by Tanner Dillon. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) De Weerd: Tanner, now I understand you're here for Boy Scouts tonight? Can I present you with a pin for the City of Meridian for leading us in the pledge? Thank you. Item 3: Community Invocation by Gordon Slyter -Treasure Valley Worship Center. De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Gordon Slyter and he is with Treasure Valley Worship Center. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Pastor. Slyter: I have taken a Palms, 122, versus six through nine, which is written as an injunction to pray for Jerusalem. I have modified it for Meridian. So, this will be our prayer tonight. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 2 of 66 • • Slyter: Our Father, we pray for the peace of Meridian. May they prosper who live and serve our city. May peace be within our boundaries and jurisdictions and prosperity within our places of government, business, and services. For the sake of our brothers and sisters, friends, families, and citizens, we will now say may peace be within our city. For the sake of the work of the Lord and the furtherance of his message of hope, love and forgiveness, we seek the good of our city Meridian. Thank you, Lord, for your hand upon us. We pray that you would continue to keep your good hand and your great grace upon us. Be with the Council as they hear issues, deliberate issues, and make decisions tonight. These things we pray in Jesus' name, amen. De Weerd: Thank you, pastor. Can I ask you did I -- have I given you one of these? Slyter: Yes, you did. De Weerd: Well, thank you for joining us. Slyter: Thank you. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item No. 4 is the adoption of the agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would make note that under the Consent Agenda, Item 5-O, change order number one is being removed from the Consent Agenda. On the regular agenda under Department Reports, Item 7-A-1, Ada County Landfill Rates Discussion, is being withdrawn from the agenda. The final on the regular agenda item is ordinance -- be Item 13, which is an ordinance, the proposed ordinance number is 08-1380. And with that I move that we adopt the agenda as amended. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as stated. All those favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 08-005 Request for Variance to UDC 11-2A-6 which requires • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 3 of 66 building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from the back of ribbon curb for 12 lots, located on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague ay and Genoard Avenue in Messina Meadows Subdivision No. ~ 1 for Messina Meadows by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south side of Deerhill Street approximately 'h mile west of South Eagle Road and approximately'h mile south of East Victory Road: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MFP 08-005 Request to Modify the previously approved Final Plat (FP 05-076) by removing the requirement fora 5-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, which are located on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue for Messina Meadows by Tuscany Development, Inc. -'h mile west of South Eagle Road and '/2 mile south of East Victory Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08- 007 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT to C-C zoning district for Shops at Victory by LDR-II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 08- 006 Request for Preliminary Plat for 3 building lots on 3.68 acres in a proposed C-C zoning district for Shops at Victory by LDR- II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-011 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval for adrive-thru pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence per UDC 11-4-3-11 for Shops at Victory by LDR-II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 08-001 Request for Preliminary /Final Plat approval of 2 single- family residential building lots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-8 zoning district for Fullmer by Jeffrey Fullmer -end of E. Carlton between E. Fifth Street and Cathy Lane: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08- 008 Request for Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services by The Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane: • • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 4 of 66 H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-015 Request for Conditional Use Permit for an Assisted Living Facility consisting of 2 residential treatment buildings and 1 administrative building in a proposed R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services by The Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane: I. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 08-001 Request for a Miscellaneous application to modify the Development Agreement to remove the requirement for cross-access between the properties located at 125 W. Cherry Lane and 1645 W. 1St Street for Mittleider by Dr. Dan Thieme -125 West Cheny Lane: J. Chance Order No. 1 for Well 14 Rehabilitation (Construction) with McLeran Well Drilling for $3,775.00: K. Water Easement Agreement for The Cottages by Jeff Fullmer: L. Five Mile Drain: M. Fourth Amendment to Lease Aareement with William A. Hon for 660 East Watertower Lane: N. Deed of Conservation Easement for Five Mile Creek Restoration Proiect with Arthur Berry ~ Kobe, LLC: O. Chance Order No. 1 for Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements with Star Construction, LLC for $6,414.49: P. Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with (name of winning bidder) for Settlers Village Sauare -Phase 1 for (amount ): Q. Contract with Star Construction for Well 27 Flush Line for a Cost Not to Exceed $29,409: R. Child Safety Day Property Use Agreement with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company: S. Addendum No. 6 to Aareement for City Prosecutor /Criminal Legal Services with the City of Boise: T. Approve 2009 Stenographic Service Aareement with MD Willis, Inc. for Stenographic Services: • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 5 of 66 De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: As noted, we are removing Item O from the Consent Agenda. Other than that, I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda as amended. Rountree: Second. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there isn't any discussion -- Zaremba: I believe I should have added for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. De Weerd: I appreciate that addition. And I'm sure second -- both seconds agree; right? Rountree: Certainly do. De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Swear in Brad Hoaglun as City Council Member Seat #2: De Weerd: Item 6. I brought to you two weeks ago the -- and asked for your confirmation for appointment of Brad Hoaglun to City Council Seat No. 2. Tonight he and his wife and I believe his in-laws are here with him. Brad is going to have his wife join him and we have our City Clerk that will swear you in. So, if you will come forward, Brad. Holman: Raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Brad Hoaglun, do solemnly swear, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Idaho and the laws and ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that I will, to the best of my ability, faithfully perform the duties ~of the office of City Council of Meridian, Idaho, during my continuance therein, so help me God. (Repeated by Brad Hoaglun.) Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 6 of 66 De Weerd: You can take your seat up here. We also already have his name tag, so we wanted you to remember who you were and who you represented. So, I do appreciate his family being here tonight and certainly your family support. City Council is one of those time consuming -- and, see, I waited until after he was sworn in to talk about the time consuming job this is. The definition of public service: Now after you're sworn in, you're sworn at. So, we do appreciate you joining our team and certainly I look forward to working with you. I know that you have high integrity and I look forward to your term as City Council member. Hoaglun: Well, thank you, Mayor. I'm pleased to be here. You have got a great crew around you with your City Council members and your staff and we have a great community and I just look forward to serving, as I said, to the best of my ability and just continue to make Idaho -- Meridian a great place to live and work and I think we can do that together. Thanks. De Weerd: Very good. Council, any comments? Rountree: Brad, just a quick welcome and as you can tell by the hair color up here and the lack of hair, you will progress either to gray or gray and no hair or no hair, so welcome and I'm looking forward to working with you for the next term and I know you will have a few teaming epiphanies across the bow here before long, but you will pick up on it with your experience that you had in other governmental activities and I think you will bring a good fresh view of things from a state and regional perspective that we haven't had before. So, welcome aboard. Hoaglun: Thank you. De Weerd: Or you can retain your youth and nice looks like the Mayor. Hoaglun: I hope to do so. Rountree: We all started that way. Bird: Can't remember when, but -- De Weerd: First to go is the memory. Next is the hair. Okay. Anything else from Council? Zaremba: I would only add welcome. I'm looking forward to working with you. Hoaglun: Thank you. Item 7: Department Reports: A. Finance Department: Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 7 of 66 n 1. Ada County Landfill Rates /Service Update: De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 is our Department Reports. We have our Finance Department. Oh. Actually, we have the landfill rates under the Finance Department and they have requested withdrawing this from the agenda, because they have not actually had full action of the Ada County commission on how the increase of 16 percent is to be allocated, so -- because they didn't have that decision, it was hard for Mr. Neal to come and break it down for us, which does make it difficult for SSC to bring in front of you tonight for their public discussion. But we will get to that later. So, that has been withdrawn from our agenda. B. Legal Department: 1. Discussion on 1=Y09 Benefits: De Weerd: Item 7-B is our legal department, so I will tum this over to Mr. Nary. Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is our annual renewal of our city benefit for our employees. As I presented to our directors this morning, the renewal -- the benefit renewal every year is like a marathon that at the end of it is a sprint. We take eight months of data with our different medical providers and they are very, very slow in providing rates and potential costs of renewal, because of the apprehension that they have about cost of services for medical coverage and, then, once they do decide on what that number is, they'd like our decision within about a week and it doesn't work so well for us to do it that quickly either. I can report some really good positive things that we have for our benefits. We started out, as you well know during the budgetary process we have to pick some number to put into the budget to be able to have a -- some spending authority. So, I worked with the Finance Department to come up with what we perceive to be a realistic number for benefits, so that we can make sure we cover the expense without having to amend the budget the first month we are into a new budget year. So, we anticipated an increase of in the area of 15 percent for both medical coverage and dental coverage and all the additional coverage that we have. The original request by Blue Cross, which has been our provider for a number of years for medical coverage, was 15 percent. The Delta Dental is our dental provider and their increase request initially was five percent. So, it was a fairly significant increase. We have not had agood -- or we have not had a bad experience for our providers in the last couple of years. You may recall in the last few years -- last year we had a zero increase from Blue Cross and the year before we had a two percent reduction. So, we have had very good experience from them, but the cost of these services are increasing and so we did anticipate that. We used Parcer Consultants as our benefits consultants. They have worked with us and with our employees, as well as negotiate these rates with the providers to try to get those rates within a reasonable amount. So, part of the process we went through with our benefits committee, as well as with my staff, was we remarketed our plan to see what would be available in the marketplace at a better rate and we did find some programs in the marketplace that were comparable. They had some things that were better and some • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 8 of 66 things that weren't quite as good as what we have, but their increase rate was significantly less than what Blue Cross was suggesting. Blue Cross, to their credit, was able to rework their numbers and find a -- find a number that was much more attractive to us to stay with them as a provider, so they went down from a 15 percent increase to now a five percent increase and the market rate that we were able to find out in the marketplace was close, but it was not significantly less to make it worthwhile for the city to switch providers and change the program for everybody and change all the cards for everybody and the reporting process and all those things. So, our benefits committee did meet, they did recommend remaining with Blue Cross, but there is a program out there in the market that we would like to gain more information on, so we are looking at some the strategies to at least evaluate that, so maybe next year in that portion of the time we are in the sprint we are able- to gather the information a little bit better so we can compare an apples-to-apples comparison. But our recommendation is to renew with Blue Cross at that requested increase. Delta Dental, when we remarketed their plan, they were at five percent, they are not at two percent. When we looked at other providers we couldn't find a rate that was better than what they were suggesting, but we did also get an additional provider that was willing to tag along really at the same cost to the employees and that's Willamette Dental and this is one that's kind of exciting for us from HR to present to employees to give them the option to be a part of. As most of you may recall, we don't provide for the city orthodontic coverage, because it's very expensive, it doesn't have a tremendous amount of employees that can access it or use it, it only applies to minors, it didn't apply to adults, so it's fairly limited and to try and make the balance of benefits when everybody is paying for very few people to use it, we really try to balance those dollars and try to make sure that we provide the most for the most people at the lowest amount. Willamette Dental is a new provider in the area and the basic difference from them is they are a location provider. Have you to go to them. You can't go to a group of dentists on their list, you have to go to them. But they do provide orthodontic coverage. So, it is a voluntary option for folks. It doesn't cost any different for the city to use that if they choose, but it's all or none. So, they can't just opt it for their kids or if they are adults, if they want to have adults that need orthodontics. So, it's all or none. But if they have that option and it was no additional cost, the benefits committee felt that it was a good opportunity for employees to opt into something that might be of some value to some folks with no additional cost to the city. So, we are very excited about that. The vision for -- the vision services still is going to remain the same. The increase was 3.38 to use the ones that we already have, so that was one where we have kept that the same and that was an affordable increase. The last one was our EAP benefits. One of the things we have had in the last few years is we have had employees that used our EAP benefit and one of the things -- the limitations that we have had in that program is that the city services -- or the city pays for three visits for employees for whatever issues may be going on, whether it's financial, personal, whatever may be happening, and what some employees report back to us is that three visits sometimes really doesn't get anywhere. I mean they sort of start with the program and, then, all of a sudden it becomes very expensive to continue on it. Some of it's covered by major medical, depending on what the issue is, some of it's not covered by their major medical. Sometimes it can be covered under their flexible spending medical coverage that we have that we offer, sometimes it can't. So, the • • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 9 of 66 committee discussed it and we could increase the number of visits from one to five to, hopefully, maybe provide a little better service for the employees and the cost of that increase is 3,000 dollars for the whole city. So, we worked out when we -- when we penciled it out per person it ends up being a fairly insignificant -- a fairly small amount of money per employee per month to provide that. We have right now about 25 percent of the employees use that service for a variety of different issues that come up and the committee felt that was enough of a minimal expense for the savings that we experience on the other end that it seemed like a valuable addition to our service to up that for a tiny bit. The other ones are all at the same expense. There is no additional cost. We have the same programs we have had in the past, short-term disability, long- term disability. We have life insurance for employees. We are offering this year an additional service the benefits committee was very interested in. We have a lot of inquiries -- and this might seem a little odd, but we have a lot of inquiries for people that want pet insurance and in the past pet insurance wasn't offered much in the marketplace, because most of it did not cover your common expenses you may have for a pet, your routine visits to the veterinarian weren't covered and so most people didn't opt to go into that. There is a program out there that offers it. No cost to the city. It's a voluntary program. The people pay a hundred percent of the premium. So, it's really just an option for employees if they wish and we have had a number of people, so the benefits committee felt it was something we could offer this year, see how many people take advantage of it, if we think it's something to continue with, again, it doesn't cost the city any money, essentially, all we are doing is inviting the vendor to participate in our open enrollment period so people can sign up for it. It seemed a little odd to me when it was brought to my attention, but, again, we have had enough inquiries we felt there are a lot of people out there in our employee base that their pets are their kids and to them it is important and it's something that is now more affordable and the vendor is from -- our reports from other -- our reference checks on them, they are very very good, they cater their product to the individual people and to their individual pet and they work out their premium based on their history and whatever information they can gather and so we felt it was something worth offering. And so we are going to add that as a voluntary service. So, really, I wanted to just bring to your attention what our renewal is for this year. Unless you had any questions or concerns, I'd like to direct our provider to get the contracts done with Blue Cross and forward those back to us, so that we can get that -- get that re-up before the beginning of the fiscal year between Blue Cross and Delta Dental and all of our other providers. Any questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Bird: Go for it. De Weerd: Okay. • • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 10 of 66 Rountree: Do we need a motion for that, Bill? Nary: Yes. A motion would be great. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I would move that we approve the benefits committee's recommendation for renewal of the medical benefits for the employees of the City of Meridian. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. 2. Discussion of Doas Off Leash Ordinance: Nary: Thank you. Shall I do the next one? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next item is an ordinance that's in front of you really for discussion. This is the dogs off the leash ordinance. We have an ordinance in the city that doesn't allow you.to have a dog off a leash anywhere within the city. We have had some discussions with the parks department and the police department about the dog facility that we have and making that available to the public and they are working out some of the details between the parks department and police and how we can make that logistically work and make sure it gets maintained and taken care of and all the issues on that end. This is just an ordinance that would allow it to happen, so it allows it at specific designated areas within the city you can have your animal off a leash. If it's not of any concern or you don't have any questions, we could put it on your agenda next week -- or I guess the following week. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions or discussion on this? Bird: I think it's great. Go for it. Rountree: Just a question, Madam Mayor. It's in draft form -- it will be in draft form and it's been through code enforcement? Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 11 of 66 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, lalready -- yeah, it's in draft form. It's on your -- it's in your packet and that I already had sent that to both the police and the parks department for their review and they both signed off on it. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: And they are actually very excited about moving forward with the dog park and having that opportunity. Nary: So, if everything is all right, I will bring it back in two weeks. De Weerd: Okay. Let's do it. 3. SWAC Recommendation for Compass Public Charter School for Playaround Eauipment for $12,000.00: Nary: Great. Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the last item I have on there is the Solid Waste Advisory Committee's recommendation for the Compass Charter School. This is a request for the --our recycling funds, 12,000 dollars for some play equipment at this charter school. One of the things they needed to verify and they were able to verify is that this is accessible for the public use. That's one of the criteria when we have dispensed any funds from the recycling monies, that all of the public can use this. and, obviously, not during school time, but the Compass Charter School assured us that just like any other public school that we have in the valley or in the city, they are accessible by the public after hours. So, there are -- it is available for the other folks. There has been adiscussion -- and Mrs. Kilchenmann from the Finance Department has been out this week -- to try and verify exactly how much we have remaining in the account for the solid waste funds. What happens sometimes, as you can imagine, the committee will recommend approval, the Council will approve that, but the expenditure may occur in one fiscal year or another. And so there has been some overlap and so we just wanted to verify what Mrs. Kilchenmann assured me is that the Council approves this expenditure, that if we had less than the full 12,000 in this budget year, she is very comfortable that we have more than enough in the account, because they keep track of the total amount that's provided by SSC and it generally has always exceeded the budgeted amount that we have. So, what she would, then, recommend is that we expend the remaining of the funds -- this is the last one for this fiscal year, spend whatever is remaining in the account and if there is any remainder left, then, we would just do that in the next fiscal year. So, she's not concerned that it's going to be any problem. Like I said, generally, the account's been somewhere in the area of 100,000 a year and our budget amount is 65. So, we have generally always had more money than what we expend in these requests. But that was the only little wrinkle I wanted you to be aware of. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 12 of 66 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Councilman Hoaglun might be scratching his head wondering what this is all about, we are giving money away. We have aprogram -- our recycle funds, those funds that are gained back in excess of the cost of the program, come back to the city and we distribute them on a matching basis to folks who want to use recycle product, park benches, picnic tables, playground equipment, that sort of thing, in public spaces and we have a committee that reviews those and makes recommendation and that's what we are dealing with now. So, we get a fair amount of money back through the recycled program that way, as opposed to SSC just taking that and adding that to their bottom line, they actual bring that back to the city. Nary: Yeah. And just to follow up on Council Member Rountree, this Council, through the recommendations from the Solid Waste Committee, has funded a food bank vehicle to take recycled food before it was sent to the landfill and food that could still be distributed and was still -- still edible that could be distributed to the folks that are in need. We have funded a reader board sign that promotes recycling on Linder Road out at Sawtooth Middle School. They have funded benches and playground equipment in both public open spaces and pathways in subdivisions and things like that to, again, promote recycling and we are very proud of this program. It is the only one in the valley and returns the money back to the community in this kind of fashion and doesn't just go back to the bottom line. So, it's avery -- it's a very positive program. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: And I would like to add that this SWAC thing was set up by SSC. They brought the proposal to us and it's been very well used throughout the community. I know the association I belong to has been able use it for bleachers out at the American Legion Field. So, it's -- it's a great program and it's something that recycling is paying off and all of the citizens of Meridian can pat themselves on the back for doing the recycling, because that's where this money is coming from and we appreciate it. Nary: We had a meeting yesterday and not to again promote the program, but it's become so popular -- this is the first year I can think of that we actually spent all of the entire budget. Normally, we have had money left over, because we have -- no -matter how much we promoted it, sometimes we just didn't get enough applications. This year we have had a number of them. We have two new ones for the next fiscal year for the committee to consider that are fairly large. In fact, we have made a decision yesterday at the meeting to start honing that criteria a little bit, because we may actually run out of money, which is unique, and we wanted to be sure that we could provide as much to as Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 13 of 66 many people as possible. So, we are also going to be looking at that and probably bringing that back to the Council as the criteria maybe sharpens up a little bit. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: You and I -- this is on recycling, it's not on SWAC, but we -- at our new City Hall -- and Iknow anybody that's been in construction knows how much stuff -- how many 20 yard dumpsters was hauled out to the deal. Ninety-eight percent of our trash has been recycled -- or 90 percent of our trash has been recycled at the City Hall. That's fantastic. And it's -- De Weerd: I'm song, I don't want to make anyone nervous, but I have to stand up. Rountree: You all don't have to, however. De Weerd: Yeah. All rise. Bird: Somebody was telling us how young they were a minute ago? De Weerd: Okay. My back doesn't feel so young. Smart aleck. Okay. Thank you. Nary: We need an approval for that. Rountree: We need an approval. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the 12,000 dollars from SWAC to the Compass Public Charter School for playground equipment. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, please: Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. Public Works Department: 1. PW Departmental Reorganization: Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 14 of 66 De Weerd: Item 7-C is our Public Works Department. Mr. Barry. Bany: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Councilman. Hoaglun, we would -- on behalf of the staff of the Public Works Department I would like to welcome you to the City Council. We look forward to working with you in the months and years to come. Thank you. Hoaglun: Thank you. Barry: It is my pleasure to present to you this evening the -- an update, essentially, on the Public Works reorganization. In April of this year I initiated a process to review the Public Works organizational structure. The review was intended to take a critical look at roles, responsibilities, and reporting structure of the staff within the Public Works Department and to determine if improvements could be made by making modifications to the organizational structure. The process that we went through took about three months bi-weekly meetings and started with the development of a strategic leadership team consisting of 11 senior management staff members in the Public Works Department. These management team members represented all sectors of the Public Work Department to insure that we had representation from each facet of the organization and to also insure that what we did in one sector of the organization did not have negative implications for the other. Moving in this manner also allowed us to insure that we had some kind of cross-training, if you will, an opportunity for senior management in one sector to be exposed to the differences of another work group, that include challenges, differences of opinion, working structure, so that we could all gain a better understanding of how the Public Works Department functions as a single unit. We first began by developing operating rules and also defining the scope of our review and our primary objectives were several. First, to insure that as we moved down the path of reorganizing that we placed the right resources in the organization in the right place. We also wanted to be sure that once we positioned the right resources in the organization where we felt they were needed most, we, then, identified the right individuals to serve in the positions that were identified. We also wanted to identify and close gaps in service area, delivery, customer class, and other areas that we felt were lacking under our current organizational structure and we wanted to insure that we had clear succession pathways for those staff in the lower ranks, so that they could move through and up the organizational structure with mentoring and coaching throughout the process in the career, rather. As I mentioned, the team met for nearly three months off and on bi-weekly. ®ur work included evaluating various organizational structures available to us. We looked at specifically five different structures. We talked about the pros and cons of each of the structures, how they worked, how they might benefit. the organization and we also, then, as a joint group, selected a functional departmentalization structure, which is similar to -- almost identical to the structure we did have. It makes a lot of sense for the Public Works Department. We reviewed and revised our mission and vision statements, because as we proceeded through this work we realized that we wanted to make sure the organization was positioned to accommodate future needs and so we wanted to identify what those future needs were Meridian City Council ® • September 9, 2008 Page 15 of 66 and staff did a really good job coming together and identifying the fact that our mission and vision statements as currently written are not as clear as we'd like them to be and they don't challenge us to the degree we felt that we could take on the challenges of the future. So, we spent considerable time talking about the mission and vision statements in the Public Works Department and refined those vision and mission statements to achieve and establish various goals for the department to insure that we move the organization from where we are now to where we would like to be at some point into the future. We -- all of this work culminated in the development of a new organizational frame work, as well as a new organizational chart for the Public Works Department. Throughout the process our work was monitored by consultants, a staff from a consulting firm called Aspireon, as well as the Mayor, and it was reviewed by the Human Resources Department and also our Public Works Council liaison. Our proposed modifications at this point in time include moving four basic positions from our operations -- or the operations sector of the organization to our Public Works engineering sector. Also to reconcile inconsistencies in about a dozen different job titles. We realize that there were some significant problems and who was called what and who did what and who was described doing what. So, we wanted to rectify all that. We also, through our work, have identified eight vacant and currently filled positions that require reclassification to insure that the work that was identified in our -- our organizational chart was properly categorized, reallocated and appropriately titled. Finally, we have added two new FTEs to the Public Works organizational chart to insure that we could fulfill the challenges and obligations that we -- we identified for ourselves through our mission and vision statement. Now, while the focus of our review was not on cutting operational costs, we did achieve a reduction in the proposed personnel costs as a result of our review of almost 10,000 dollars annually, despite the addition of these two new FTEs. I wanted to also mention that while one or two staff in the organization may be transferred from one work group to another, it is important to note that no one currently employed in the Public Works Department will be let go or see their current salary reduced as a result of this reorganization. The steps that we are going to be pursuing over the next 30 days or so are several. We wanted to make sure that we were working on a transition plan. We feel like that half the work has been done and we have another half to do and that is the roll out or implementation of our proposal. So, we would like the next couple of weeks to develop a transition plan, which will include several pieces and parts. We have not shared the results of our reorganization with the staff as of yet. We are still wanting to make sure that we refine job descriptions, that we have the positions properly categorized, and that we had the proper pay schedules, at least that met what we preliminarily believe they need to meet. That work is going to take some time to accomplish with the assistance of the Human Resources Department. We wanted to make sure that we didn't rush the roll out of this to insure that staff were not hearing about the results of the organization in a public meeting, but, rather, were hearing it from their supervisors and the department director. So, while we are working- on the development of this transition plan, we hope to also accommodate and accomplish the important work of classifying and titling and benchmarking various important positions that have been identified as either new in the organization or it being augmented to cover the areas of importance that we feel need to be covered. What I'd like to do is report back to the City Council in a few weeks, Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 16 of 66 hopefully with the transition plan in hand, as well as the full organizational chart, the schematic and all the detail associated with our Public Works reorganization. I just wanted to give you this evening a sense of what we have been up to over the last several months and let you know that this -- that the results of this work are coming your way, but it is a bit premature to share those results just yet, because we do want to protect and lessen -- we want to protect staff and lessen the anxiety of the staff members as it relates to the roll out of the reorganization. So, I wish I could bring more detail to you this evening, but that is going to be forthcoming. We want to make sure that we have got our staff on board and certainly want to do that with the help of the human resources director and our consultant on the project. So, with that I hope to be back in touch with you in a few weeks and give you the finalized version of what we believe we have in front of us and, then, entertain any questions or comments you have. With that I'm happy to address current questions, comments, on our process or any concerns you might have as it relates to transitioning or roll outs or just general things that you want us to consider as we move forward on the project. De Weerd: Council, any comments or questions? Bird: He addressed mine. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Tom. Barry: Thank you. D. Police Department: 1. Mutual Aid / Joint Powers Agreement Reaardina Controlled Substances and Illicit Drugs: De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-D is our police department. Chief Lavey. Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, what I have in front of you is -- actually, I should get my -- and I think I'm in the class that you guys were talking about earlier, I have both gray hair and no hair, so -- De Weerd: And you have only been the chief for half a year. Lavey: A year. Bird: And you're only 21. Lavey: Twenty-nine. Bird: Twenty-nine. Oh. Okay. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 17 of 66 Lavey: That's what I told them today. Twenty-nine. What I have in front of you is what we call a mutual aid joint powers agreement and I'm sure everyone on Council, except possibly Councilman Hoaglun, have seen this in the past. And, basically, what this is is a document that gives us legal jurisdiction in other areas at the time that we are requested, such as the one that I talked about last week where Boise police and Boise fire requested mutual aid with -- from Meridian police and fire. We responded to their jurisdiction and we had legal authority while we were over there. What's unique about this one is that we have now, based upon the election of the sheriff in Canyon county, as we have Canyon county sheriff, Nampa, and Caldwell also on board and so what you have in front of you today is a mutual aid power -- joint powers agreement between both Ada County and Canyon county. So, essentially, what that means is if we get a major incident in Meridian and we need to call for help, not only are we going to get resources from the state police and Ada County, we are going to get resources from Canyon county as well. So, basically, what I would like to do is answer any questions that you may have and, then, request the authority to go ahead and sign this document. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to follow up on Chief Lavey. One of the reasons we asked to put this on a department report is because the signator on this document are all the chiefs and the sheriff and not the mayor or the commissioners and so there is a liability clause. It does match the state code, so it's certainly not an issue for the city, it's just for the -- not the mayor that was being asked to sign it and so that was our recommendation was to bring it in front of you and get the chiefs authorization -- get the Council's authorization for the chief to execute this document and, again, I don't think there is any issues with the liability, since it follows the state code. Lavey: It, essentially, basically, says that we accept liability of our people, whether they are working in the city or outside of the city. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would just comment that one of the provisions in there, of course, is that each jurisdiction will cover all of their own costs, whether it's equipment or whatever, and whether they are the requestor or the volunteer responder. That seems fair to me to begin with. I would only say that maybe that provision should be reviewed again after two years, three years, something like that, to make sure that there isn't one jurisdiction that is under funding itself and calling for help more often than it should. I'm not suspicious of any group that might do that, but I would say that at some point we should Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 18 of 66 make sure that the request and the response are sort of coming out even round the region. Lavey: Councilman Zaremba, I totally agree. I can tell you for the record in the past it's never been a problem. I can also point out that unbeknownst to me that they have set up an executive board to review this yearly and it has both the sheriff and one police chief on it and Meridian city I guess is the first police chief. So, I will be on that, so I can take a look at that for you. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Question, chief. Under section two of the purpose it does look like that you do have discretion that -- whether or not to render assistance. There might be a situation here in the city you're dealing with and you get a request and, then, it's up to you to determine whether or not to provide that assistance, am I reading that correctly? Lavey: Yes. That's true. This document does not give anybody the authority to make a demand on services. It mainly is -- is we make the request and if we have resources we can send, then, we send. The one thing that we have always dealt with in the past and even dealt with last week is that Meridian city comes first and once the city's covered, anything that we can spare, then, we will spare. Hoaglun: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any further questions? Rountree: I have none. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Not hearing any -- no more questions or anything, I move we approve the mutual aid joint powers agreement regarding the controlled substance and illicit drugs for Ada and Canyon county and all the city police departments and for Chief Lavey to sign for the City of Meridian. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 19 of 66 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Lavey: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This was not, to my recollection, added to the agenda. Joe, did you have something that you wanted to add? Rountree: It was on the Consent Agenda. De Weerd: Oh, was it on the Consent Agenda? Okay. Okay. Council, I just wanted to also bring to your attention we did receive an a-mail from the governor's office and he has given us the guidelines of a Presidential Proclamation declaring Patriot Day on September 11th. Certainly it is in -- as a memorial to what has happened in our past on September 11th, 2001. He is calling upon the people of the United States to observe Patriot Day with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and remembrance services, to display the flag at half staff from the homes on that day and to observe a moment of silence beginning at 8:46 a.m., eastern daylight time, which is 6:46 our time, to honor the innocent Americans and people from around the world who lost their lives as a result of the terrorists attacks of September 11th, 2001. Just wanted to bring that to your attention, so when our flag is flown at half staff that you do recognize and appreciate what the symbolic gesture is of that action. So, to our public as well. Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Item 8. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from August 12, 2008: AP 08-003 Request for City Council Review for an Appeal of Director's Determination to deny alternative compliance to allow a portion of the former Idaho Truss site to be used for shared parking for the Broadwav Integrated Project (CZC 08-018) by Ward Schwider -130 East Broadway Avenue: De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 9, which is a continued Public Hearing. This has been requested to continue to October 7th, as there have been some new occurrences in the issues that they needed to resolve with Union Pacific. Anna has told them that Council's desire was not to continue this forever, but there is a specific reason why this has been continued. So, with that said, does staff have any additional comments? Canning: No, ma'am. Whatever the pleasure of the Mayor and Council is. I will present the project if Council doesn't want to continue it, otherwise, I will wait to hear what action you want to take. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 20 of 66 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, how -- how comfortable do you feel that this UP thing is going to be settled by 10/7? Are we just -- De Weerd: Mr. Bird, maybe I will answer that question. I'm sure it was not -- it was more rhetorical than a question. But our experience with UP has been similar to this and having a difficulty getting a timely response. Like I said, there are some new situations in this and so, you know, it does seem logical to continue to -- or address their request for the 10/7 continuance. But, certainly, that decision is yours. Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: I have no problem with continuing it, but I -- knowing the history like we know, that's just the first continuance. De Weerd: Well -- Rountree: This would be about the fourth. Bird: It would be about the fourth now, but -- De Weerd: It is a reminder we have had similar experiences ourself. So, it is frustrating and maybe they have to get on a plane to Omaha themselves to figure out that -- what they really need to do. Bird: I don't -- whatever the other three -- I can go with -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I wouldn't say that I have a problem continuing it. If there is a possibility that they are resolving something, I would say if by the time we get them to October 7th, if there has been no resolution, that we may want to make some other decisions, but I don't have a problem waiting another month while they work with UP. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I just wanted to say on this issue and the other issues we will be dealing with tonight, I have gone through the records and the minutes of past meetings and the applications and the comments and different things, so I'm prepared to vote on this and the other items as they come up, but continuing on one more time -- to me this is their first continuance, so it's not a problem with me. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 21 of 66 De Weerd: Love the new. guy. Okay. Rountree: Fresh eyes. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: I don't have any problem. De Weerd: Okay. If Council so desires, I would entertain a motion to continue this item to October 7th. Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 9 to October 7th, 2008. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from September 2, 2008: AP 08-004 Request for City Council Review for a McDonalds Redbox (DVD kiosk) located in an approved C-N zone by Anna Canning, Meridian Planning Director - 3415 West Cherry Lane: De Weerd: Item 10 is a continued public hearing from September 2nd on AP 08-004. I will turn this over to Mrs. Canning. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the McDonald's Redbox project. It's located at 3415 North Cherry Lane, which is near the Ten Mile intersection. The application before you tonight is a City Council review of certificate of zoning compliance. The proposed development is to install a Redbox movie DVD rental kiosk on the property just north of the entrance for the drive-up window. The kiosk is 24 square feet in area. Council continued this item for staff to research what options are available to the Council regarding actions and to that end Section 11-5-A.4, which is the administrative process section of the UDC, give the director the authority to require conditions of approval that are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and prevent undue adverse impacts on surrounding properties. Granting a certificate of zoning compliance is listed in table 11-5-A.2 as an administrative process. Therefore, Council may direct the planning director to impose conditions of approval on the CZC. The outstanding issues of City Council -- I just wanted to briefly summarize the testimony that you heard last week in discussion and it focused on the following: One. Although the plans comply with current code, there is concern that the proposed Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 22 of 66 24 hour use conflicts with information given the neighbors during talks with the developers and the builders. Two. The adjoining residential property owners have expressed concern over the 24 hour use. Three. The Council suggested moving the use inside the McDonald's. The franchise owner did not feel the interior design lent itself to having the use inside. Four. Council suggested limiting the hours of the Redbox through use of a gated enclosure. And, five, the city recently passed UDC amendments that limit the hours of operation within the C-N district from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Additionally, you have received two letters of testimony, one from Steve Caldwell and one from Mary Ann -- and, forgive me, Mary Ann, I just forgot your last name. My apologies. Chrisman. Thank you. I have provided the Council with recommended motions, just because on the City Council review ones it's a little unclear as to what the proper motion is. So, a motion to deny the application would be upholding the issuance of the CZC as it is. Council also has the ability to approve the City Council reviewed and modify the certificate of zoning compliance. Essentially, you're directing me to re-issue the CZC with conditions. Or Council has the option to approve the City Council review and deny the certificate of zoning compliance out right. So, those would seem to be the three options. If you want to add conditions to its approval, but modifying the CZC and I'm sure that's clear as mud. Let me answer any questions you ma have, please. De Weerd: thank you, Anna. Any questions from the Council? Bird: Not at this time. Rountree: I have none. Canning: And I do believe your public hearing is still open. De Weerd: Yes, it is. Okay. Council, if there is no discussion -- or questions for staff, do have one person that's -- oh. Does the applicant have anything to add. Canning: Ma'am, I'm the applicant, but -- De Weerd: Does the -well -- Canning: We have somewhat treated the Redbox applicant and the applicant as well. De Weerd: The affected party, I guess. I don't know what to call them, McDonald's or the -- Rountree: Redbox. De Weerd: Redbox. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Darmody: I will. Rick Darmody. 12959 North Andys Gulch Road, Boise. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 23 of 66 De Weerd: Thank you. Darmody: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I brought a few pictures. Could I give them to the city clerk to share with the Council? The pictures in the file just represent a few other locations where we do business with Redboxes and face residential areas and it kind of gives you an idea of the distance that they are. I just went to the Redbox and turned around and took a few pictures to share that with you. I wanted to share with the Council we haven't had any complaints from neighbors dealing with Redbox or noise or anything to that regard since the Redboxes have been installed at our other locations and, excuse me, I did investigate with Redbox, McDonald's and, then, also Sanitary Services concerning the trash noise complaint from the last week's hearing. I'll start with the trash one. I spoke to them, they admitted to me that they probably were showing up a little early and that they would change our time to be as close to 8:30 as they could. They said sometimes the trucks do run a little early and that city code restricts them from being at a commercial development that's adjacent to a residential development before 7:00 a.m. So, the gentleman I spoke to made the change, so, hopefully, the neighbors will notice it, a little bit of difference there. De Weerd: We made that phone call, too. Darmody: Okay. De Weerd: And we got the same response. Darmody: Followed up on multiple times. I spoke with Redbox about the -- the gate idea that Councilman Bird mentioned. They don't have a gate and, to be perfectly honest, they are not interested in developing one for a one off situation. I spoke to McDonald's about relocating to the north portion of the property and they expressed strong concern to me that it would create traffic flow issues in the front of the building that, quite honestly, they thought the Council would probably be concerned about as well, so they more or less vetoed that idea. And I did investigate putting the Redbox inside and from my perspective it would be a strong preference not to do that, it would require me to tear out furniture that I just put in and rearrange the lobby that was just installed at my own cost. Redbox does not -- is not interested in participating in that. I really think that the Redbox is a -- is not nearly as obnoxious of usage as it's been portrayed to be. It's pretty innocuous. People drive up, they use it, they drive away. We haven't had any complaints. That would be -- De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I do have one person on the public hearing sign up sheet. Mary Ann Chrisman. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 24 of 66 Chrisman: Yes. My name is Mary Ann Chrisman. I live at 3440 West Elk Creek, which is directly behind McDonald's. Madam Mayor, Council, first of all, Steve Caldwell could not be here this evening and he asked me to read his short note that he did a-mail the Council and Mayor. De Weerd: And it is in front of them right now. Chrisman: Okay. De Weerd: So, thank you. Chrisman: So, basically, the homeowners association position is that they are opposed to having the kiosk on the outside of the McDonald's for reasons that were discussed last week. Also, I did send an a-mail -- it was rather lengthy, but I do represent -- when I say represent, I have spoke to many of the neighbors and they all pretty much hold the same position that they do wish to have the video box on the outside. I know that the gentleman that was just here commented about how the -- and I appreciate the concem about the trash noise and how that was addressed. So, I thank those that did make a phone call and did address that. But he made the comment that they haven't gotten any complaints about the Redbox. Well, with all of the problems we have had in the neighborhood of the trash at McDonald's being picked up so early in the morning -- it literally sounds like a cannon going off and I never called -- think to call to complain and I don't know of anybody else that's called and complained. A lot of times it's just -- we just deal with it. And so I don't think that that is really a measure of whether it's really a problem or not. I, myself, and many of the neighbors have talked about the fact that we have been to McDonald's -- it was mentioned in the last meeting that -- or not McDonald's, Albertson's where the other Redboxes are, that there is a congregation of people there. I mean I have been there where there is just a crowd there of kids running around waiting for their parents and so on and so forth. My teenagers have gone out at midnight with their friends to rent a movie and we are concemed about that, because we are right -- that -- with that box being in our backyards literally. So, we are very concemed about that being on the outside. And the concem we have is in the wintertime when it gets cold, you're going to have people idling their cars in the parking lot while somebody's standing there in line at the Redbox. Now, it was mentioned last week this is one of the busiest locations in -- I think it was the city or the state. I'm not sure what they said. But it's a very busy location. If they need another Redbox they should put it over at Albertson's, that's more conducive as far as can handle the traffic, it's not in our background, but to put it literally, we are spacing all of out backyards, when you have got the winter coming and you have got people idling in their cars on Friday and Saturday nights, we feel it is going to be a problem and I can tell you I represent many many neighbors that are very concemed about that. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony on this item? Yes, sir. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 25 of 66 Canning: Madam Mayor, did you want me to put the photos up? I have that technology available if you'd like. De Weerd: Council, do you -- sure. Canning: Do you want all of them or -- let me know what you want me to do. De Weerd: Well, I don't know. I guess I thought I would see pictures of Redboxes and I didn't see anything. So, I'm not sure of the pertinence of the pictures personally, but -- so, Idon't know how to advise you on that. Yes, sir. Seaman: My name is Scott Seaman. I live at 1413 South Benewah, Nampa, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Seaman: I have been involved with Redbox for the last year. I have installed 95 units throughout the northwest. At this time I haven't received any complaints or conflicts by the public at any of the locations as far as Redbox goes. In most cases they are happy about the Redbox being so close to their house. I get many comments anytime anybody knows that I'm involved with Redbox. They have got nothing but comments. Their only complaint is they don't hold enough movies for them, that they are out of movies. So, I think to kind of help her with her question as far as the lines and whatnot that are at the existing Albertson's, adding another machine in this location will alleviate those lines, so that there isn't a line when people come up to them and they come up to them and the transaction takes a couple of minutes to pick one out, get the movie, and they leave. Adding another unit in this location would only help shorten those lines. I have been involved in two other City Council meetings and they reviewed a Redbox installation. They were both in Oregon. In both instances they received no opposition from the public and were approved by the city council. Locally, as Rick with McDonald's was stating, we have at least five stores where the property adjacent to the McDonald's is residential and at this time I have received no opposition of the exterior Redbox. Any questions? De Weerd: No. Probably just a comment. I love your ideal world, but I'm one of those that stand in front of a Redbox for more than a few minutes, because I have to read the definition of the movie and, then, I am technology challenged and so it never works like it promises to, so I guess I would say my experience was a little different than the one you painted, but I wish I were more adapt or -- Rountree: Adept. De Weerd: Yes. Seaman: Maybe I should rephrase. Those that are familiar with the unit and visit them often, if there is not a line there, yes, the transition would take a couple of minutes to do, if there is not a line there and possibly you know the movie you want to pick out. • • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 26 of 66 De Weerd: Okay. Seaman: If that's fair enough. De Weerd: That is fair. And I really feel the pressure when there is a line to not do that, but I'm spending a dollar, so it's important. Okay. Council, any questions? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further -- yes. Thesons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Daryl Thesons. I live at 3487 West Fir Creek Court. De Weerd: Thank you. Thesons: I'm directly behind the McDonald's. As I spoke last week on -- my number one concern with my wife and I is the lighting at the McDonald's late at night. It was stated last time that the light -- the kiosk would be self lit, but I have taken time to notice as I'm coming home late at night after the McDonald's lights are out how dark that property is and how dark the right of way between our yard and that parking lot is. If we are encouraging people to come into that dark parking lot to a self lit kiosk and spend time in there, I'm just not comfortable with it. You know, if there is going to be a Redbox there I would absolutely want that parking lot lit, so that the police driving by can see what's going on in that parking lot if we are encouraging people to be there. I wouldn't feel comfortable walking up to that box with a big dark parking lot around me with people heaven only knows where in the bushes waiting to rob me, because they know I have a credit card on me, because I have walked up to that machine and just used it. So, therefore, we have kind of an interesting situation. We have a dark parking lot that's ideal for the neighbors that the bedrooms are on the back side of their house facing that parking lot, but now we have an unsafe environment for people lining up to use that Redbox. The other side of that if we leave the lights on -- we are already on until 11:00 at night, so we have adjusted our sleeping times and tried to buy blackout shades and to accommodate that. Now, we have lights on 24 hours a day. So, people using those facilities are safe, they can walk up and be comfortable with it. But now we have a light shining in our bedroom window 24 hours a day. So, I would ask that you consider this -- the impact that this Redbox would make on our community. You know, we have tried to be good neighbors with the McDonald's. I use Redbox a lot. I'm just like the Mayor, I'm there, I'm renting movies, maybe not in the middle of the night, but I'm standing there picking out movies, you know. De Weerd: Hopefully you're faster than I am. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 27 of 66 Thesons: Maybe. I don't know. Depends on what's left in the box, so -- but I would ask that you consider the impact that this is going to have on the neighbors of this facility and to know that we are definitely opposed to this Redbox being outside 24 hours a day. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have no questions. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Anna, I think, on this. I just wanted to be sure I understand that the C-N district -- you mentioned here it's recently passed 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. are hours of operation, but is this McDonald's under that same or does it go to 11:00 -- he just mentioned 11:00 p.m. So, is there a difference? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Hoaglun, that ordinance with the time restrictions was passed after the McDonald's was approved. The city attorney and I will work together to figure out an enforcement plan for those -- that provision. We haven't done that yet, but we will work on that one. Hoaglun: Okay. If I may follow up, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Hoaglun: So, those businesses that -- there is a grandfathering in, since -- for those businesses that already had hours established from this, but to follow up, the Redbox, as it come in, it says the plan to comply with current code. So, what we can do, then, is -- as I was reading through your -- as I understood it, we can say no to Redbox, we can say yes with conditions, or yes and just let them have it 24/7 as planned. Canning: Correct. Hoaglun: Okay. De Weerd: That is correct. You're a fast learner. Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Even if the McDonald's itself is grandfathered to the hours that they had before this UDC amendment went in, the Redbox is a separate business. It's not ancillary to a food service business, it's a separate business, and Idon't -- I don't see that it should be given any special treatment to allow it to be 24 hours in an area where we want things to stop between 6:00 and -- I mean between 10:00 and 6:00 a.m., we Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 28 of 66 want them to be quiet next to residential. I don't have a problem with there being a Redbox, but I can't agree that this- separate use should be allowed to operate 24 hours and -- 24 hours a day outside of the building or south of the building. They have eliminated the other solutions, but I don't see it as ancillary to the food service business. This is a separate business that's asking to be a drive-up business 24 hours a day and that part of it I feel I would need to deny. De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further information needed from staff or the Redbox McDonald's folks, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move we close the public hearing on Item No. 10, AP 08-004. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Do I have a motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I think Mr. Hoaglun ought to make this motion. De Weerd: Whoa. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I think they are picking on the new guy here. Rountree: But since he's a new guy, Madam Mayor, I would move for discussion or consideration that after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move that we overrule the director's decision regarding CZC 08-004 as presented in the staff report for the hearing dated September 9th, 2008. I further move that the director shall issue approval with the following conditions and the condition is that the Redbox be only allowed if it is installed inside and operated interior of the McDonalds restaurant. Zaremba: Second. Bird: That's your motion? Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 29 of 66 • Rountree: That's my motion. Bird: I second it. C~ De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion from Council? Okay. Madam Clerk, will you, please call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was just -- it just occurred to me that if installed inside they don't actually need a CZC, but I think we can figure that out. Item 11: Public Bearing: AP 08-005 Request for City Council Review for an Appeal of the Planning Director's denial of Instant Equity Auto's request for Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval (CZC 08-010) to operate without connection to city services AND denial of an Alternative Compliance (ALT 08-004) request for reduced landscape buffers adjacent to Fairview Avenue and a residential zoning district for Instant Equity Auto by The Land Group -1065 East Fairview Avenue: De Weerd: Okay. Well, thank you. Item 11 is a public hearing on AP 08-005. I will open this public hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Instant Equity Auto project. It's located at 1065 Fairview Avenue on the south side of Fairview west of Locust Grove. The application before you tonight is for City Council review of the planning director's denial of the CZC. Thank you, guys. The proposed development includes a request to operate a car sales lot on the subject property that primarily, with the request to not connect to city sewer, and with reduced landscape buffers adjacent to Fairview Avenue, but there are also some ancillary issues and those are they would also -- do not want to provide cross-access to adjoining properties and they do not want to annex a contiguous un-platted adjacent property. This one's shown as R1-M. And that property is held in common ownership with the property in question. The applicant proposed to convert the existing single family home and detached two car garage for the auto sales lot. And I have some photos. These are standing at the property lines looking into the property. So, there is from the front. There is from the east side. And that's along the west side looking south and this is on the south side of the property looking north. These are some of the adjoining sites. To the north is developed. To the south is not. This is the view of the site across the street at Fairview. This is the Brood Awakenings and these are the structures you saw on the pictures on the previous slide. This is the west and to the east. I struggled with how to communicate this in somewhat of a clear fashion to Council, because it is a very complicated set of requirements over Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 30 of 66 the years, so I thought the best way to present it to you would be by year and kind of give you the history of the project. The project was annexed in 2001. At the time it was -- the proposed use was for a doctor's office. At that time -- I have kind of picked out some of the key issues and what the requirement was. There was a requirement for a conditional use approval prior to any development. All landscaping had to conform to our ordinance. If we are required to have an irrigation system, they are required to have a sidewalk along Fairview. They were also required to remove any wells, septics and to connect to city sewer and water. The issue with regard to cross-access to adjoining properties was not discussed. Driveway has to conform to ACHD policy and a DA was required as a condition of annexation. However, the property was annexed without a DA. So, we have never had a development agreement on the property. In 2003 there was a request to modify the original annexation from 2001. The proposed use at that time was a small retail store. The provision regarding the requirement for the CUP was not up for discussion. So, therefore, that one did remain. They did discuss whether the landscaping needed to conform to ordinance and what Council approved in 2003 was that existing landscaping may be modified to conform with the intent and purpose of the landscape code pursuant to altemative compliance. If the future use of the property is a permanent use in the C-G zone and the building footprint is not expanded or modified, modifications to the landscaping may include additional trees as required and in the imgation system, if there is not one provided on the site. New construction on and/or the request for a Conditional Use Permit or subdivision of the property will require complete conformance with the adopted landscape ordinance that affected the time of the new application. So, with regard to irrigation system, it said may. Sidewalks were -- Council moved to take out the ACHD requirement for sidewalks along Fairview. Wells still need to be removed, but the septic system did not and they didn't -- they were not required to connect to city sewer with this provision. The applicant shall connect to city water prior to any use of the property. Sewer is currently not available to this site. Applicant shall be required to connect this existing structure to the sanitary system -- sewer system when it becomes available from the south. Expansion of the existing structure or new construction on the subject property will not be allowed unless sanitary sewer is brought to the site by the applicant. Again, cross-access to the adjoining properties was not discussed. The driveways still need to conform to ACHD policy and the DA required -- the DA was still discussed and mentioned within that 2003 report and, yet, we still don't have a DA in 2003 either. So, in 2008 the applicant came in with an auto sales use, which we have had a code amendment in this time. Auto sales previously in 2003 and 2001 would have been a conditional use requirement, now they are apermitted -- principal permitted use. So, because there is no DA on the property, I was going by code and only code, since we failed to obtain a DA upon annexation. So, I determined that a CU was not required, because it was a principal permitted use, but I held them to all the standards. Therefore, landscaping needed to conform to our ordinances, with the exception that altemative compliance for the landscape buffer along Fairview is still an option, but it needs to meet the intent and purpose of the landscape ordinance as suggested in 2003 and as defined by the UDC. The current proposal for their altemative landscaping on the front buffer depicts 17 and a half feet along Fairview. Twenty-five feet is required. The 17 and a half feet is the minimum allowed through altemative compliance. You can only go down -- you can't reduce it to Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 31 of 66 more than ten percent of your lot width. The proposed altemative is to plant two additional trees within that buffer. Furthermore, the vehicle display area immediately adjoins this 17 and a half foot buffer and staff is fearful that this sets an unwelcome precedent in that we continually have enforcement issues related to vehicle display areas, parking within. landscape buffers. The application does not state how the proposal complies with the intent and purpose of the landscape ordinance. Where am I? Okay. The imgation system is still required. Sidewalks adjacent to Fairview are still required. Wells need to be removed, as well as septic and connect to city sewer and water. I did want to mention that with regard to city sewer, the city engineer has given the applicant an altemative route for sewer, since the property to the south has not yet developed. He has made available a connection in Fairview at Jericho, which is approximately 160 feet away. Still need to connect to city water. Cross-access to adjoining properties. Driveways conform with ACHD policy and, as I mentioned before, since there is no DA, I was not looking for them to record one at this point. So, the outstanding issues before Council -- I have formed these in a series of a number of questions to highlight perhaps what your options are with regard to your decision tonight. I think the first question is since a DA was not recorded, should Council direct staff to de-annex this property? The second one would be should the applicant bring is the contiguous parcel to the east for annexation and seek new DA provisions with regard to both. properties? If yes, the contiguous parcel could gain access to sewer in Fairview at Jericho and that would be pretty much immediately adjacent. Now, those two hit at the larger picture and perhaps not at the CZC issue that's before you tonight, but certainly are related and are options. Should the applicant enter into a DA with the provisions negotiated in 2003 and if yes should the applicant obtain CU approval for the auto sales lot as required in 2003? Is the altemative compliance proposed sufficient to meet the intent of code and is having the vehicle display area over the septic leach field acceptable. Moving on to another option with regard to tonight's application. Should the city stand by the 2003 provisions without benefit of the DA. If yes, the questions are essentially the same. If the altemative compliance proposed is sufficient, should they have a CU and is the vehicle display over the septic leach field acceptable. And the third question would be should the applicant abide by the 2008 code requirement. If yes, should the city engineer approve the septic system use, particularly with regard to the location of the leach field. Is the altemative compliance proposed sufficient to meet the intent of the code and should staff require cross-access to the adjoining properties. Once again I have provided you with a couple sample motions. A motion for denial in this case would be upholding the director's decision to deny the CZC and the altemative compliance. A motion to approve would be overruling the director's decision and, then, directing me to take action on one or more of those applications. And with that I will answer any questions you may have, Mayor and Council. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions at this point? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Need some answers. No questions. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 32 of 66 De Weerd: Okay. Since we don't have an applicant that is not the city, I would ask for the affected party if they have comments. Well, hi. Butler: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Young, old, standing, sitting, whatever. It's good to see you. I do have some pictures that I supplied by a-mail to Anna, but because we didn't have a chance to get together I also have these in hard form, so I will provide those to the Council. Holman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm sorry, could you state your name for the record. Butler: I'm sorry. Joann Butler. 251 East Front Street in Boise. I apologize. Canning: Madam Mayor. Ms. Butler, I do have your photos. Butler: Thank you. I'll pass these out, nonetheless, because there is some writing on there. With me here tonight are Dan Burrup and Ed Christensen, who own Instant Equity Auto, and presently run their business on Fairview Avenue east of here in the city of Boise and this is a picture of the existing business. They will speak briefly to the Council tonight. Also with me tonight is Mr. Van Elg from The Land Group and The Land Group compiled the application for the certificate of zoning compliance or CZC. Yes, we are appealing the denial of this certificate of zoning compliance and, yes, we are finding facts at fault with the staff report and some of the facts that have been presented to the Council. We appreciate this Council's endeavor in our experience to support your staff whenever possible. In this case I think that our request to have the Council consider the facts and this testimony before you, it may be that staff was only saying to us, look, we can only go so far. This is our interpretation of the code and after that it's up to the Council to review our decision and come to reach a fair conclusion and we are asking you to take that fair and balanced conclusion and direct staff to issue that certificate of zoning compliance. We are here to show the Council tonight that issuing a CZC and allowing the applicant to improve the property will be both beneficial to the public and the private property owner, which is a balance that I know this Council strives for. Issuing the CZC will be consistent with your decision to annex the property in 2001. Your decision to modify the annexation conditions in 2003 and also consistent with your decision to modify your entire zoning ordinance by adopting the Uniform Development Code. In addition to this property -- Anna, could you show the next slide? Is that possible? Which is similar to what -- this is the site that the applicant is attempting to develop in connection with the past approvals by the city. To add to some of the facts with regard to the annexation, our predecessor annexed and rezoned this property as commercial in 2001. At that time it was not identified as a doctor's office, there was no use identified, and the transcript that we provided the Council in our appeal shows that -- that Councilman Borup and the applicant at that time had a discussion there was no identification of the use. And, in fact, there was no identification of a development agreement at that time and I will provide the -- you do have all those transcripts in your -- in your packet. It may have been that there was some intention, but I can tell you that it does not show up in the files or in the findings of the Council. The owner of the Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 33 of 66 property, after that -- when Mr. Smith tried to -- that was the contract purchaser of the property in 2001. He did not go forward with the development of the property and so in 2003 the owner of the property approached the city asking for some relief to a couple of the conditions of approval. The request centered on two things. First, it centered on relief from the full landscape ordinance provisions, because of the location of the home and the building on the lot and staff at that time supported that request and so did Council. The Council said that the revised condition of approval will allow staff to approve a new landscaping that meets the intent of the ordinance, but does not require complete compliance at this time. The Council said -- and if we tum to the next page, which is also the last page of the handout, we have the two modified annexation conditions and what the Council said was the landscape could be modified if we conform, as Anna said, with the intent and purpose of the landscape code and I'll explain that, yes, we do and if the future use is a permitted use, which this is, and if the building is not expanded, which is it not being expanded. The Council at that time said we might require additional trees and we are providing additional trees and it will require an irrigation system and we are supplying that irrigation system. The release sought in 2003 also centered on the connection to the sewer system, because it wasn't available. Staff at that time supported that request and as did the Council and the Council said that -- and I'm quoting: The proper sewer connection for the subject property is located 450 feet to the south. The original condition of approval would have made the connection to city sewer cost prohibitive. The Council was absolutely right about those costs and it's true that after several months the city engineer did change its position and said that rather than going to the south when that property developed, that we could extend into another sewer shed north into Fairview and extend a sewer main to the east. That would cost 36,000 dollars, as opposed to 1,500 dollars to go to the proper sewer shed to the south. Starting -- and I think Mr. Burrup and Mr. Christensen will probably explain, because they attended all these hearings, beginning in October 2007 we started to have both pre-application conferences and meetings with the staff. And we designed the property as that site plan in the last -- it's also the third page of your packet shows, based on and reliance on those modified conditions that the Council approved and the guidance of staff in those hearings that they would support alternative compliance for the landscape design. I will just give you one example. Our original site plan that we brought to staff showed 25 foot of landscaping across the frontage on Fairview for a portion of the frontage, coming down to the 17 and a half feet for the remainder of the frontage and as Anna explained, we --that is the minimum that we can reduce the buffer -- the landscape buffer with. At staffs encouragement we were asked to take that buffer to a consistent 17 and a half feet across the frontage, because staff felt that it would be visually more appealing. At that time we agreed to include two extra street trees, 23 extra densely planted shrubs, because of this reduction that we were asking for. By the way, if that is not enough landscaping, we are more than happy to provide more landscaping in that buffer. The rear setback shown in the site plan is 15 feet and at staffs request we were -- we indicated that we would put up an eight foot fence at the rear property boundary. Before I go on I want to -- I want the Council to understand that the actual landscape width that would be required at the rear is not 15 feet, but five feet. Staff confirmed for that in meetings that it would be a five foot distance commercial to commercial. buffer. Although staff has identified our rear as Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 34 of 66 residential, it's residential in name only and what your code requires is when there is a vacant property, which this is to the rear, even if it is zoned for residential use, the Comprehensive Plan designation provides what the actual use will be. This is in 11-2- B.3. That's tabled. It says that where the adjacent property is vacant the director shall determined the adjacent property designation based on the Comprehensive Plan designation. So, what we have behind us is commercial property for this purpose. I have had personal conversations with the engineering firm that is working with the owner of that property. That property owner -- I think this Council will remember -- I think, as it got to Council, came to the city with a condominium project and the city rejected that project. That owner is now in the process of pulling together an annexation and a rezone application for the city in which they are requesting commercial. So, what are we asking for? We are just asking for recognition that what the Council did in 2003 was to strike a balance for good planning that supports two things, the public health, safety, and welfare, as well as not putting an undue burden on this particular private property owner. The Council recognized, then, that the health, safety, and welfare of the public was not going to be jeopardized by the continued use of a septic system that is approved by Central District Health. The Council recognized at that time that the public health, safety, and welfare wouldn't be jeopardized by waiting to hook up when sewer was available to the south, which would, then, not put an undue expensive burden on this property owner. The Council recognized that the public's health, safety, and welfare would not be jeopardized if we created a landscape plan for this site that meets the intent of the landscape ordinance and I'm going to read a few sentences from 11-3-8.1, which is the landscape ordinance and this is the purpose and intent section of the landscape ordinance in part. The City of Meridian recognizes that landscaping can be a significant expense to business people and residents. At the same time landscaping improvements improve the appearance and attraction of commercial areas. The intent of these regulations is to achieve a balance between the right of individuals to develop and maintain their property in a manner they prefer and the rights of city residents to live, work, and shop and recreate in healthy and attractive surroundings. And that's what we .think are altemative compliance that the Council in 2003 said that we could come back and go through, that's what we think we have met. We think we have met that intent and purpose of your landscape ordinance. I actually think with a very straight face we can all look at this and say that's a pretty good job, well done, on the site that you saw that exists today. In addition, we also meet the code's criteria for altemative landscape compliance. 11-5-B-5-B-2 says that we have to meet only one of the following conditions. We meet three of six. And if the Council will let me continue, if that's a stop forme. I don't know. Bird: I don't know. Butler: Okay. Thanks. It's the fire department. Okay. Rountree: Nod of heads. I'm in control of the meeting at this point. Zaremba: I don't think that timer sound was related to this. Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 35 of 66 Rountree: Go right ahead. Butler: Thank you. The landscape altemative compliance criteria -- we have to meet one of six. We meet three of six. There is a criteria that says that the -- there is some site conditions that are such that full compliance is impossible or impractical or there are site and space limitations that are not usually found. And the site is constrained by an existing building and that is the basis for the original Council decision in 2003 for modifying that landscaping condition. They recognized that that building is sitting there. They said as long as that building is sitting there and its footprint doesn't change, we understand the need to come in and ask for an altemative compliance. We will give you that opportunity to show our staff that you can landscape -- not at the full 25 width, but in a good way until that building is changed. Another criteria -- staff found that they didn't believe that the environmental quality would be improved as a result of the reduction in buffer width and they related that to the fact they thought that that meant we were going to increase the paved area over the septic system that exists. That is not correct. The city engineer absolutely -- and I think Central District Health would do this as well -- requires us to put anon-pervious surface over the septic tank and we are absolutely going to comply with those regulations. I wish I could stop there and just say that's all we are asking for, acknowledge that we have done a great job on landscaping, acknowledge that 36,000 dollars versus 1,500 dollars to connect to sewer is too much to ask when something is going to be coming in the not too distant future. But as Anna mentioned, there are a couple other things that have cropped up in our discussions with staff and it made their way into the staff report, although not in the denial letter. Those issue are cross-access, the conditional use application that Anna mentioned, and a development agreement. The issue of cross-access was brought up in discussions with staff and it's a laudable goal. If this community wants to try to assist ACHD reduce the access points along Fairview and to benefit the pubic that is a laudable goal. I question whether or not that particular -- the city can require two private property owners to agree to cross-access and, in fact, we found that an impossible condition to meet. Some of you may know the property owner to the west of this. They would not even entertain a concept of cross-access and, in fact, when that property owner finally, either on contract or whatever -- somebody else went -- that's in Ada County, by the way. They went to Ada County for an approval and Ada County has approved it and at that time that application was sent to Meridian, Meridian did not comment and did not make any recommendations to Ada County, including no recommendation for cross-access. So, we really question why this is an issue for us where we were puf in a position where we can't deal with a next door neighbor and, yet, that next door neighbor is not at the same time asked to deal with us. With regard to the -- De Weerd: You will need to summarize, please. Bird: Okay. Two things. Conditional use. We need to make a very strict legal distinction here. The condition of approval that was in 2001 and 2003 calls for a conditional use for a planned development. That is an animal that is no longer in existence in the city. This is not a conditional use that was required,. it's something that's no longer required. And I have to say that I have had clients and I have been in Meridian City Council S • September 9, 2008 Page 36 of 66 hearings where your staff has said when somebody has tried to invoke conditional use for a PUD, that staff has said please don't go down that worm hole. If we do that we will have to go back and address many other applications. De Weerd: Ms. Butler, that's not a summary. Butler: Okay. That's one. Finally, development agreement. It wasn't an issue in 2001 and 2003, but if staff and the Council are saying we would like you -- and we were never offered the option of that. If you are saying to us we want you to put into writing that you will develop as you have told us here and record that document, I have no problem with that. I don't think it gives you anymore comfort than your decision itself, but we would certainly do that. De Weerd: Your time is up. Butler: I'm asking you to, please, direct the staff to issue the certificate of zoning compliance. We will stand for questions and other people may speak to the Council as well. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none at this time. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? Rountree: Madam Mayor? Go ahead, David. De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Would you have an opinion as to the remaining useful life of the septic system that's there? Butler: I can't answer that, but I think our client can answer that. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor. Joann, you mentioned a couple things that I need clarification on. You said if that's not enough landscaping, we'd do more, and my question to you is how much more? Butler: You know, I'm going to have Mr. Elg probably answer that, who works for the landscape -- The Land Group and the landscape architect at that -- at that firm can probably answer that. I guess from my perspective, since I just had two trees planted today, this is fresh in my mind and they were very clear about keeping them somewhat separated, so they didn't interfere with each other. So, somewhat more is something that wouldn't hurt the existing landscaping. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 37 of 66 Rountree: The other question is related to the sewer hook up and sewer hook up costs and you mentioned two figures and two directions and neither one of them related to the comment that I had heard staff present that there is a potential hook up location, I believe, to the east some 150 feet away. Butler: Our client owns two different parcels here. In order to get their business off the ground -- and they are doing this in two phases and they have applied -- you know, this is, basically, what they have told staff: We are applying for the first phase here. The sewer hookup that you're talking about is on the other side of this second property. Rountree: Excuse me. If you could identify which property that is. Butler: Yes. De Weerd: There is a -- Butler: Thank you. It's closer to Jericho -- Fairview and Jericho is where I understand the hookup is and Jericho is to the east of these two parcels We have -- Rountree: So, we are talking about ownership of both of these parcels? Butler: That's correct. Rountree: Okay. Butler: That's correct. And what we have told staff that we would do -- two things. That when we get to the second phase, in compliance with that 2003 condition of approval, which says if we do new construction, which we would with the second phase, we are going to have to comply completely with the landscape ordinance. That's one thing. But with regard to sewer, if we don't use our existing septic here that 36,000 dollars that I said would be required to be paid just for the development of this parcel. Now, I don't want to stick my foot in my client's mouth, but if it should get to be the point where they are at their second phase and they are closer to that hookup and sewer hasn't come from the south, I'll ask them to address as to whether or not the would, then, hookup to the north. Did that answer your question? Rountree: Spoken like a wondertul lawyer. De Weerd: I do have a question. I guess my concern with reduced landscaping area would be it's still in question what the future right of way width of Fairview is going to be and if this totally takes landscaping out of that scenario, I guess with the landscape buffers we have in the developed areas, if they start eating away into that you still have green left and what we didn't want is pavement, sidewalk, pavement. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 38 of 66 Butler: Right. And appreciate that, Mayor. I think -- here is an answer for you in light of the lack of knowledge I have on the right of way width that ACHD might require my clients in the future -- and my clients may have more information on that. When our client does come back for the second phase, because of your July changes to your conditional -- to your code, all commercial uses are gong to have to come to you for a Conditional Use Permit and that will mean that you will transmit to Ada County Highway District and at that time you will get the information that you're talking about, so that you know how wide that right of way will be and so that you can impose appropriate conditions on the two phase, so that you are assured of that green-scape that you're looking for. De Weerd: This is one -- just acomment -- editorial comment. This is one reason why I like the expiration -- or expiration of annexations if they don't develop within a certain amount of time. It takes the guesswork out of it. It makes it pertinent to current codes and it answers things like this. Butler: And a development agreement back in 2001 and 2003 would have as well. I can just tell you I just know from the record and going through your files it just was not -- it just wasn't done. Canning: Madam Mayor. Page seven of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, item number 20, states: The subject annexation request and zoning designation -- oh, I started in the wrong place. Sony. Page six. Number 17. It is found that if the developer pays for the requested improvements and complies with the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact, number 16, and all sub parts, the economic welfare of the city and its residents and tax and rate payers will be protected, which requirement shall be included in a development agreement, the condition of annexation and zoning designation. Butler: Anna is absolutely correct and I did not see that in there. I don't think that changes the issue. It wasn't done. And so if -- if it had been done, what it would have contained would have been the modified conditions of approval, because the 2001 development agreement would have been modified to contain those conditions. So, I think we are, basically, back at the same place, that we -- the development agreement would have incorporated the conditions of approval and that's all we are asking you to let us live by. We think that we have shown you that we meet your alternative compliance, your intent and purpose, and we are asking you to recognize what the Council did back, then, again. Let us hook up to sewer at a more reasonable cost. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for Ms. Butler? Okay. Butler: Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, can I clarify the record on a couple other items? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Meridian City Council r • September 9, 2008 Page 39 of 66 Canning: With regard to the property to the east, you may recall we had the applicant come in and talk to the City Council about annexation. She had promised that she would annex. We had petitioned against the -- to the west. I'm sorry. Thank you. We had petitioned Ada County with a lengthy response with regard to the proposed site plan, which was largely ignored, as was our complaints with regard to the large billboard that was put in that was -- again, the comments were ignored. It was appealed up to the county commissioners. We commented at that. We have put a note in the file that, basically, says when this property comes in for annexation that they need to abide by -- with all the things that we have requested thus far. So, at this point I have quit wasting my time providing lengthy comments to Ada County with regard to the piece of property. I just wanted to clarify that. De Weerd: It was very fresh in my memory. Canning: Yeah. De Weerd: So, when Ms. Butler said that we didn't comment, I thought, hum, I think I over commented, but -- Canning: Yeah. Butler: I think Anna has underscored the fact that it was not easy to talk to the property owner to the west. Canning: And with regard to cross-access, we don't require that they obtain the permission of the adjoining property owners, we just required that they provide access across their property to those adjoining properties. When the adjoining properties develop, we require the same from them. De Weerd: And we did ask for that on that property. Canning: Yes, we did. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Well, this is a public hearing. Is there additional testimony? Yes, sir. Just in case you wondered, it is three minutes. Christensen: Okay. My name is Eddie Christensen. 1882 North Prestwick in Eagle, Idaho, for the record. De Weerd: Thank you. Christensen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are not a major enterprise. It's -- I'm an accountant. He's a stock broker. My partner. We are trying to beautify the city. I mean it's -- we are not trying to do anything wrong or not beautify things in those terms. I don't speak as eloquently as Joann, obviously, but the reality is all we are Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 40 of 66 asking for is what we were told and a year ago when we started this project we sat in a meeting with staff and we were told that certainly we could operate in -- on the premises and once that sewer was brought to us from the south, certainly we would connect at that time. In April we were instructed that was -- that no longer applied, that now we had to start from ground zero, basically, as far as we were concerned after all these things and -- and so, really, there were certain things that were told us that we were -- that we based everything upon and why we proceeded and things like that and, ironically, we are back to ground zero and here we are asking for what we are asking for. So, I don't think our demands are outrageous. We are simply trying to do things right. Believe it or not, we are ethical, even though we are auto salesmen. We weren't seasoned in the business, obviously, so we run a good business and we wanted contribute to the City of Meridian and, you know, we took an opportunity and bought that property and, really, the things that we are asking for, you know, I hope aren't too -- too unreasonable, so thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Yes. Christensen: The septic system -- we actually did have looked at. It was pumped out. It was in perfect condition. So, we did have an okay on that. We are as excited to get rid of that thing as anybody, with our existing building. We spent the money that we have had, anyway, we have spent to beautify it and make it better. We had a lot of issues with the roof and things with our existing building in Boise. We have spent adequate money to make it right. We would do the same with this property and to be in compliance and we would be the first ones to hook up were that sewer to come. It wouldn't take six months. We would hook up to it as soon as we possibly could. But in terms of the water, just for the record, we do have water to -- from the street right now. So, water is really not an issue. It's really sewer, so thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Burrus: My name is Dan Burrus. 2284 Piazza here in Meridian. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thanks for your time. I know it's late. Just -- I don't want to beat a dead horse, but we did purchase this property, we did hire The Land Group. We did expend a lot of money with the assumptions that were given to us and recommendations by the staff and, unfortunately, none of the members of the staff that were in those meetings with us are here tonight, but it's undeniable that they recommended to us several items and that's really all we are asking for. We are asking for you to give us what they told us we could have. What -- as Joann presented, legally appears we should have. And that is altemative compliance on these landscaping. We are happy to put in additional trees, bushes, whatever it is, we want our place to look great and the better it looks the more attractive it will be for our customers. We are happy to do whatever it takes as far as that goes. We were told, in fact, that before we hired The Land Group that we could hook up to city sewer as soon as it was stubbed to our property and we would have six months to do so. And that was told us in -- on more than one occasion by staff and also the altemative compliance on the landscaping. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 41 of 66 Those are recommendations primarily that they gave to us and so we were just going forward with those. So, I appreciate your time. Do you have any questions forme? De Weerd: No. Thank you. Elg: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Van Elg, 462 East Shore, Eagle, Idaho. I'm with The Land Group. Madam Mayor and Councilman Rountree, in response, to your question about landscaping, what you see right there is it's fairly dense as far as trees. I don't know that we could fit another tree in there -- I'd have to talk to .one of my landscape architects -- without causing problems with growth if they start interfering or growing together. I'm sure that we could talk about some other lower growing bushes or shrubs if we -- if we needed to, but, again, this is an auto dealership and we don't want to be completely obscured from the street either, so we would be willing to discuss with staff any additional requirements and certainly consider what that might be. If there is -- if anybody does want additional landscaping there. Madam Mayor, you had mentioned that you were concerned about ACHD's encroachment -- future encroachment. They are requiring an additional ten foot of take of right of way there. As we understand it, that's what they need for their planned growth at this point. So, what you see is what I think will be there for quite some time with the -- with the landscaping. One clarification -- I think somebody mentioned that there -would be a pervious -- or an impervious surface over the top of the septic system, drain field. We are actually installing an impervious -- or a pervious concrete over the top of, which is something that's -- I don't know if you have seen it, but Sienna Elementary School has got it now, it's the largest pour in Idaho. We have been spear heading that. It's a great new product. DEQ -- the agencies love this product. It allows the water to go completely through. We will scratch off the top soil of this property above the septic system and it will continue to drain just as if it were -- you know, it's a pervious surface. So, it will accept the water. We won't alter that -- that drain field as a condition. So, I don't think that that's going to be a problem. There was a discussion about cross-access and at one point we discussed the fact that this is an auto dealership. Most dealerships will close off their lots at a certain time of night. That's their product. That's their life. They don't want free flowing traffic going through their project during the middle of the night to -- their product could be damaged or keyed or whatever that might be. Of course, that doesn't stop people from going onto the site, but it's a deterrent and so one discussion was made was we would be willing to combine our access with the pool or the coffee house at the time and provide an access right there, but that didn't come about. And, in fact, the billboard was in place there, which really caused some problems with trying to get a cross-access through there. We were told by ACHD that they were going to require -- when that project came through they were going to require them to slip their access. That didn't happen either and no comments were made by ACRD either during the time of the pool and fly applications. So, I think those are the -- I think those are the only issues I -- that I had. If you have any questions I'd sure be glad to answer them, though. And if I didn't answer yours appropriately, Councilman Rountree, I would be glad to -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 42 of 66 De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Yeah. Van, you addressed them. I just wanted to make sure how much -- how much was. So, this landscape width is the 17 and a half feet -- Elg: Correct. Rountree: -- minimum, but you did make a comment that makes me want to ask another question when you said you contemplated a joint access with this -- with this neighboring property, I assume at this location, since your applicant -- or your client owns this, it seems to me that maybe that there, working both, kills two birds with one stone, gives them a little more spot for displays and makes it -- makes it, I think, better for them ultimately. Now, I don't know what their plans are, but I'll bet it's auto related or some such. So, anyway, I would throw that out in terms of, you know, take a look at your site plan, you probably could save them some money doing that. The other concern I have is that apparently the sewer is stubbed over here and I don't know if -- it's up here? Okay. It's at the street, but it's on -- it's right at the property line or close to -- Elg: No. We'd have to -- it's in the street. It's -- whatever the corridor is there. Rountree: I'm going to get Clint to -- it's in Fairview? Dolsby: Yeah. Rountree: Okay. Canning: Council Member Rountree, it appears to be 25 or 30 feet from this property line toward the north end of Fairview. Rountree: Okay. Canning: Very close. Rountree: It's very close. Okay. All right. Anyway, I just want to get in my mind where that is, because it seems to me that that's probably ultimately going to be your closest location. I'm not asking you for more trees, I think you got sufficient trees. I agree sometimes you can get them too close, but -- Elg: Madam Mayor and Councilman Rountree, if I could, we have discussed that issue of moving that access over there to center -- between the center of two properties and we can't meet the offset distances from Jericho Road when that builds out. So, ACHD wanted us -- in fact, they'd prefer that we leave it back over there by the coffee house, but we have shown them that this is an acceptable location for us. They have approved -- we have gotten the -- an approval from ACHD today for the access location for the -- Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 43 of 66 Rountree: I understand that, but when you access this property, you're not going to meet the offset either. Elg: I'm sure that it will come from -- it will come from this existing access point and/or from Jericho Road when that develops. Rountree: Just use the same one. And, then, in terms of your site layout, as far as cross-access, I understand the desire to not have the access through the site at night. We actually have some retailers in the community that have the same concern and they actually gate their cross-access with others at night, but during the day the access is open and I would say that, again, Anna's comment is we don't require that you have the access, but you make provisions for that access on your property, so at some future date it can happen and I would say just looking at it, it would be in these general areas possibly, that maybe provisions could be made at some point in time in the future that that access could be allowed. We all know the issues to the west. But you're going to want to combine your properties anyway and I don't know that that's an issue. Elg: That doesn't seem to be an issue. Right. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Rountree. I was going to bring up the gate or the chaining myself, so -- any other questions, comments? Okay. Hoaglun: Question for Anna if I might, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Hoaglun: It sounded like they talk a lot about the sewer to the south and what I'm kind of divining here is that was a potential development going in in that south property that did not -- and looking ahead that there be a sewer connection they could connect to and, then, when that development did not go through, that kind of took away that south access. Am I reading the tea leaves correctly on that one? Canning: Yes, Councilman Hoaglun, and I'll let the city engineer fill in the details, but I did want to point -- Touchtone Place was approved to the south of this property in July of 2006. Now, that has since expired, the two years is gone, or the 18 months. So, it has expired, but it was approved and it is annexed as R -- is it an annexed piece of property and it's zoned R-15. That would have put sewer about 460 feet away from this property line. Or it currently exists 460 feet. It would have brought the sewer to this property line. Anything else, city engineer? Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Hoaglun, additionally, once that development goes -- say if this development chose to build asewer -- if they had the money to build a sewer through there, they would likely get reimbursed once that development went through -- once that development went in, that Touchstone Place or whatever ends up going in there, per our new reimbursement policy that we Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 44 of 66 are bringing to Council within the next couple months. And the other option for sure that we already talked about was up on Fairview was in a different shed, but we agreed to let them go that way if they would like to as well. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Clint, does that gravity flow from south to the north there in Fairview without going outrageously deep? Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Bird, yes, it does. Bird: Okay. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, did Van have a response to my question? Elg: It was in response to the question about sewer from -- from Touchstone. We have talked with the owner there, with Briggs Engineering, and we have actually discussed the possibility of, you know, how soon can you bring it in, do you -- can you identify where that might be. They just aren't willing to do that at this point, because they are retooling that site, if you will, for a different application, different commercial use, knowing that the original Touchstone piece has been denied. So, we are hoping that that service -- that may come in. In this market who knows when it will happen, but we have got good septic, we are putting pervious concrete on top of it, we have got water. The site can function as it was previously approved I think, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Now, I guess I have a question for you. Are they keeping, then, the house for their sales -- Elg: Yes. De Weerd: -- place and so not any -- Elg: For the phase one. De Weerd: Okay. So, not adding any structures. What is the signage? It's not this tall thing that they have in there. Elg: The other side of the billboard. I'm kidding. No. Rountree: Sandwich board, uh? Elg: Yeah. De Weerd: You know how to get a denial now for that. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 45 of 66 Elg: That might be something that these two better answer. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If you will state your name for the record. Burrup: Sure. Dan Burrup. De Weerd: Thank you. Burrup: And Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the sign on our existing property at the address of 10221 West Fairview in Boise was, actually, grandfathered in. It was built many years ago and so we can keep it as long as we don't make alterations and we never have. So, in answer to the question of the signage on this new property, it would simply be whatever is allowed by code is what we plan to put up. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: A question as it relates to the landscaping and an issue that -- that Director Canning brought up. We do have issues with auto sales and propensity to want to park vehicles on the landscape area and if it's not vehicles it's a thousand flags waving and if it's not a thousand flags waving it's a lot of streamers and balloons and whatever. Your sense of your marketing effort and that kind of an activity, because that's not something we want to see. Burrup: We intend to abide by the code, by the laws of the City of Meridian. As you can see and maybe appreciate by the photo of our dealership, I took that photo yesterday, just to -- Van called me in the middle of the day. It's not like we set the lot up for it to look like that. In fact, I would change a few things just by looking at the picture, but that's how we operate. You know, we do balloons occasionally. We don't have any streamers. Those have powerful power lines in front of our dealership that we can't do anything with. We intend to obey the law. We always have. Rountree: Follow up. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: What's your intent in terms of improvement to the existing structure? Burrup: Basically, we just want to improve -- redo the inside, just remodel, new floor -- I mean nothing to where we are going to take down any walls or anything like that, we just want to redo the building. People who were there prior had made some changes. We are just going to update some things at this point. Rountree: How about exterior? Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 46 of 66 Burrup: Exterior there is a little more paint work to be done and whatever signage will be allowed by code we'd like to do. I think that's it. Rountree: Your partner has another comment. Christensen: Eddie Christensen again. De Weerd: Thank you. Christensen: Madam Mayor. I think the proofs in the pudding kind of. I don't know what the relationship is with Boise, we are in no violation with Boise or Ada County with our current dealership. We will not be, simply because -- I can't say that to our neighbors on the east side of us currently in Boise, but we are in compliance -- complete compliance as it is right now. I think that should answer that question and simply, yeah, we want to beautify the property. With what we have to work with right now, you know, cosmetically there is some things that we can do to that building certainly to make it look better. It is phase one. You know, we will have to come in with a new plan for the next phase, but certainly, you know, we are still growing as a dealership, so it may take some time to put anice -- blow that building off and put a nice big building on there and things like that, but with the proper lighting and signage and beautification of what we have to work with right now certainly we can make it work with decent inventory. We are not a buy here, pay here, dealership, so we sell quality vehicles, that type thing, which enhances the dealership. With the concrete and the pavement that we are going to use -- we currently own Think Green Car Company as well, it's basically a lease that we have on the comer. Our concept is really think go green and so with the next building, the next phase, the reason we are going with the concrete and the drainage and all these things, are simply to -- we are going to focus mostly on hybrids and more efficient cars. It's really a new concept to the valley that we are bringing in. We were on a -- recently interviewed by Channel 6 or 7, I think. They did a big story on us with Intermountain Gas and things doing conversions to vehicles. We have a lot of ideas. I'm kind of divulging some of those now, but it will improve that area dramatically based on what you see right now when you drive by and see the eye sore that's sitting there. So, you know, I guess, finally, in closing, it will be a classy establishment as you drive by as long as we own it, so -- thank you and thanks for your time tonight. I certainly want to get home to my family. De Weerd: Thank you. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I do have an additional question. Noticing from the pictures that are up now, the second building that is on the property is a garage-type building, it appears to be. And so my question is other than washing the cars that are on the lot occasionally, are Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 47 of 66 you thinking of doing any repair or maintenance or other kind of work on the cars. You need to be on the microphone. Christensen: Yes. We will improve that as well. It will look similar to the building as you see it now. We certainly wouldn't leave that in the condition that it's in and not change that, too. Structurally we won't do too much in phase one, simply because of the requirements and things that -- as far as that goes, but, yeah, it would be improved as well. The entire facility would be improved with what we own currently with -- in relation to 1065 East Fairview and, then, we would -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor. I wasn't actually asking about the building, I was asking about the use of the building. Christensen: Oh, the use of the building -- Zaremba: If you're going to do any repair on automobiles. Christensen: Currently it's a storage facility. I mean there is not much we can do with it. It's not tall enough to put a mechanical shop in it and that type thing. It would really just be a storage facility. We may park a vehicle in there. We may just park -- you know, put items for detailing and things like that, but in terms of a showroom, no. No. In terms of glass and a nice pretty building with cars, no, it will not be -- because ultimately it will be tom down. Zaremba: Somehow I guess I'm not making my question clear. Christensen: I'm sorry. Zaremba: I'm talking about repair of automobiles. Are you going to do any maintenance or repair on automobiles? Christensen: No. That is not the plan currently. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: I just have a comment when you think green on phase two, you know, I don't think green on car lots, usually, because they are just a bunch of asphalt. So, would love you to think green on phase two. Bird: Paint the concrete. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 48 of 66 De Weerd: Or concrete. Okay. Any other questions, wrap-up remarks? Well, it's not like we have had ~ any public testimony that's contrary to what the applicant has said. Any additional comments from staff? Okay. Council, seeing no further testimony, do I have a motion to close the public hearing? Bird: Everybody satisfied? Rountree: Yeah. Go ahead if you want to make that motion. Bird: I would move that we close the public hearing on AP 08-005. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 11. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Not having been here in 2001 and 2003, just what was your guys' task? De Weerd: Change. Bird: Our intent was to make it -- to make that property look nicer than it does now. Or did then. De Weerd: We could ask that before the 2000, too, to formercouncil -- Rountree: Yes, you could. De Weerd: -- at that time. Rountree: Yes, you could. De Weerd: So, what's your point? Rountree: I just wanted to know if you could explain what your intent was and Mr. Bird did that, so -- Rountree: Madam Mayor, just some observations and comments on what I heard and Anna's questions that she posed to us. I think that in 2001 there was -- there was direction by Council to have a DA completed on this property and I think that's still in order and I would think that we would want to do that and I think the DA ought to reflect that the testimony and responses that we heard this evening and what our current Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 49 of 66 ordinances, I guess, would allow. So, going through these questions I think a DA is in order. I don't know that a CU is -- would necessarily have to be for an auto sales lot as in 2003. It's not now. Alternative compliance for the landscaping -- I think they have indicated that they'd do the 17 and a half feet. Not only that, they are doing landscaping in the parking lot and the back property, which I believe is new. They are also -- I will say my desire is that they at least accommodate cross-access on this property, so it could be done in the future. As far as the vehicles over the septic leach field, if they are putting the surfacing down as in testimony, that should be part of the DA and I think that takes care of that particular issue. Should they abide by 2008 code requirements, I think if they are going to modify the building they are going to have to meet whatever code requirements that it's going to require as far as the code requirements and the ordinance from the Unified Development Code. Previous approval by Council was given direction on how to do alternative compliance with some of those features and I think that that should be recognized, since we didn't develop a DA. We have talked about cross-access. I believe as far as hooking up with the sewer, I would like to see that done. And I know it's expensive. The problem with not doing that is, then, it's deferred for ever and ever some more. The problem with doing that with the adjacent property that they own and coming off of Fairview is that they could sell that, then, we don't have it yet again. I understand their difficulty with the development to the south and I don't know how to solve that problem, but some way we need to get that property sewered. I don't have the language for the DA, but I think our intent that that happens within a prescribed period of time needs to be in the DA. I like the effort that the applicant's made to try to make this property look like something and I very much appreciate if they have had any dialogue at all with their neighbor to the west, that, you know, that's penance enough, but we still have some things we got to do. Those are my comments. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We sit next to one another and I think word for word I agree with Councilman Rountree. Rountree: First time ever. Bird: My first time ever. De Weerd: That's getting scary. Bird: That is. But, anyway, I, too, believe that we got to have a DA. We have got to put a time limit on when we hook to the sewer, whether it's to the south or to the north and I'm like Councilman Rountree, I don't want to see it two years from now. I know it's an expensive process and probably the market out there right now isn't real conducive to it, but we got to have a time limit and that's why a DA has to be. I believe that for cross- access in the DA we make sure that in certain areas, certain widths on east and west • • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 50 of 66 that buildings are not ever allowed to be built there, so you do have cross-access. Your landscaping I can certainly agree with, but we have got to have -- we have got to have a DA and we have got to have a time limit on the sewering, as far as I'm concerned. And I, too, applaud you for going out there and fixing that thing up and making it -- it certainly would be an addition to what we have got out there now. Thank you. Hoaglun: Madam Chairman? De Weerd: Yes. Hoaglun: I have been given good advice in the past and I intend to follow it tonight is to follow the wise counsel of your elders. Rountree: Careful. De Weerd: I'm not going to comment. Bird: I'm sure your not always going to say that. De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further discussion, do I have a motion? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, before the motion, is the direction from the Council -- I think I understand all the conditions you were looking for. In fact, just to clarify, I think the issue of the leach field probably -- Central District Health -- maybe Mr. Dolsby can sign off on what they are trying to do to make sure that it's satisfactory, but -- but do you want us to negotiate with them as to what time period is reasonable to put in that into the development agreement for the hook up to the sewer -- I mean that really is the 36,000 dollar question it seems like that -- and what I think I heard from Mr. Bird is 18 months seems about the farthest out or something less than that, if I understand correctly. De Weerd: Mr. Nary, I guess those questions are more appropriate when we have a motion, so -- Nary: Just trying to help them form in their mind what they want to put in the motion. Bird: I agree with you, Bill, I -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 51 of 66 r~ u Zaremba: I agree with what has been said, but I guess my question would be would we want to see the terms of the development agreement, in which case we need to reopen -- De Weerd: Mr. Bird and Mr. Nary -- Nary: Sorry. De Weerd: -- this question's actually directed to Mr. Nary, so it's important that he listen. Nary: Sony. Zaremba: Would we need to reopen the hearing and continue it to see the DA? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Iguess -- Council Member Zaremba, I guess because I don't know the -- I mean they did offer to do a DA. I think the conditions that you have discussed to this point, other than the sewer issue, are things that I think have been put on the record, but because of that provision -- and this is somewhat unusual, that might be probably wiser than you -- than the Council making that motion and direction and, then, we can't reach a resolution and we just have to come back anyway. That might be wiser. But Mrs. Canning has a different perspective, it appears. She seems to be waving over there. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, with regard to the DAs it says that the Council can initiate one as long as it's the subject of a public hearing. It doesn't need to be the subject of an annexation public hearing. So, I think the comments you have made tonight can be rolled into a DA and perhaps what we could do, rather than put it on your Consent Agenda, is to have it as an open discussion for the night once staff has had a chance to work with the applicant and come up with those provisions for the DA, if the city attorney agrees with that thought. Nary: That's perfectly fine. I mean as long as -- I just don't want you to pass something that we come back in two weeks and say we can't reach a resolution with this and they are not willing to sign an agreement. So, however we want to have that conversation back in front of you -- Mrs. Canning's suggestion is good. De Weerd: So, Mr. Nary, does that mean you continue this item contingent on that DA or -- Nary: Madam Mayor, I think that's what I -- what I understood you to say. Did I misunderstand that? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you have two options. You could continue this item and we can work on the DA provisions for you to consider it at a continued public hearing or you could take action today and, then, we could work on the • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 52 of 66 DA provisions and once the DA is ready for Council, we could bring that to you with the negotiated agreements. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we don't have a motion and a DA with provisions how are you going to work on anything? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- Bird: I mean I think we need to go forward and make a -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe I'm not tracking the same as Mrs. Canning. I think you can either continue it to a date certain and we can bring back what you're requesting in a development agreement or you can move to do that and we will bring it back when we reach a resolution or bring it back in front of you when we don't reach a resolution. So, I -- I think you can do it either way. I don't really have a concern that you continue it to a specific date. Normally, if you make these findings we would bring it back when it was completed, not to a specific date certain. But if you want to see it within a month, that's perfectly fine. De Weerd: Okay. Council, you have heard your options. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I will take a stab at this. I move that we direct staff to work with the applicant to prepare a development agreement that outlines the comments that I stated previously and have been stated by the rest of the Councilmen during discussion and negotiate with the applicant a time element as it relates to hook up with the sewer and bring either a completed and agreeable DA back to the Council for approval or bring conditions that need resolved back to the Council for final decision. Bird: I can -- I can buy into that, if we don't -- De Weerd: Is that a second? Bird: That was a motion? Nary: Yeah, that was a motion. De Weerd: Yes. • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 53 of 66 Bird: I'll second it. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Discussion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: What kind of time limit have you got in mind, Charlie? De Weerd: I think from his motion it would be -- oh, to bring back? Rountree: Bring back? Bird: Yeah. Rountree: 23rd. De Weerd: So, two weeks. Rountree: Two weeks. Is that -- Bird: Is that doable? Rountree: I know that meeting's going to be about 4:00 o'clock in the morning. Nary: I think we have a lot on that meeting. Rountree: It really is getting stacked up. If you could do it -- I wouldn't have a bit of problem if it works out and goes smoothly as a Consent Agenda item on our -- in our workshop on the 9th. I mean the 16th. Excuse me. Tonight's the 9th. Can't do it? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we can't get it -- that means it has to be done Thursday. Rountree: Yeah. That isn't going to happen. Again, if it's smooth and can be pulled together, it could be a Consent Agenda item on the 23rd. If it needs further discussion and clarification from Council, then, it would be -- De Weerd: We could pull it off. Rountree: We could pull it off and look at it on the 7th. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. • Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 54 of 66 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean not to be flip, but it's been seven years on this parcel it appears. I mean I would prefer October 7th, only because I don't think -- I don't think October -- or September 23rd -- I think you have a fairly full agenda and if we have a discussion all we are going to do is move this to the 7th anyway. De Weerd: We have a very full agenda on the 23rd. Nary: So, I would suggest we just shoot for the 7th. I think that gives us time and Ms. Butler's office time to see if we can resolve something. If not, we will just have -- we will be able to have a discussion on the 7th, rather than bringing it up on the 23rd and, then, moving it to the 7th anyway. If we have it sooner, since it is just a development agreement, we can certainly we put it on your agenda on the 23rd, if there is a resolution. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I'm unclear what the status of the original question about the CZC would be during this interim period. De Weerd: It sounds like it's contingent upon the DA. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess what I would suggest -- what I would say is that you have entered into a motion and a direction that is an alternative resolution to the CZC appeal that is on front of you. If we can reach that resolution with both parties, then, that would be the conclusion of the matter. If not, then, on the 7th we would be having the discussion for you to make a decision on the appeal that's in front of you tonight. What we have, basically, done is we just took a side road to see if that would resolve the issues for both the city and the applicant and the planning department and that's what we are trying to do with the development agreement. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, that brings me back to the question I asked earlier. In order to accomplish that, don't we need to continue this hearing? Nary: Mr. Zaremba, you're right, I guess we would need to continue that, because, obviously, it's still an open question and you would have to hear it. So, again, I still would recommend the 7th, because if we are going to have a discussion and we don't reach a resolution on this development agreement and we are going to have -- the Council is going to make a decision on the underlying appeal, you'll probably have more time on the 7th than you would on the 23rd. So, you're correct. Rountree: So, maker of the motion would amend my motion by adding that we open -- reopen the public hearing on Item 11 and continue until October 7th. Meridian City Council September 9, 2008 Page 55 of 66 Bird: Second agrees. n L_J Zaremba: And, Madam Mayor, as I always wish to comment, that nobody left the room during the period of when we thought it was closed. De Weerd: Okay. So, the motion is to reopen the public hearing and continue it until October 7th and ask staff and applicant to work on a DA with the comments provided by Council. Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: Proposed Fee Increases for Solid Waste Collections by Sanitary Services Company: De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is a public hearing on the proposed fee increases for the solid waste collections by SSC. I will open this public hearing and ask for comments by our SSC representative. Good evening. Sedlacek: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Steve Sedlacek, Sanitary Service, 2130 West Franklin, Meridian, Idaho. First of all, I wanted to say -- in response to some of the early public hearings we did not intend to create a ruckus at the McDonald's and had we known about it we would have fixed it immediately. We just heard about this issue -- De Weerd: We know that. Sedlacek: -- in the last few days, so -- Rountree: So did we. De Weerd: You heard when we heard. Sedlacek: And thank you for passing that along. De Weerd: We appreciate your response, too. Sedlacek: I have given you a memorandum, dated August 12th. I believe you have that in your packets. It was based on an assumed sequence of events that was supposed to occur with the county commissioners and whether or not they were going to raise their landfill fees. The way this was supposed to work was the county commissioners were supposed to meet with the Ada County solid waste staff yesterday and decide. They met and they did not decide. I was told earlier last week that there would not be a 50 percent rate increase, but it would be a 16 percent overall rate increase and that would be accomplished by raising rates for compacted waste, which is most of the waste stream that we get from residential and commercial customers, 22 and a half percent. So, they play with the proportions of waste and how much each Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 56 of 66 waste stream goes up or down to achieve the 16 percent. They could not agree on that. So, I stand before you with no idea as to what the county commissioners will do or what rate structure should be approved. I have provided you the one on August 12th. I have also given you another one with the 22 and a half percent rate increase that I thought was going to go through yesterday. That one has not been published, therefore, I don't know what that means legally and I'm frankly stumped as to what to do. Rountree: Say tuned. Zaremba: Madam Mayor'? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Do we know, once they do make their decision, how quickly they implement it? I mean do they give the two month or three month warning? Sedlacek: Oh, no. Rountree: Oh, no. Zaremba: It's the next day? Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, typically they can decide anything -- it's soup to nuts. It could be October 1st still. They like to hit their fiscal year criteria. Their economic models that they use are based on fiscal year, October 1 to October 1, financial plans. They will be meeting Friday. We will see what happens. You know, we have this requirement -- these rates are going up so quickly to such an extent that they will trigger public hearings and we have to have the notification periods to do this and so that's why we are on the track we are on and it could get to the point where they raise the rates and give you such a short time you can't meet the public hearing requirements and, then, I don't know where we are at, then. De Weerd: But, Steve, I believe that you have published rates that are higher than even the rates that you just brought back. Sedlacek: That's correct. De Weerd: So, as long as you're lowering the rate, I think your published rates meet the intent. Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's great. We could call these not to exceed rates. Rountree: In fact, that's what they would be. Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 57 of 66 Sedlacek: And that's, in fact, what they are. I guess an altemative path is to ignore the county commissioners and assume that they won't act and we will just go ahead with our normal CPI adjustment that we do every year. In that case it's a 4.3 percent adjustment, which is less than the public hearing requirements. Then, the issue with that, though, is that they will, eventually, act and we will have to go through another rate modification, the citizens will see a series of bumps over time and that's not good. Rountree: So, one solution, (suppose -- Madam Mayor, one solution, I suppose, would be to hold these rates. If they don't raise them quite that high, and maintain them and you have built in the next rate increase, maybe, and a portion of the next one. There is several ways to anticipate that, because, you're right, they -- you can't outguess when they are going to do this. Sedlacek: That's correct. De Weerd: But can we tell them they missed their window of opportunity and we won't pay the increase until next year? Sedlacek: Well, we don't pay that, so I -- I don't know that we could -- De Weerd: No. We will not require our -- Rountree: I'm not sure it works that way. Sedlacek: I would like my trucks to get in the gate. Bird: I was going to say -- Sedlacek: Although one option, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you want to look at going to altemative landfills, we can. We are not stuck at the Ada County landfill. Rountree: That's one of the questions -- I don't know how much more you wanted to go into detail, but I had a couple questions and that was one of them of at what point do we start looking at Elmore county. Sedlacek: Whenever you would like. There are a number of issues related to that. Once this tipping fee -- the new tipping fees at the Ada County landfill goes into effect, when you convert them into a tonnage based rate system -- now currently they ,are based on volume. We pay ten dollars a cubic yard. That will be something more soon. When you convert the future rate to tonnage, it's going to be about a 30 to 35 dollar a ton rate. The current rate at the Ada County -- or the Elmore county site is 16.50. De Weerd: Wow. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 58 of 66 Sedlacek: It's farther for me to drive, so my fuel costs are higher. I have to go through a weigh station. That can be an issue for me. And there are a number of ancillary programs that the county commissioners offer that the citizens love and one of them is household hazardous waste disposal. It's free. I mean that's why their rates are higher, they offer more things. But at some point you reach a tipping point where -- Rountree: You have to look at that. Sedlacek: -- we might want to deal with somebody different. Rountree: The other question -- you have talked about they may be adjusting rates higher for compacted waste. How does that apply to your operation when, in effect, you decompact them at the transfer station, plus all the material that comes into the transfer station is added to that truck. Is that all classified as, then, compacted waste, even though a good share of it's not? Sedlacek: Everything -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council and Councilman Rountree, everything that comes out of our transfer station is compacted in our compactors, so when it gets to this county landfill they classify everything as compacted waste. So, there are issues with me, in particular -- of our operation in particular, if they decide to arbitrarily raise the compacted portion of the rate structure higher than any other. I had heard at one time that they were going to raise their compacted rate 50 percent and raise no other rates. Well, that really hurts me, because, then, basically, when you bring waste into your transfer station at ten dollars a yard, you're turning it into 15 dollar a yard waste and you can't -- you can't do that very long and stay in business. And so I had a little discussion with some of the people at the solid waste department and they kind of understood my position and I don't really know how they are going to come out with any future rate changes. The discrepancy between compacted and other rates can't be too far for -- it can be off a little bit and I can be fine, because Ican -- I have a large compactor. De Weerd: So, what's the -- what's the definition of compacted and e Sedlacek: A compacted waste is anything that comes in in a truck and that's commercially collected and it's compacted in a shape, rear loader, front load truck, or side load, but it stays in that shape. There is cylinders that push it into a cube, as opposed to just throwing it in a truck and bringing it up there loose. Or for a roll out box. De Weerd: So, they are pretty much penalizing those that try and reduce the number of trips up to the landfill by compacting -- by your transfer station? Sedlacek: I don't think there is any intention to harm us. I think that they are simply looking at -- I know that the county at one point is going to be looking at switching from yardage based systems to tonnage based systems. When they do that the onus or the increase in rate is going to fall on the consumer and the construction companies that run the roll off boxes are going to get a better deal, because they are -- right now on a Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 59 of 66 tonnage basis they are paying a very, very high rate, because there is not much weight in the box, as opposed to the rear load trucks, which have very high densities, because they are packed. And that may be why they want to start moving toward a more equitably based system when they finally do convert to weight as a measurement. It's a little bit complicated. I have a difficult time saying that I know what their, you know, ideas are. I really don't. I think we will be fine. I'm not womed about that at all. I just have no idea what their rate structure is going to be and so I stand before you with no idea of what's going on there. Rountree: Madam Mayor, my suggestion is just move forward with the information that you have projected and published and if, in fact, you're not harmed, then, make downward adjustments according to what rates they may come up with at the point in time they come up with them. Otherwise, put those rates into effect. Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what I don't want to do is absolutely stick to those rates, because they are too high and Idon't -- it would be a windfall for me and the rates in Meridian would be higher than they should be and that's -- I mean it's just bad for the citizens and it's not right. So, if I have the ability to move backwards from that point -- Rountree: You do. Sedlacek: -- I'm happy with that. Bird: You do. Sedlacek: I just -- from a legal perspective I just don't know if we publish a rate do I have to stick with that rate. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you can't exceed the rate you published. You can certainly charge less. Sedlacek: Okay. If they are not to exceed rates, I'm good to go, if you're good to go. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what we could do -- because the normal course of action that we would take after tonight's hearing was, then, to bring a resolution, normally we would just in the resolution indicate these are the actual rates, but we could indicate that the rates can't exceed this amount, may be less. The published rate will be available both at the utility billing, at SSC, on our website. So, if somebody needs to know how much is my trash bill, they will have a way to find it, but it won't be higher than what we publish and that doesn't violate the state code. Sedlacek: Just one other comment for the Council and the Mayor. The rates are getting high enough now where we need to look at differential can rates. Unlimited waste collection probably needs to go away where we need to offer more recycling Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 60 of 66 opportunities and we need to have people that generate more waste pay more and those that generate less will get a break. De Weerd: That was going to be my question. Sedlacek: Excuse me? De Weerd: It was certainly going to be my question. Sedlacek: So, I believe in the next six months we will be able to go through the solid waste committee and come to you with a new rate structure. I'd like to think of it as a two year plan to move towards automated collection and increase recycling, maybe doing some composting in conjunction with the wastewater treatment plant and -- excuse me -- and just being a better steward of the waste stream and I think we can do that. It's a large capital expenditure, so it will take some time, but I think if we lay the plan out and follow it it will be great. De Weerd: Excellent. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: You have probably thought about this before and I know Boise measures what each person contributes to the system, the individual homeowners, they charge by different amounts they collect, but the administrating that -- I mean at the moment your drivers drive down the street, they pick up whatever is there, they don't make any record of it, they don't tum a record in. Changing that system is not going to be free. At what point does the administrative cost justify doing that? Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, the city of Boise does not measure -- Zaremba: Oh. Sedlacek: -- they have unlimited service as we do. Now, they are moving in 2010 under a new contract to automated collection with can limits. The way I foresee this would be you would be offered probably two different can sizes for your garbage, a 95 gallon can or a 65 or a 40 gallon can and you would have a rate for -- pay more for a bit more and pay less for less. And those would be your only two choices. Everyone would, then, get a bigger recycling bin and you would commingle everything in one bin. So, the rate structure is based on the waste can, not all of the other cans. But people are going to have two or three cans at their house. But implementing -- how you do the billing system is going to be more complicated. Keeping track of -- well, 75,000 garbage cans is what it's going to be. All coded and whose is whose and -- it's going to be difficult, but, you know, most cities are doing it. It's not impossible. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 61 of 66 De Weerd: And you're certainly doing it in Moscow. You charge by the number of cans. Sedlacek: Yes. They are can limited in Moscow. That's right. And Eagle is also can limited right now. Now, you don't get a choice of can sizes, but you do have -- you have options -- for example, in Eagle you can get unlimited service and pay a whole bunch of money or you can limit yourself to one size can. But you still have to keep track when you go to that house who is -- you know, whose trash is that. Are they beating the system or not. It's difficult. Zaremba: Yeah. I'd drag mine into the driveway next door and leave it. Sedlacek: That will happen. Nary: You know we record these, so just to advise you. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, actually, another question. If we go to a system where there is some way to track who is putting how much, one place that I lived about 15 years ago had a very extensive recycling program, but in addition to that, there was a fine if you put recyclables into your regular garbage thing and I imagine the drivers administered that as well, but it's a way to enforce the recycling if we are going to start looking and -- Sedlacek: Yes. These -- De Weerd: And that would be your enforcement, chief. Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the issues is a revision of the ordinances and I think that from my perspective I'm not worried about people putting recyclables in their garbage, I am worried about people putting their garbage in the recycling can, because that screws up the whole deal. If they are crazy enough to waste their space that they are paying for to put recyclables in when it's free to put it in the recyclable can -- I don't think that's as much of a problem. But, you're right, there are citizens -- or cities that enforce that. Seattle is one and they have garbage police that go out and they look at your can and they give you fines and you better do it right. I don't know if we want to get to that point. That's up to the Council and the Mayor. De Weerd: It's not a job I would want. Sedlacek: It will open up an entirely new set of issues. Illegal dumping will become more of an issue. Tracking all the cans. It's -- it's going to change. De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Or comments? Thank you, Steve. Rountree: Oh, I do have aquestion -- I do have a question. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council • September 9, 2008 Page 62 of 66 Rountree: I read it in the Trash Notes. You're cycling grass clippings now. Sedlacek: We are. We are attempting to use those as cattle feed and there is also one company -- is that right, Doug, that takes it for composting. Tree Top Recycling. Right. I believe composting is the way to do -- to handle that waste stream and the city has a large bio solids waste stream. I have got a large grass clipping waste stream and wood. I have a tremendous amount of wood. And together those things make great compost. Rountree: So, how are you collecting that? It has to be brought to the transfer station? Sedlacek: It has to be brought to the transfer station. We have a separate segregated area for it. We throw it into a -- we don't throw it, we put it into a 30 yard -- Rountree: Compact it nicely. Sedlacek: Yes. We place it gently into a 30 yard box and we haul to either the farmer that we have a relationship with or to Tree Top. Rountree: Is there a fee? Sedlacek: There is a fee to drop it off. There is no -- and there is no -- and there is a fee to take it to Tree Top, but we drop it -- but for the cattle feeding operation we give it to them for free. One of the difficult issues with grass is the seasonality of it. You don't get any in the winter, so -- Rountree: And way more than you need in the summer. Sedlacek: And way more than we need is the summer. That's correct. Bird: Steve, you got a cattle feeder that feeds -- Sedlacek: Yes. Bird: What do they do, mix it -- chop it and mix it? Sedlacek: I believe so. Bird: Because it's very very tough on cattle, just -- it causes bloating and stuff. Or I have always -- Sedlacek: They approached us and they want it and they signed a release. I wont' about things like, you know, what if a door knob gets in that pile of grass or a bottle of -- aCoke bottle or something and the cow eats it, I mean it's going to be a bad thing. So, I like composting a lot. Meridian City Council • • September 9, 2008 Page 63 of 66 De Weerd: Yeah. A lot of people don't think when they throw something in with their grass that it's going somewhere that it could do harm. Sedlacek: Thank you for your time. De Weerd: Okay. Council -- this is a public hearing and since I see so many members of our public out there, I would offer -- is there any further public testimony? Okay. Seeing .none, Council, what is your pleasure? Would you like to keep this open? Close the public hearing, ask for a resolution? Maybe by next week when the resolution comes back you will have more information or what would you like to do? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: My preference would be to close the public hearing, make a proposal to bring a resolution back not to exceed the published prices and I have never known anybody to complain if the prices are lowered, so -- and that's a not to exceed price. So, that would be my preference. Yeah. You would also put the effective date of 10/1/08. That would be my preference. What the rest of you -- Rountree: Is that a motion? Bird: I would close the public hearing. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we direct the attorney to bring back a resolution regarding the increase in fees at a not to exceed of the published fees as published by SSC, Sanitary Services Company. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the rate increase with the not to exceed and bring back a resolution. Bird: And 10/1/08. Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 64 of 66 De Weerd: 10/1/08 effective date. Okay. Any discussion? Oh, I don't -- Rountree: Want a second? De Weerd: Yeah. I need a second. Rountree: I'll second it. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Discussion? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: Question for Bill. Can we add a -- on the effective date October 1st and add: Or the date as the rates are increased by Ada County? Because they may not increase the rate by October 1st. De Weerd: Sony, we can't have you talk. We have a closed public hearing. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, Ithink -- I think you can make it 10/1. We could certainly publish that as well as the resolution, that the rates will be effective whenever. But that's my only concern is how is anybody going to know. Rountree: Ithink Steve wanted to say it also includes the CIP increase, so he could knock it down to that. Nary: Sure. Rountree: So, that would take care of it. Nary: Okay. De Weerd: Yeah. Because he has a not to exceed, it can -- Nary: Right. Bird: Not to exceed. Rountree: He can take it down to his needed increase. Bird: Yeah. De Weerd: Yeah. Okay. Any further discussion? Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 65 of 66 Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Ordinance No. Position and Titles Ordinance: Amendments to Director De Weerd: Okay. Ordinance No. 08-1380. I will ask Madam Clerk to, please, read this ordinance by title only. Holman: By the city -- City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1380. An ordinance of the City of Meridian amending Title 1, Chapter 8, Section 1; Title 1, Chapter 8, Article D, Sections 1 and 2; Title 1, Chapter 8, Sections 1 and 2 of the Meridian City Code relating to the title of duties and responsibilities of the director positions. De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Ordinance 08-1380 with suspensions of rules. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: We are at the end of our agenda. Council, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Bird: So moved. Meridian City Council ~ • September 9, 2008 Page 66 of 66 Rountree: No. No. No. No. That's the duty of the newly sworn in -- Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Hoaglun: I would move that we adjourn tonight's Council meeting. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:04 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ~GG~~~~ MAYOR TAMM a WEERD ~'~/ ~ ~ ~~ DATE APPROVED -~ ir~~~, ATTEST: JA g~AL y~ ~~ ,,,, a,~ ~o,,,,, '~~~~'~'mrn~w nn```'\#` • s September 5, 2008 VAR 08-005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Tuscany Development, Ic. ITEM NO. 5-A REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for a YAR to UDC which requires bldg setbacks to be measurec from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from back of ribbon curb for 12 lots for Messina Meadows - w/o S. Eagle Road 8~ s/o East victory Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See altaehed Findings A ~~ra ~e. OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubNc meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. u CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~I ~E ID$ IAN; ~J In the Matter of Final Plat Modification to the previously approved fmal plat for Messina Meadows (FP-05-076) by removing the requirement fora 4-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue and Variance to UDC 11-2A-6, which requires building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from back of ribbon curb for 121ots for Messina Meadows, by Tuscany Development Inc. Case No(s). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 For the City Council Hearing Date of: July 22 and August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report-for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Repor+ r hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers a Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Tit 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of it codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all curre. Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Are Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which wa, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pui, 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 a ~~ _ ~ ,o -1- C~ • 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for a Variance is hereby approved. D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 -2- • • By ction of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) Attest: Jaycee Iceman, City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. VOTED VOTED VOTED__~~,~ VOTED Ma~Q~ Tammy d eerd ~~ ~ ~; = AL ., . ~ ~~~ The lyiatj~~1"ia~~nt, Public Works Department and City rii~~iin~n„o~ By: V Dated: City Clerk Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 -3- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: August 26, 2008 (Continued from July 22, 2008) ~ I~TAN TO: Mayor and City Council j j 6 6~ FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner 884-5533 SUBJECT: Messina Meadows • MFP-08-005 -Request to modify the previously approved fmal plat for Messina Meadows (FP-OS-076) by removing the requirement fora 4-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue. • VAR-08-005 -Request for variance to UDC 11-2A-6, which requires building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from back of ribbon curb for 121ots. 1. SUNIlVIARY AND ANALYSIS OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Tuscany Development, Inc., has applied for a final plat modification to remove the 4-foot detached sidewalk along the south side of E. Deerhill Street, adjacent to Lots 54-66, Block 5, between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue for the Messina Meadows Subdivision. Concurrently, the applicant is requesting a variance to UDC 11-2A-6 to allow the street (front) setback to be measured from the back of ribbon curb, instead of from the sidewalk (which is proposed to be removed) or the property line. The Messina Meadows final plat was approved by City Council on February 7, 2006. The fmal plat consists of 310 residential lots and 49 common lots on 88acres of land; zoned R-8.The subject site is generally located approximately a half mile south of E. Victory Road, west of S. Eagle Road, and approximately a half mile north of E. Amity Road in Section 30, T. 3N., R.1 E.. The current builder/owner of the site owned all of the lots along Deerhill Drive and began designing and constructing homes on the lots. Construction of the homes began on the east side in Block 4 where the lot depths are 102 feet plus; thus the builder proceeded to design all of the homes to accommodate a102-foot lot depth. The depth of Lots 54-66, Block 5 (west of Montague Way) varies from 100 feet and tapers down to 97 feet at Montague Way. A lot depth of less than 102 feet makes it impossible to accommodate the builder's design without the removal of the sidewalk. If the final plat modification is approved, it would allow the builder to construct the homes as designed without having to spend additional time and money to redesign the plans. The Unified Development Code (UDC 11-3A-17D) requires sidewalks on both sides of the street unless the average width of the lots exceeds 150 feet. The lots proposed for modification do not meet this requirement (40 feet); however the future homes on the subject lots will have access to an existing common lot (open space) which includes a 4 foot sidewalk located at the rear of the subject lots. This pedestrian pathway on the back (south) side of Lots 54-66 is located approximately 100 feet south of the subject sidewalk proposed for removal. Along the north side of Deerhill Drive is a 6-foot wide detached sidewalk that provides pedestrian connectivity to additional amenities within the development. The applicant is also proposing to install highlighted crosswalk locations to help facilitate pedestrian movement across Deerhill which staff has illustrated in Exhibit A. Staff is supportive of the applicant's request and finds the removal of the 4-foot sidewalk would not diminish pedestrian connectivity within the development. Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 In addition to the removal of the sidewalk, the applicant is requesting a variance, if approved that would allow the street setback for the future homes to be measured from back of the ribbon curb instead of measured from back of sidewalk or property line as required by UDC 11-2A-6. Because the adjacent street section (see map attached as Exhibit A4), the property line is located along the front side of the sidewalk which still leaves the lots short of the 102 feet lot depth needed to accommodate the builder's home design. Thus, the request to measure the setback from the ribbon curb, not the property line. The requirement for the front setback being measured from the sidewalk or property line is to ensure that cars parked in front of garages are not blocking pedestrian facilities. In this case, if the sidewalk is removed pedestrians shouldn't be walking on the south side of the street. This area will instead be used for driveways, parking and drainage facilities. Because there is a pedestrian easement granted on the subject sidewalk and because the area is within ACRD right-of--way, if the subject request is approved by the City, the applicant should also coordinate with ACRD on approval of the sidewalk removal and the vacation of the underlying pedestrian easement, and approval to have driveways/parking within the right- of-way. Staff has received an informal e-mail from ACRD which outlines ACRD requirements and is attached in Exhibit B of the staff report. UDC 11-SB-4 states to grant a variance, the Council needs to make the following findings: • The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district; • The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; • The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. Staff finds that granting a variance would not allow a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties that are in an R-8 zoning district. The applicant would still be required to maintain a 20-foot setback that doesn't interfere with parking or pedestrian ways, and provide parking as required by city code. The applicant will also have to comply with ACHD's requirements for the removal of the sidewalk and parking plan. Because the 121ots taper from 100 feet to 97 feet and E. Deerhill is already constructed, it is difficult to modify the lot depths to accommodate the 102-foot depth required for the home design; therefore staff believes granting the variance would relieve an undue hardship. Staff also believes that granting the subject variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. In fact the applicant is proposing highlighted crosswalks to mitigate the concerns for pedestrian safety. Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of the Variance application (see Exhibit C for required variance findings). 2. SUNIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the applicant's final plat modification (1V)FP) request to remove the requirement for the 4-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5 and the variance (VAR) request from UDC 11-2A-6 for Messina Meadows Subdivision, as proposed by the applicant in Exhibit A and based on the Findings of Fact in Exhibit C of this staff report. ~ eridian City Counc°l heard here items nn .Tnly .2 anri Anmtct .6 ~nnQ At tha r»hlin Ams-.'.... council annroved the ubiect MFP and A7 reauest. ~. ummarv of City Co nc'1 ~bli . Ilear~nu~ ~. In favor: Trent Nieffene~~er al. In onnosition: None iii. Co men °n :None ay, Written tes 'mono: None y. tall nresen 'n~ ann ication: Anna .a nin ya. ther staff commen 'n on ann i ation• Non 12, ev Issues of Discussion by o roc'l: Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TILE HEARING D• OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing) Approval After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers VAR- 08-005 and MFP-08-005, as presented during the hearing date of August 26, 2008 and direct Planning Staff to prepare findings for approval based on tonight's hearing, with the specific following changes: (State any changes.) The applicant must also obtain ACHD approval for the proposed sidewalk removal. Denial After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers VAR-08- 005 and MFP-08-005, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 and direct Legal Staff to prepare the appropriate findings document for denial. Continuance After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers VAR- 08-005 and MFP-OS-005, to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 4. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing homes and vacant land b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: A mix of single family residential and vacant land, much of which has been approved for residential developments. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Messina Hills Subdivision; zoned R-4. 2. East: Kingsbridge Subdivision; zoned R-2. 3. South: Future Messina Meadow No.2 and No. 3; zoned R-8. 4. West: Future Phases for Bellingham Park Subdivision; zoned R-8. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a variance as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5, Article A (Table 11-SA- 2), apublic hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a final plat modification as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5, Article A (Table 11-SA-2), a public meeting is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: June 30, 2008 and July 14, 2008 d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 27, 2008 Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 e. Applicant posted notice on site by: August 15, 2008 6. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Final Plat Map (referencing the lots subject to the modification) 3. Map illustrating proposed changes 4. Street Section Map illustrating ACRD Right-of--Way 5. Applicant's Letter B. Agency/Department Comments 1. Ada County Highway District C. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code (Variance) Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map VICINITY MAP LYING IN TFIE SE 1 /4 OF SECTION 29 T, 3 N., R, 1 E, B.M. MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO B Exhibit A - I - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Final Plat Map (referencing the lots subject to the modification) ~I ~ ~ ~ ~~ i~ I ~ ~ i~ i .r O Q ~~ ~ ~ N a ~ ~ qqQ W" t~l1 .~ ~_ ~ 6 ~~ +~.~ r.r d~ a ~~~, ~. ~ 8 ~~s~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ s ~ ~~~~~~~ i 0 g • . ®' I I~ i I _ - '~ e e '~ ~ ~ I ~ ~' ~~~ i ~~~ . ~ - - ~ I ~_ ~ - I '~$ ,, ~ _ ~I i ~. I ° ° e- ~ i ~~ ~ a a,:~ + ,i.....,. 9- .. ~ I I a ; ~^ 0. I @ • s • 0007777 o • . • ~' ~' rat i I i 7 + • . 9 • Y , g ! . •R67f yy I _ ~ - -_ _- _~ g_ ~ • ~ , B ~ i' I ' i ~ . I I s~ : e r ~a .o'•~ I ~ _ JJ ~ I i Q: r r I a I ' 1 r r •~ . • - e. i ' ~I 9 "! Q i ~ . _g ~ ~ l- ~ ~~ $• I .4 i 8~ I ~" a t ~~ _ _s _ .g ai . `8~ t r I ~•-• i ~ j _ ~ ~~~~ .slits pmno~ei + ~~ I ~ i° _ ' ~ r--- . I ~ ~~ ~ • 1 I Yp~' ':aReci 8F . $s ~ ' °~ ~ ~ ~ !'1 ' _.______ rsn I ~e~; 7 ~~A ~~ el~ ~~ ~ pp s I y~y Y ~~ Exhibit A _ 2 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Map showing proposed changes veld ~~ 1~-1~ ~P~ ~ ears-s ` ~i ~ MATCHLINE ' W l6N ! ~~ SHEET Lt 1 r:3. a• _, .. , a .,. . . _ ,; a m. ~ -- - -- - --f . , . •. ,C -mss S k # F ? ~ + ~y ® A r S B 6 ' e t i i W. .,jg.. ~ l~.1 ~, I $ A ` n 1 .~ 1 f t ~ ?~' ~ 0 1 - ' 0 Q C C ~ n s ~~.~ ~ y 4-foot detached sidewalks ' ~ ~ ~ 9r~~ , ~A ~ A i~~' ~-, ~.~ ~ ~ proposed to be removed .Ra~. - }~ '~=~ 1 =>$ .., ~ L~ '' n I 0 1 I .t~~ R ,p;, ati 1~ 1 a. (~ I ~ i_i~ Y I 1 ~ 1 "y n ~ r _.~ 1 .. R 1 7 L j 1 a 't 1 6. 0 - B t ~ 1 SSA y Z ®~. _ R ' e §P. ~ I C „ ' ~ 1 i r 4 v ` 'j :4 . • r . Existing 4-foot sidewalk in rear ~° ; Crosswalk markings to facilitate of the lots ,~ ~ pedestrian traffic ~ -'e , ~{(( 1 ..,eq i r 1 1 - 14~' E A.r 3 '~ 4 Aryl ~ {( S P I ~ ~ 1 1 4 ~ @I. Y. ~, _ . y I d - ~ ~ 7 ~~ I ~ } • .2 ~ ~' } ~ i 1 ~l ~~~• ~~ . ,e': 1 . P t. yll A .2.1 t q,~ i n ~ ~,,~ ..J~ I' .i -, ~ r•.~b 'i ~w ~ ..56 . t.l~. `.j 1 e' ` f_`r'~'.~y . : ~ I f ~ 1 r b ~ « I ! I ~e 8 !g 6 ~ - ~ a ~ 1` ~ - - - -- ~a ~ II ~-~ = a i D a tl n m I ~ 8 ~l .` i~ ` ~~- t - Exhibit A _ 3 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Street Section Map illustrating ACRD Right-of--Way ----~--- ~c~ } ~~~ !~~ (~ .. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .k ~ .. ~ ~ ' ~ ~~ ~._ _~_~~ ;~i d ~ ,~ ~ - ;, ~` ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ .~ ~~ _ ~ ~~ °~ ~ --_ ~ ' _ ~~ ~ i ~ ~'t ~ ~ ; ~~ ~~ ~.,' ~ '{ r h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ t a ~ d i is ~ :; ~~ ~; ~, ~~~~ , ~. .~ ~ ~a ~ ~; ~~ ;'y ~~ ' ' ~ ~~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ f ~ ~~~ .~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ,..~~ ~ ~1~ ~~ ~ i ~`~w~ -~ ~ ;: :~ ~ ~ ~ , ~, ~ -~~ -~. . ~s ~ ,~ ~. pp ~ ~ ~ i ~ vs +~'" 7~ + ~~+~ r ~ ~~ t r 5 .. «.. ~ ~ "~ ~ ,.. __ ~ a ~k Exhibit A _ 4 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Applicant's Letter The Rent To Meridian Planning and Zoning Department: Inc. Tuscany Development Inc. (Tuscany) is proposing the removal of the sidewalk within the Messina Meadows subdivision and on the south side of Deerhill Stmt between Montague Way and Genoard Ave through a final plat modification More specifically for lots 54-66 of block 5, which are alley loaded garage lots. Tuscany sold all of the alley loaded lots on Deerhill StreEt to one builder. The builder started to build on the east side in block 4 where the lots have a depth of 102'. The builder grocceded to design aU of the houses to fit on the 102' depth. The lots in block 5 taper from 100.22' to 97.20' in depth and will not accommodate the builder's design. The purpose of this modification is to request for removal, the sidewalk on Deerhill Street. This is to allow the cars to park on the driveway and not pose a problem for pedestrians using the existing sidewalk. As part of this proposal the houses will need to have a setback of twenty (20') feet from the back of the n'bbon curb versus from the front of sidewalk. Currently there is a sidewalk that can take the place of the one that is desired for removal in the common area on the front of each lot and adjacent to the common area. Included is a landscape plan showing this alternative sidewalk in orange. Also shown on the landscape plan are strategic crosswalks that Tuscany is willing to install to allow for a continued flow of pedestrian traffic. Tuscany feels this is a good solution to a problem that was unforeseen by the customer who bought the lots. This solution will prevent the builder fiom spending large sums of money to redraw the plans and continue towards generating a profit on these houses. Please feel free to ca11 me if there is a need for further clarification or resolve on behalf of Tuscany Development Inc. 1 b ~ Trent Nieffenegger The Vdestpark Company President 208.870.1843 66o E Franklin Rd #240, PO Box 344, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Exhibit A _ 5 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Agency/Department Conditions 1. Ada County Highway District Page I Qf 2 Bip Persons From: Anna Calming Sent: Thursday. June 28, 2008 g:00 AM To; BiU Parsor~; C. Caleb Hood Salsject: FVV: Messina Meadows Skiewalk an Desrhip Dr. Attachments: M~stna Meadows1.pdt; Messina Mesdows1cpdf, Messina Meadowsl b.pdfi C'~.y of Meridian Plormtng Department (aoa] esa-9s33 phone (2os] ~s~as4 facstrnUe From: !'grin Carroll [maNto:dcarroH@achd.ada.id.us] Seam Thursday, May Ol, 2008 5:52 PM Tot Trent Nor C~ Anna Canrtirtg; C. Caleb flood Subyecn Messina Meadows Skiewatk on Deerh~l Dr. Hi Trent, AGHD has evaluated the request to remove the existing concrete sidewalk along DeerhiA Dr. in Messina Meadows 1. it is our understanding there was an error in the final plat because Deerhill shifts south making the lots on the west end of the phase 5-feet shorter than those at the east. end (from 102.17 feet to 97.2-feet). A single builder has purchased ap d1e lots frontng Deerhil! Or. between C;enaard Dr. and S. Cubola Ln. and the shorter tots da not fit their house plan sized for a full 102-feet given the 20-foot setback required by City of Meridian. 1-Would the City consider relaxing the setback requirement to RjW line or back of curb to retain the existing sidewalk? Our preference is to on{y remove the sidewalk if it absolutely has to be done, subject to the conditions below. 2-if not, we need some more help justifying the removal of ~e new sidewalk. Would the City of Meridian send ACRD a letter recommending removal of the walk? If the City of Meridian will ortiy allow the setback with sidewalk removal, we have a few other items to dean up. a. Would need to vacate the ~dewalk easement fronting the lots. b. ACRD would require a min. 2-foot ribtron curb ar a 2-foot portion of the sidewalk remain to act as the ribbon curb at the bads side of Swale to delineate the drainage Swale. c. Would need new ped ramps to cross the public streets at sidewalk termini. 1 understand Anna is out thts week and I will be out next week. I took a gins at Anna's emaN address and hope h is right. if not, maybe Caleb can help out. 1Da:rla Carroll ACND ~vebpment Revxsnr Supervisor 3775 Adanre St-tia[den Cyr, fD ~i714 off: (2d8) 387-8183 aeQ (?Sf8) 860.6831 fax: (~ 387.63ai ~~roil~a_G1~r~ d~a.fci.~s 6/26/2008 Exhibit B _ I _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C: Required Findings from the Unified Development Code (Variance) The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-SB-4.E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The City Council finds that granting a variance would not allow a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties that are in an R-8 zoning district. The applicant is required to maintain a 20-foot setback that doesn't interfere with parking or pedestrian ways, and provide parking as required by city code. Further, the applicant will have to comply with ACRD requirements for removing the sidewalk. B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Because the 12 lots taper from 100 feet to 97 feet and E. Deerhill is akeady constructed and the final plat recorded, it is difficult to modify the lot depths to accommodate the 102-foot depth required for the home design; therefore the City Council finds granting the variance would relieve an undue hardship. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The City Council finds that granting the subject variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. In fact the applicant is proposing highlighted crosswalks to help mitigate the concerns for pedestrian safety. Exhibit C _ I _ • • September 5, 2008 MFP 08-005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Tuscany Development, IC. ITEM NO. 5-B REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request to Modify the prevsiouly approved Final Plat by removing the requirement for a 5-ff detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5 for Messina Meadows -west of south Eagle Road and south of East Victory Road AGENCY CQMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Findings Contacted: m~ Date: ~'~ ~ ~ Phone: r r~~ ~~P(~~~ ~ Emailed: Staff Initials: T(1 Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the CHy of Meddfan. • CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Final Plat Modification to the previously approved final plat for Messina Meadows (FP-05-07~ by removing the requirement fora 4-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue and Variance to UDC 11-2A-6, which requires building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from back of ribbon curb for 121ots for Messina Meadows, by Tuscany Development Inc. Case No(s). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 For the City Council Hearing Date of: July 22 and August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing a-' ?008 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts ~ of August 26, 2008 incorporated by referee 4. Required Findings per the Unifies rt for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 u B. Conclusions of Law ~` . 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise t std Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Cl /~ ). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judic ~C. ~ _ codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code . _~,~eieoi.-The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established ~.-~t~ Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Mere, _~~, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 -I- u • 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request for a Variance is hereby approved. D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 -2- u • By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ! ~ day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA C E COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) Attest: Jaycee Hcbllnan, City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. VOTED_ ~~-- VOTED VOTED__ ~~ VOTED ~' `\`~1(~oy~un~~a-~?ylY Weerd \~ .' ~rF , / = ° '_ SEAL .,~~ ~ `0 `~~. The Pl ~~g ,epient, Public Works Department and City By: Dated: 9 ' ~~~ ~~ City Cler s Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 -3- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D• OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: August 26, 2008 (Continued from July 22, 2008) ~. E IDIAN^ TO: Mayor and City Council B FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner 884-5533 SUBJECT: Messina Meadows • MFP-08-005 -Request to modify the previously approved final plat for Messina Meadows (FP-OS-076) by removing the requirement fora 4-foot detached sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, on the south side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue. • VAR-08-005 -Request for variance to UDC 11-2A-6, which requires building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line; applicant requests to measure street setback from back of ribbon curb for 121ots. 1. SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Tuscany Development, Inc., has applied for a final plat modification to remove the 4-foot detached sidewalk along the south side of E. Deerhill Street, adjacent to Lots 54-66, Block 5, between Montague Way and Genoard Avenue for the Messina Meadows Subdivision. Concurrently, the applicant is requesting a variance to UDC 11-2A-6 to allow the street (front) setback to be measured from the back of ribbon curb, instead of from the sidewalk (which is proposed to be removed) or the property line. The Messina Meadows final plat was approved by City Council on February 7, 2006. The final plat consists of 310 residential lots and 49 common lots on 88acres of land; zoned R-8.The subject site is generally located approximately a half mile south of E. Victory Road, west of S. Eagle Road, and approximately a half mile north of E. Amity Road in Section 30, T. 3N., R.1 E.. The current builder/owner of the site owned all of the lots along Deerhill Drive and began designing and constructing homes on the lots. Construction of the homes began on the east side in Block 4 where the lot depths are 102 feet plus; thus the builder proceeded to design all of the homes to accommodate x102-foot lot depth. The depth of Lots 54-66, Block 5 (west of Montague Way) varies from 100 feet and tapers down to 97 feet at Montague Way. A lot depth of less than 102 feet makes it impossible to accommodate the builder's design without the removal of the sidewalk. If the final plat modification is approved, it would allow the builder to construct the homes as designed without having to spend additional time and money to redesign the plans. The Unified Development Code (iJDC 11-3A-17D) requires sidewalks on both sides of the street unless the average width of the lots exceeds 150 feet. The lots proposed for modification do not meet this requirement (40 feet); however the future homes on the subject lots will have access to an existing common lot (open space) which includes a 4 foot sidewalk located at the rear of the subject lots. This pedestrian pathway on the back (south) side of Lots 54-66 is located approximately 100 feet south of the subject sidewalk proposed for removal. Along the north side. of Deerhill Drive is a 6-foot wide detached sidewalk that provides pedestrian connectivity to additional amenities within the development. The applicant is also proposing to install highlighted crosswalk locations to help facilitate pedestrian movement across Deerhill which. staff has illustrated in Exhibit A. Staff is supportive of the applicant's request and fords the removal of the 4-foot sidewalk would not diminish pedestrian connectivity within the development. Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 In addition to the removal of the sidewalk, the applicant is requesting a variance, if approved that would allow the street setback for the future homes to be measured from back of the ribbon curb instead of measured from back of sidewalk or property line as required by UDC 11-2A-6. Because the adjacent street section (see map attached as Exhibit A4), the property line is located along the front side of the sidewalk which still leaves the lots short of the 102 feet lot depth needed to accommodate the builder's home design. Thus, the request to measure the setback from the ribbon curb, not the property line. The requirement for the front setback being measured from the sidewalk or property line is to ensure that cazs pazked in front of garages aze not blocking pedestrian facilities. In this case, if the sidewalk is removed pedestrians shouldn't be walking on the south side of the street. This area will instead be used for driveways, parking and drainage facilities. Because there is a pedestrian easement granted on the subject sidewalk and because the azea is within ACRD right-of--way, if the subject request is approved by the City, the applicant should also coordinate with ACRD on approval of the sidewalk removal and the vacation of the underlying pedestrian easement, and approval to have driveways/pazking within the right- of-way. Staff has received an informal a-mail from ACRD which outlines ACRD requirements and is attached in Exhibit B of the staff report. UDC 11-SB-4 states to grant a variance, the Council needs to make the following findings: • The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district; • The variance relieves an undue hazdship because of chazacteristics of the site; • The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfaze. Staff finds that granting a variance would not allow a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties that are in an R-8 zoning district. The applicant would still be required to maintain a 20-foot setback that doesn't interfere with pazking or pedestrian ways, and provide pazking as required by city code. The applicant will also have to comply with ACHD's requirements for the removal of the sidewalk and pazking plan. Because the 121ots taper from 100 feet to 97 feet and E. Deerhill is already constructed, it is difficult to modify the lot depths to accommodate the 102-foot depth required for the home design; therefore staff believes granting the variance would relieve an undue hardship. Staff also believes that granting the subject variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfaze. In fact the applicant is proposing highlighted crosswalks to mitigate the concerns for pedestrian safety. Therefore, Staff is recommending approval of the Variance application (see Exhibit C for required variance findings). 2. SUIVIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the applicant's final plat modification (MFP) request to remove the requirement for the 4foot detached sidewalk along Lots 5466, Block 5 and the variance (VAR) request from UDC 11-2A-6 for Messina Meadows Subdivision, as proposed by the applicant in Exhibit A and based on the Findings of Fact in Exhibit C of this staff report. Thy eridian City Co nc'1 heard these itemc nn Jnly 22 and Anm~ct 26.2(IOR_ At_ t_h_e_ n_n_h_lic_ hear:nsr the ouncil annroved the subiect MFP and 7, reaue t ,~ u marv of itv ounc'1 Public Hea 'n : ~. In favor: Trent Nieffene er iL In onnosition: None lii. Commentin~• None aY. Written testimony: None Y. tall nresen 'n~ ann ication: nna a nin yi. Other staff Comm n 'n~ on anu ication: None 1L ev Issues of Discussion by Counci: Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing) Approval After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers VAR- 08-005 and MFP-08-005, as presented during the hearing date of August 26, 2008 and direct Planning Staff to prepare findings for approval based on tonight's hearing, with the specific following changes: (State any changes.) The applicant must also obtain ACRD approval for the proposed sidewalk removal. Denial After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers VAR-08- 005 and MFP-08-005, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 and direct Legal Staff to prepare the appropriate fmdings document for denial. Continuance After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers VAR- 08-005 and MFP-08-005, to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 4. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing homes and vacant land b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: A mix of single family residential and vacant land, much of which has been approved for residential developments. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Messina Hills Subdivision; zoned R-4. 2. East: Kingsbridge Subdivision; zoned R-2. 3. South: Future Messina Meadow No.2 and No. 3; zoned R-8. 4. West: Future Phases for Bellingham Park Subdivision; zoned R-8. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a variance as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5, Article A (Table 11-SA- 2), apublic hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a final plat modification as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5, Article A (Table 11-SA-2), a public meeting is required before the pity Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: June 30, 2008 and July 14, 2008 d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 27, 2008 Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DA'L'E OF AUGUST 26, 2008 e. Applicant posted notice on site by: August 15, 2008 6. EXH~ITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Final Plat Map (referencing the lots subject to the modification) 3. Map illustrating proposed changes 4. Street Section Map illustrating ACHD Right-of--Way 5. Applicant's Letter B. Agency/Department Comments 1. Ada County Highway District C. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code (Variance) Messina Meadows Subdivision MFP-08-005 and VAR-08-005 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map VICINITY MAP LYING IN THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 29 T. 3 N., R. 1 E, B.M. MERIDUdd, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO Exhibit A _ I _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Final Plat Map (referencing the lots subject to the modification) m ~i p z o ~¢ bN ~m ~~ ~"- ~ a ~ e~b~~~ ~ i~ J ~,. ~ ! ~q r-~ ~~uvu imam. ~ ~~- ~ ~ a ~~~g~~~ a$~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~; ~~&~~~~ ~~.a®~' I ;I ~~ I a~,~ '~ e t a 9~9 ~ ~~ '~~ I d ~. ~ r, II. ' ~~I yppa N_ ~ ~~ i 1 i ~ a ~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~i ~ ~~ ' ~- I ° ` '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ 9g~ap ~ e • N ~~ a ° ~~ ~ ' i ~ ~ 0 s N N ~ a & ~ ' 1., r i .,¢~s r i~+ 9 ~. 8- I i ., _~~_ - - -- •~' - - ' I - r ,~ ~ N N a . ,. . ®~. ~ , _ ~ , i i ~ ~ a~~~ • N • 0' 7 0Q I N, N -~ .a N N , i - ' ~~ °~ ° ~4 ~~ I ' ~ j-- '9 ~ o ~ e~ • i i - - g - - - ~ - - , I X91 - - .! of A~ i I _ _ ~. pQ ~ 1 N ~~ ~ 4gg73 $ ~ ~! i 3 i L~ fi B.9 ' I ~ ' _ ~ _ _ _ ~ ~~~ ~~~ i ~ ~~~ - i ° e'a ~'~ ~ ''~a ~ ~' ~7 ~ ~:~ Exhibit A _ 2 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Map showing proposed changes Exhibit A -3- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Street Section Map illustrating ACRD Right-of--Way F _ ~~ - - -- --- -- - bc~ , ~ ;* cyf~y i~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ p s. o J .~ ' ~~ ~ ~`` ~ ~~ Est ~~~ ~ ~~ w~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ _ ,~~ "- i 1 11 ~ 4'' _ ! z y~y ~~ ~ ~~ ; ~ ~ €~ I --- ~ ----, -~---- '~ ~ ~ ~ ot~ ~~zz ~, f 1 '~ v'~ w v5 t t ~ ~ w -.. ,% ~ ;~+ i i ~~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ±. ~ti~ ~N ~ ~~ `~~i ~ ' ~ 1~ ak ,, { .,~ ~ `~ - ~ ~3 ~ ~: Id $B 3.8t w "' w " 3 1 ~ 1 p_ , * ..~ Exhibit A - 4 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Applicant's Letter The Westpark Company, Inc. Real Estate Development To Meridian Planning and Zoning Department: Tuscany Development Inc. (Tuscany) is proposing the removal of the sidewalk within the Messina Meadows subdivision and on the south side of Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genaard Ave through a final plat modification. More specifically for lots 5466 of block 5, which are alley loaded garage lots. Tuscany sold all of the alley loaded lots on Deerhill Street to one builder. The builder started to build on the east side in block 4 where the lots have a depth of 102'. The builder proceed to design all of the houses to fit on the 102' depth. The lots in block 5 tape from 100.22' to 97.20' in depth and will not accommodate the builder's design. The purpose of this modification is to request for removal, the sidewalk on Deerhill Street. This is to allow the cars to park on the driveway and not pose a problem for pedestrians using the existing sidewalk. As part of this proposal the houses will need to have a setback of twenty (20') feet from the back of the ribbon curb versus from the front of sidewalk. Currently there is a sidewalk that can take the place of the one that is desired for removal in the common area on the front of each lot and adjacent to the common area. Included is a landscape plan showing this alternative sidewalk in orange. Also shown on the landscape plan are strategic crosswalks that Tuscany is willing to install to allow for a continued flow of pedestrian traffic. Tuscany feels this is a good solution to a problem that was unforeseen by the customer who bought the lots. This sohttion will prevent the builder from spending large sums of money to redraw the plans and oontinue towards generating a profit on these houses. Please feel fi~ee to caall me if there is a need for further clarification or resolve on behalf of'Il~scany Development Inc. i e ' .~~' Treat Nieffenegger The Westpark Company Presidem 208.870.1843 660 E Franklin Rd #240, PO Boa 344, Meridian, Idaho 83680 Exhibit A _ g _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNiT IG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Agency/Department Coni litions 1. Ada County Highwa y District Page 1 of 2 8iq PI~rSans From: Arena t ;anntrtg Sent: Thin qy, June 26, 2008 9:00 AM To: ~N Pei sons; C. Caleb Hood Snbjee~ FW: M asslna Meadows SidawaAc on Deeridll Dr. Attachments: Messir a Meadowsl.pdf; Messina Meadows1 c pdf, Mina Meadows9 b.prdfi GB.y of Meridian Plannfi tg Department (208) 884-8933 phone (2a B) 8BB-8894 foaim8e From: Darrlni Carroll [m f8to:dcarradi@achd.ada.id.~] Senn Thursday, Mayo], 2008 5:52 !=hl To: Thant N~Ffenegger G~ Anna Canning; C G deb tf~d Subjlec~ Me~ina Mead 6ws Skiewalk an Deerhill Dr. Hi Trent, ACHD has evaluated the request to remove the ex(stirrg concrete sidewalk along DeerhfU Dr. in Messina Meadows 1. it is our un derstanding there was an error fn the final plat bepuse Oeerhill shifts south making the lots on the west end of ~ he phase 5-feet shorter than those at the east end (from 102.17-feet to 97.2-feet). A angle builder has purch~ ~d ati the lots fronting OeerhiR Or. between C~noard Or. and S. Cubala ln. and the shorter tots do not ht th eir house plan sized for a full 102-feet given the 20-foot setback required by City of Meridian. 1-Would the City consid~ er relaxing the setback requirement to R/W Nne or back of curb to retain the existlng sidewalk? Our preferen:e is to anty remove the sidewalk if it absolutely has to be done, subject to the conditions below. 2-if not, we need some i ttore help justtfyfng the removal of the new sidewalk. Would the City of Meridian send ACHO a letter recommei tding removal of the walk? If the City of Meridian will only allow the setback with sidewalk removal, we ha ive a few other items to clean up. a. Would need to vac ate the sidewalk easement fronting the lots. b. ACRD would requH e a min. 2-foot ribbon curb or a 2-foot portion of the sidewalk remain to act as the ribbon curb at the I tack side of Swale to delineate the drainage Swale. c Would need new p jed ramps to cross the public streets at sidewalk termiM. i understand Anna is oui this week and i w8i be out next week. I tonic a guess at Anna's ema0 address and hope it is right. if not, maybe Caleb can help out. na:nn ca:rou acrtt~ ~vetopmert Rev~r s ppervtsor 3779 Adema St-Ciatden City,111&9714 afiiae: (2tr~ 387-818.9 oeA: tai i1 faz: (~ 387-8393 dcarroii~5i ~a,idu~ 6/26!2008 Exhibit B _ 1 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIP fG DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C: Required Findings fr om the Unified Development Code (Variance) The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-SB-4.E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Cow icil shall make the following findings: A. The variant a shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The City Coy mcil finds that granting a variance would not allow a right or special privilege than is not otherwise allowed for properties that are in an R-8 zoning district. The applican t is required to maintain a 20-foot setback that doesn't interfere with parking or pedestrian ways, and provide parking as required by city code. Further, the applicant will have to comply with ACRD requirements for removing the sidewalk. B. The variant a relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Because the L2 lots taper from 100 feet to 97 feet and E. Deerhill is akeady constructed and the final plat recorded, it is difficult to modify the lot depths to accommodate the 102-foot depth required for the home design; therefore the City Council finds granting the variance ~ ~vould relieve an undue hardship. C. The variant ~ shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. The City Council finds that granting the subject variance would not be detrimental to the public health safety, or welfare. In fact the applicant is proposing highlighted crosswalks to help mitig~ ate the concerns for pedestrian safety. Exhibit C • • September 5, 2008 AZ Og-~7 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT LDR-it/DMG, LLC ITEM NO. 5-C REQUEST Findings for ~'-pproval -Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT to C-C coning district for Shops at Victory - 3210 South Eagle.Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT; ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DIS'~RICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS lRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: us WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See atMched Findings OTHER: Contacted: ~ Date: ~~' ~„~ Phone: Emailed: f ~°; Initials: ~, Materials press anted at public meetin shall become property of the city of Meridian. • CITY OF M ERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT,, CONCLUSIONS OF LAVE ~ AND DECISION ~~ ORDER CJ E IDIAN7f ~Ai~~ In the Matter of the Requ~;st for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat for 3 Commercial Building Lots on 3.68 Acri ~s; Conditional Use Permit for aDrive-Through Pharmacy in a proposed C-C Zoning District within 300 Feet of an Existing Residence; and Alternative Compliance is Requested i or a Reduced Buffer Width in Certain Areas Adjacent to the Existing Residential Use a] gong the Southern Property Boundary, by LDR-II/DMG, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-08-007; Pl'-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see a~ tached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by refer ~ence) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by refer ~ence) 3. Application and Prol ~erty Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporatf .d by reference) 4. Required Findings pE x the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Augu st 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chap 2. The Meridian City G ~uncil takes judicial ; codified at Title 11 ~ [eridian City Code, aL Meridian has, by ordi nance, established the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 02-3E2 and Maps. Jse CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAVA CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006 CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -i- ~~~ Q., ~J C 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration h as been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upo n the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has gr~ anted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by th a Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Ply inning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Conditions of Apprc val in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008,incorporated b ~ reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City G~uncil's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above aid foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's A~ mexation and Zoning request as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated March 17, 2008 by Aaron Ballard, PLS, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. A Development agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application. and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date; of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. 3. The applicant's P~ •eliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated 4/24/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 4. The applicant's Conditional Use Permit as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, dated 4/24/08, is h~;reby conditionally approved; 5. The applicant's rec nest for Alternative Compliance is hereby approved; and, 6. The site specific at ~d standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS O] ~ FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASENO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -2- ! • D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Preliminary P lat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat ,hall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat ol~ one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that th a development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and r easonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, s zch segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, may ~e considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat aI ~proval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B-7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be gr anted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary ply t, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisi~ ins of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant d oes not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the plattin, ~ procedure again. Notice of Eighteen (1 F) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice :hat the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, tl le applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of apprc oval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in he ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, th~~ eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the deve .opment is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phase~- shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year from the original d; cte of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one (1) year interv~~l, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void: Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-SB-6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence :he use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission may b e granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City.Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is he reby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use p ermit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-O8-012 -3- l_ J Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) ~ lays after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review m ay be filed. 2. Please take noticE that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 1 iroperty which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and o rder seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Repor t for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; i ~ B ction of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the C~~~ day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED~o~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_ I~ Q~_~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__~~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) /~ Mayor Tammy Weerd Attest: `~,~`'~~~`~ Of ~~i©/q ~`'~.', Jaycee loran, City Clerk = ~'~~' - "s 7 ~' Copy served upon Applicant The Pi'~``~ublic Works Department and City ~~~~~rrrrrrn n~~~~~`~, Attorney. By: ~~~~ Dahl: ~I ' ~ ~ - (~ City Clerk Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-OS-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-OS-012 -5- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearn ig Date: August 26, 2008 ~ '~T TO: Mayo ~ & City Council E IDIL71 ~I ~~'' FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner ~ ~` l=y ~_~ ~"~ 208-8 34-5533 SUBJECT: Shops at Victory • A 7-08-007 A mexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada. County) to C-C (C'ommunity Business District) • P]'-08-006 Pi eliminary Plat for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres • CiJP-08-011 G mditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zc Wing district within 300 feet of an existing residence • A;.T-08-012 A ternative Compliance is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain ar gas adjacent to the existing residential use along the southern property be undary 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPT [ON OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, LDR-lI/Dl~ [G, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) approval of 4.79 acres of land from the RU' C zoning district in Ada County to the C-C (Community Business District) zoning district. Preliminai y Plat (PP) approval is also requested for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land. Altern<tive Compliance (ALT) is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the resid~:ntial use along the southern property boundary. Lastly, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is requeste i for approval of adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet i-f an existing residence. See Section 10 of the staff report for more information. The proposed developme~ ~t is planned to include neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drug store, complimentar3 retail shops, services, office, and restaurant components. The final mix of these uses will be deper dant on market conditions at the time of development. The site is located at 3210 S. Eagle Road on the southeast comer of E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home with a pasture on this site. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area and is contiguous to the current City limits. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (~ ~Z, PP, ALT, and CUP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Alternative Compliance applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (AZ-08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with the Development Agreement provisions listed in Sectia n 10, and the conditions listed in Ezhibit B of the Staff Report. Note.• Per UDC Il-SA-2, Alternative Compliance applications are approved at administrative level by the Planning DirectoY However, because ALT is requested concurrently with the AZ, PP, and CUP, Staff Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPNT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 has included analysis on the ALT request in this staff report; the ALT application does not require Commission/Council attic n. The Meridian Plamiing 1 ~ Zoning Commission heard these items on June 19 and July 17 2008 At the public hearing on July 17, 2008 they moved to recommend approval of the subiect 7,_ PP. and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara, Thompson; Bob Aldridge; Bob Carpenter; Greg Owens ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting• Nolae iv. Written testimon y: Charles Axelrod v. Staff presenting a Gpplication: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff coma Denting on application: Scott Steckline; Caleb Hood b. Kev Issue(s) of Discu Fsion by Commission: i. Eligibility of this bite for a reimbursement agreement with-the City for a mainline extension to the s. ite: ii. The extent of the verb-crete wall fencing along the south property boundary; iii. The number, tvpi: (right-in/right-out, full access), and location of access points to the site from Eagle & Victory Roads; and iv. The proximity of the southern access point for the site to/from Eagle Road in relation to E. Falcon Drive. c. Kev Commission Cha ~nge(sl to Staff Recommendation: i. Modify DA provi~ Rion #g, page 10, to restrict access to/from the site to one full-access point to Eagle Ro ~d, located as far north as possible in compliance with ACHD distance requirements for pntersections. Allow both access points to/from Victory Road, as proposed by the applicant. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Access points to/f rom the site Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP• 08-011, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 with the following m odifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff `, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Plumbers AZ-08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing ~ fate here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND Pl ~OPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/I,ocation The site is located on t he southeast corner of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road, in Section 32, Township 3 North, Ra age 1 East. b. Owner(s): Axelrod Living Trust, Charles Axelrod 211 S. Spalding Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 c. Applicant: LDR-II/DMG, LLC 350 N. 9~', Ste. 201 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Tamara Thompson, La ndmark Development Group 2462 Sunshine Drive Boise, ID 83712 e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada. County) Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Community g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for: Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres; Alternative Compliance of a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to an existing residence; and a Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy within 300 feet of an existing residence. The proposed development is planned and designed to include neighborhood commercial retail uses. 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 3. Date of Conceptual Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: "The site is in the City of Meridian's impact area and its Comprehensive plan designation is Mixed Use -Community. Our proposed zoning and development comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is intended to fill a need for neighborhood services on the southern boundary of the City. Due to its proximity in the surrounding trade area, the proposed project will reduce trips out of the area for daily consumer needs and services." See applicant's naYYative submitted with application foY mote information. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use permit as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. d. Newspaper notifications published on: June 2, and 16, 2008 (Commission); August 4, and 18, 2008 (City Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 23, 2008 (Commission); August 1, 2008 (City Council) f. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 4, 2008 (Commission); August 12, 2008 (Gifu Councill 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): There is currently asingle-family residence, associated outbuildings, and a pasture on this property. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property is currently surrounded by rural residential properties. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family home on a large rural parcel, zoned RUT (Ada County) 2. East: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-4 [The R-4 zoned property has received preliminary plat (Harcourt Subdivision) approval foY 60 single- Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 family residential building lots on 22 acres.] 3. South: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-8 4. West: Single-family homes, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: • In 2005, the South Eagle Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-OS-001) application approved a change to the future land use map for this property from "Low Density Residential" to "Mixed Use -Community." e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: This property will sewer to an existing manhole located approximately 760 feet east of the intersection of S Eagle Road and E Victory Road. The manhole is located in E Victory Road. Location of water: E Victory Road and S Eagle Road. Issues or concerns: a.) Providing services to 3250 E Victory Road. 2. CanalslDitches Irrigation: NA 3. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 4. Proposed Zoning: C-C (Community Business District) 5. Size of Property: 4.79 acres (3.68 acres included in the preliminary plat) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 0 2. Non-residential Lots: 3 3. Total Building Lots: 3 4. Common Lots: 0 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 3 7. Gross Density: NA 8. Minimum House Size: NA g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet adjacent to S. Eagle Road, a principal arterial street; and 25 feet adjacent to E. Victory Road, a minor arterial street 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: 25 feet (Applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas.) 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Tree Preservation: Mitigation is required for all existing healthy trees 4-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement. The application states that there are S existing trees of value Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 totaling 54 caliper inches on the site. Fifty four caliper inches are planned for mitigation onsite along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35' required by the UDC. The result is 27 mitigated trees at 2"caliper = 54 caliper inches. h. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires one off-street vehicle parking space for every 500 square feet of gross floor area in commercial districts. The total building square footage depicted on the site plan is 29,910. Based on this amount, 60 parking stalls would be required; 133 are proposed, which complies with this requirement. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all three parcels. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. See Analysis, Section 10, below for Staff's analysis of the proposed access to the site. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On May 30, 2008 a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. These agencies submitted comments on this application, which are included in Exhibit B of this report. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This site is designated as "Mixed Use -Community" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Per Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, the Mixed Use land use category contains five sub- categories. "Generally, the mixed-use designation will provide for a combination of compatible land uses that are typically developed under a master or conceptual site plan. The purpose of this designation is to identify key areas which are either inf~ll in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning areas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The intent of this designation is to offer the developer a greater degree of design and use flexibility." The following standards apply to the MU-C category: 1) Up to 25 acres may be non-residential uses; 2) Up to 200,000 square feet ofnon-residential building area is allowed; and 3) Residential densities of 3 to 8 units/acre. Staff finds that the development request generally conforms to the stated purpose, intent, and standards of the MU-C land use category within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Beyond what has been discussed above, the following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): • Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: - Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (11IPD). - The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACIID). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District No. 2. This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a commercial zoning district. In the proposed C-C district, a 25 foot wide buffer is required to be constructed adjacent to residential uses, per ZIDC Table I1-2B-3 to protect residential properties from the impacts of commercial development. 7'he applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas with this application. As an alternative means of meeting the intent of the ordinance, the applicant is proposing additional landscaping within the buffer, a verti-crete wall adjacent to areas with a reduced buffer width, and 6 foot tall vinyl fencing on the remainder of the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. Staff believes that the proposed combination of landscaping and fencing should adequately protect the adjacent residential properties from the proposed commercial development. See Analysis below for more on the Applicant's alternative compliance request. • Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 5 -Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping. Street buffer landscaping and internal parking lot landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan for the proposed project. All landscaping shall be installed and maintained on the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B -Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. The proposed development, which consists of neighborhood commercial uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses, will provide a variety of commercial opportunities in this area of the City. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 3 -Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. The site is located on the corner of two arterial streets, E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. The site is surrounded by rural and urban density residential properties. Staff believes the proposed commercial development should complement the surrounding residential uses by providing needed services in this area of the City. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 6 -Require neighborhood commercial areas to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, fences, etc.) Six foot tall vinyl fencing, a verti-crete wall, and added landscaping are proposed around the perimeter boundary of the commercial development to assist in providing a buffer between the existing residences to the south and east. The applicant is requesting alternative compliance with this application to reduce the buffer width adjacent to residential uses from 25 feet to as low as 10 feet in one area (the majority of the buffer is 25 feet wide as required). Staff is requesting that the applicant provide pathway connections to the east and south with this application for connectivity to the adjacent residential uses. Staff believes the proposed site design should be compatible with surrounding uses if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval and DA provisions in the staff report. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all lots in the subdivision. Staff is requesting that the two right-in/right--out only accesses proposed closest to the intersection on Victory and Eagle be removed and only one access to/from Eagle and one access to/from Victory be approved with this application. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant s zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2B-21ists the permitted, accessory, and conditional uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed retail, restaurant, office, and service uses are all listed as principal permitted uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed drive- through requires conditional use permit approval in the C-C zoning district if it lies within 300 feet of an existing residential use or another drive-through facility. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district proximity to streets and highways. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots shall comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 for the proposed C-C zoning district. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: 1. AZ Application: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone 4.79 acres from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C zoning district in the City. The applicant proposes to develop the property with neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses. The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map as Mixed Use -Community. The proposed use of the property and C-C zoning district are compatible with this designation. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~~~MENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D• OF AUGUST 26, 2008 The C-N zoning district would also be compatible with the MU-C designation and would provide more of a transition in zoning between the adjacent residential uses and the proposed commercial development. Staff compared the permitted uses in the C-C district vs. the C-N district and found that the proposed retail, restaurant, and office uses are all principal permitted uses in both zoning districts. The major difference between the two districts is the dimensional standards, as follows: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS' C-N C-C Front setback in feet 20 0 Rear seffiack in feet 25 0 Interior side setbacc in feet 0 Street land buffer m feet Local 10 Collector 20 Arterial 25 En a corridor 35 Interstate 50 Landscape buffer to residential uses in feet "'" 20 25 Ma~amum building hei ht in feet 35 50 Maximum building site without design standard approval as set forth in 11-3A-19 in square feet 7,500 60,000 Parking requirements See Chapter 3 Article C. off-street arking and loadin r uirements Landscaping requirements See Chapter 3 Article B. landscaping re uirements "All setbacks. shall be measured from the ultimate right-of-way for the street classiflcatlon as shown on the adopted Transportation Plan. """minimum setback only allowed vuith reuse of existing residential structure. '""Where the adjacent property is vacant, the Director shall determine the ad acent ro deli nation based on the Com rehensive Plan desi nation. Staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this site if the applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions in this report pertaining to maximum building footprint and minimum number of buildings on the site. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The proposed annexation area consists of a combination of two parcels; a majority of parcel S 1128223075 (Axelrod parcel) and a very small portion of 83193250010 (Aldridge parcel) to the south. The applicant has submitted a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application with Ada County Planning to modify the Axelrod parcel so that it is consistent with the annexation legal description and proposed plat. With the BLA, the Axelrod parcel is reduced from 3.92 acres to 3.69 acres; the Aldridge parcel is enlarged to 5.07 acres to conform to the Ada County requirement for RUT zoning. As a DA provision, Staff is requiring that the applicant submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~ENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Conceptual Site Plan: The conceptual site plan submitted with this application [prepared by The Land Group, labeled as Sheet C1.03, dated 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08)] depicts 3 buildings pads with footprints totaling 29,910 square feet (s.f.). The largest building pad, "Pad A," where the drugstore is proposed, consists of 15,885 s.f.; "Pad B" consists of 7,065 s.f.; and "Pad C" consists of 6,960 s.f. Off-street parking for the site is depicted on the plan. Based on the total building square footage proposed, 60 parking stalls are required; 133 parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds UDC requirements. Staff has reviewed the proposed concept plan and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B- 3 for the C-C zoning district, except for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses; the applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance to this requirement (see below). Staff is requesting as a provision of the DA that a minimum of 2 buildings be constructed on the site and that the maximum building footprint of any one building not exceed 20,000 square feet to assist in providing a transition to more intense commercial uses adjacent to the existing and future residential uses. A detailed site plan is required to be submitted and will be reviewed with individual Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for future buildings/uses on the site. Building Elevations: The Applicant has submitted conceptual building elevations with this application for each of the building pads that depict how future buildings on this site may be constructed. Building materials depicted on the elevations included in Exhibit A.6 are proposed to consist of stucco with stone and split face CMU blocks accents and green metal roofing. The buildings will be painted with 5 different shades of brown. These elevations are included in Exhibit A.6. Staff is supportive of the proposed elevations. Buildings constructed on the site shall substantially comply with these elevations. Hours of Operation: Hours of operation for the businesses within the development were not specified in the application, except for the proposed drive-through pharmacy which is proposed to operate from 6 am to 10 pm. Because of the adjacent residential uses, Staff is recommending as a provision of the DA that hours of operation for all businesses within this development be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. Development Agreement: UDC 11-SB-3.D.2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the Ciry the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Staff believes that a DA is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and does not negatively impact nearby properties. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. The DA shall incorporate the following: a. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. b. Any and all existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DA'L'E OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. c. No signs are approved with the subject annexation approval. All business signs will require a separate sign permit in compliance with UDC 11-3D. d. The request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential property to the south, is approved per the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and in accordance with the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in the Shops at Victory staff report. e. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall verb-crete wall adjacent to the residential property to the south in the areas where the buffer width is below the required 25-feet, as shown on the fencing plan in Exhibit A.S, as approved through Alternative Compliance with this application. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing in all other areas along the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. All fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7C. f. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Said sidewalk shall extend across the Aldridee Pro~pertp alonn axle Road to Falcon Drive and be located within a public uedestrian easement. g. Access to this site shall only be provided from one full-access and one ri~ht- in/right-out access to/from Eagle Road essibl~ia . and one full- access and one right-in/right-out access to from Victory Road ls-Mewed. as op sed by the applicant .,.,a :.,* +„~~.,,.,, ~r.,.~,,.R, n,,.,a ....Ho lec-ati~;-appFeTAC~. Any other access points to/from the site are prohibited. h. Across-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded to/from Eagle Road and Victory Road benefitting all lots within the subdivision. i. Provide a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. , j. A minimum of 2 buildings shall be constructed on the site and the maximum building footprint of any one building shall not exceed. 20,000 square feet. k. Hours of operation for the businesses within this development shall be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. 1. The Applicant shall comply with the tree preservation standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-10 for protection of existing trees that are proposed to be retained and existing trees 4-inch caliper and greater that are proposed to be removed. The applicant's proposal to plant trees along .the southern and eastern property boundaries as mitigation for trees removed from the site is approved per the landscape plan included in Exhibit A. m. The detailed site plan and building elevations submitted with any future CUP and/or Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~ENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CZC application for this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual site plan and building elevations submitted to the City as shown in Exhibit A of this staff report, as amended herein, and with the requirements of the subject Development Agreement. n. The Applicant shall submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council and publication of the ordinance in the newspaper. o. The Ea~le/Victorv intersection improvements shall be complete prior to release of occupancy for anv b~uil' 'ngs within the site oY the applicant shall work with ACRD to determine a fun ing mecha ism for the intersection 'mnrovement . 2. PP Application: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land in a proposed C-C zoning district. This property has not been previously platted. The applicant is proposing to plat this subdivision in one phase. Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in the UDC 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district except for the requirement of a 25-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to residential uses. The applicant has requested Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width (see below). Alternative Compliance: The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance with this application for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south and southeast property boundaries. As mitigation for a reduced buffer width, the applicant proposes to install a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall, and added landscaping along these boundaries to create more of a barrier between the proposed commercial uses and the existing residence. Per UDC 11-SB-SB.2, requests for alternative compliance are allowed when a site involves space limitations or an unusually shaped lot. Staff believes that this parcel has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape. For this reason, Staff is supportive of the request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along the perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to residential uses. See attached Findings in Exhibit D for more information. Existing Landscaping: The application states that there are 5 existing trees on site that are considered of value, totaling 54 caliper inches. Fifty-four caliper inches were mitigated on the site along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35 lineal feet required by UDC 11-3B-9. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the aforementioned figures and approval of the tree mitigation plan. The Applicant shall provide mitigation for existing healthy trees on the site that are proposed to removed as depicted on the landscape plan in accordance with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-lOC. Additionally, all trees that are retained should be protected during construction. The Applicant should contact Elroy Huff at 888-3579 for approval of the protection fence prior to construction. Landscaping: The applicant submitted a landscape plan [prepared by The Land Group, on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), labeled as Sheet L1.0] for the site with the subject application. Staff has reviewed the plan and approves of it with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACHD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. (Note: In 2011, the Victory/Eagle intersection is planned to be reconstructed and widened to S lanes on all legs, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes, per ACM's 2009-2013 Five Year Work Program.) • The applicant shall construct a 7-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Sidewalk may be located within the required buffer area. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Ekoy Huff, on implementing the proposed protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated and approval of the tree mitigation plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Sidewalks: The conceptual site plan depicts a 7-foot wide sidewalk along S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road. The Comprehensive Plan (page 55) requires detached sidewalks along all arterial streets within the City. Staff is requesting as a provision of the Development Agreement that a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk be constructed as a detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Pathways: No pathways are proposed for interconnectivity and pedestrian access to adjacent residential properties. However, the approved preliminary plat for Harcourt Subdivision to the east depicts amicro-path connection to this property at the east boundary. Staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) be provided from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. Additionally, staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence/wall) be provided to the property to the south for pedestrian access to the proposed commercial development. Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright- in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. Planning Staff, the Fire Department, and Police Department are supportive of the two full-access points proposed furthest from the intersection, but are not supportive of the two right in/right-out only access points proposed closest to the intersection. Staff is including a DA provision that access be restricted to the one access point from Eagle Road and one access point from Victory Road in locations approved by ACHD. If the Commission and Council should decide to approve the right-in/right-out accesses proposed closest to the intersection, Staff recommends that a center median be required in Eagle Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DF~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Road to restrict left-dn/left-out traffic movements Further, staff is supportive of the internal driveways proposed within the site and does not believe that stub streets should be required to adjacent residential properties. Cross-access easements are proposed to. be granted between the pazcels (see Analysis, Section 10, below for more information). Easements and notes regazding access should be placed on the face of the final plat. As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ACFID on this application. Stab Streets: No stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties and no stub streets are provided to this site from adjacent residential properties. Because residential properties exist to the east and south of this property and because these properties are designated on the future land use map for low density residential uses, Staff is supportive of no stub streets being provided. Existing Structures: The existing building(s) on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. Fencing: The applicant is proposing a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall along the southern and eastern perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. With approval of the request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses, Staff is requesting that the proposed verti-crete wall be installed adjacent to areas where a reduced buffer width is proposed, as shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S, to provide more of a barrier to the bordering residential uses. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence shall be installed. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. Fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed, prior to release of building permits. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are no laterals, canals, or ditches on this site. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a yeaz-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. if a single- point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 11-SB-lA). To ensure that all of the requirements of the Development Agreement and preliminary plat, as listed in Section 10 and Exhibit B of this staff report are complied with, the Applicant will be required to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to building/pazking lot construction, and all improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. 3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): The applicant is requesting CUP approval for adrive- through window for the proposed pharmacy within 300' of an existing residence. Per UDC 11-4-3-11, if adrive-through window is proposed to be located within 300' of an existing residence, CUP approval is required. The drive-through window is proposed to be located on the south side of Pad A at the southeast corner of the building. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Per UDC 11-4-3-11, Specific Use Standards apply to the proposed drive-through use of the property as follows: - All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; The site plan depicts a stacking lane that is separate from the drive aisle needed for circulation. The speaker location and window location shall be depicted on a revised site plan submitted with the CZC application. - Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; There is sufficient room for patrons to stack without obstructing the public right-of-way. - The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; The stacking lane is separate from the circulation lane. - The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is approximately 95 feet from of a residential district, which complies with this requirement. - Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, There is a drive aisle adjacent to the stacking lane which will serve as an escape lane if needed. - A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. As of the print deadline, comments have not been received from ACFID. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Staff believes that the proposed drive-thru does comply with the aforementioned standards. The applicant shall demonstrate continued compliance with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the drive-through window. Hours of Operation: The proposed hours of operation for the drive-through pharmacy are 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. Staff has no objections to the proposed hours of operation. However, the Commission and Council should rely on testimony presented at the public hearing to determine if the nearby neighbors have objections to the proposed hours. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted, prior to issuance of building permits, for the proposed drive-through pharmacy use. The site plan submitted with the CZC shall be revised to comply with the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this report and shall be submitted prior to establishment of the new use. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (AZ-0B- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with a Development Agreement and the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on June 19, and July 17, 2008. At the public hearmg on July 17, 2008 they moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ PP, and CUP request The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on August 26, 2008 At the public heari~ the Council anuroved the subiect AZ. PP. and CUP request. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 15 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 11. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 5. Fencing Plan 6. Building Elevations 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7: Ada County Highway District C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 16 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map Exhibit B -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) ~nf ,£. _ ~.v~creavacao ~;` _ _ of - sz:f-~ ~e --a u ~ d K~ Y~ ti- ~- - ...- e. o 0 V ~~ ;~ S; j }~~ ~ ? ~ ,~ k ~, ~ 1~., ff i ' J I. ~. 9 f~ 38~T ~~ f Ii1tlYI l __... ' __ tlI '.: ~~ -n±4• ..~ $ 4~1~'.w'~,... ~ t' I ~~ ~8 I 1 1. °~ r -~~ ~a ~ tlISELV -I~ - _ oav~ m alr~==; , , ~~~~ ~e ~~ i, k y ~~~~ ~ ~~ Q B ~~ ~ • .~~ ~ ^ ®~~ ~~ ~ , .. a . N ~~ ®~ '®~ ma® Wetltlbf/y~~ asb IbMs4 y4 dAr ~ q~l 6 1 NO 8~r l I~ ~ C ~ ~ m . uo ~ _ - R OII4DI X18 ryEOpy a®~ a~romm ~~® s~ ma~mmta® wasaori • ~tan.~~omecv s a.ew~v®• c _ ~ qn merit YlW@c d0~ °°r°°® w.urmmms ~ A~ ®' tf 0 aAnl~a eamaoiu ` ~Q~`nT4'~ik ~ o~ ~, R ~~~` ~saY® mu = s 9K l MSL~f000tl6®b MBLtfm Mid ` ~ Y M f°•w~ ""~'`^im BCnehmmk mrJOaan Cp6118l~ID~O1mm ~ ~~ ~~~ Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) a ~~- 4 -~~ ~ U ~~ ~ ~ ~ n .®~ ~~. , .m ~ ~ ~~ i .~ (Y~ ~-----~ ~.. pnm o+ as cuv,.,n ~(+ o• ms '. EuY, Btl. Jdo Cw~'n Mom a~ min. ~~ m s~ rasa .n~cazm, .~~ ~wwa 4~~ w .... 4 . +a.®mrn ~: a wim.~mamo .n . ~,~~ ~. ~~~ ~~-n ~ r. '~ . ~~. ~ a, i e, ~ i ate Plan ~~~'--=;;y ~ ~a ~r- - -- ~~ -- ~- ., .~~, a1Qi oI~ dB{1 ~NT vWBU ~~~N tive,~~p NRD On 0t Wt • a tlef9anypMHO ~. C~ O o~ U Y Exhibit B -Page 3 Q CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4!24/08) E ~ .~......,,i'.s w':.a .. ~~.. r.. • ~EGIp~TU:aT~""'~ ~ 1 ~~'w,:./ % ~s~.~S~~ ~~ ~~CONiFEROUS TF~E PLAIJiFNO_~ ~~ 3 SHI~JB PZAtdI'11_1c~.3.. , '~~. t(~PLAAiTER BEO Cu7 ESE - ~~~ -~ i 2t-- .~.---ax- --~,- --„-. E. VICTORY ROAD _ -. N WSJ;-17 ___ ~_ m tt i ! I .~ I ~ eR~~ ~. it®~ ~- ~ I~ -~ ` ~ - . :~ w~ i • ...~~ r ~° ~ ~ ~,~, ~ f -- i~ ~ PROJECT CALCULATIONS ~ ~rT rrl~uLE ~ ~-°~~-..~. = ~' ,rya--- _ -- --- - €KIBTRIQ THEE LEGEND °~~..:~..,,.® ,~,p _. ____ _ -~~ _ ~ ' L„' ~~ N1t6 MLV __ - ~ ~-. . - ~~~_.. nb`_ a_. .~. .~.r.. . I AMhCPe PC I - - cwin I ~ _ - ~~_. . _ rv ~ ~.... ~ meo® _... .~~K~r ~~ w"nn"0.~~'u ~~, ` ~L #.andscana P eam ,• _ .a lan . I~~I O U C3 ~i_ n _ ##~ ~ ~~ L a ~ i Exhibit B -Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Fencing Plan ~+~ 6' ~~d v;fiyl ~enc~ ~O~ VerNcrefe w~.tt •,~ ~~.~~. ,n~„ .~.~ • YBi[Qf i ~VJG ~GT,ICTB®Ri'GA31t WfJGl6 ~O Exhibit B -Page 5 CTTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 6. Building Elevations U O Q U O Q ~ (~ .. ~~ ,~ --- _ _~ - m -- ~_ ,_, n_ _ ,~ ,_ -- Pad MNalb Ebvaltat ~ a .. r~r.m ~., .~ ,~ ~ ,. ., ", born evm _..... .: ~_ i b ~`r_=3-~'~- te-.~.n+`a...~~ FeAAdN@S!®6Y9lIMI -~ .. 4 - _ _ . }~ . ~, P~ A-@esE 8tarafloa ! .r, ~ .r his e~~e~ ~1~ `_~ .~~ ~.7 >„~ r r -i ~~ -}--}-.. gg@9(~( BQH d r T ~ ~~~ Exhibit B -Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~tTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Q ~ , -_ 0 0 O O ~ ~.. .~ ~{0 ~~~ ,~.~.. o 0 0 ~_ ~. ,- :..~ s ..~ -- .., eeow ts'• O O V - ~>r ~j .. ' ~.l ~_'t P. ._ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~:~ ~-= ~:. --~ -,.y ~, t~-~. C7!h...'• r ~~ o$oB ~4~ ~~ , f~ ~ N ~a ~ Exhibit B -Page 7 •Y O CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ~_J W I ~~,o =_. Pad C-NOrtlt Elevation e L O O _ ,,,, ~ 1 ~ ~., Pad trEast Elevation soww-. ~: ~.~ , ~° i% i ~> ` 1 ~~ ~L 1 9?° .- " Pad C-8oatl~ Eievadon awm iL i' i -, y _,~, nl~~ -~.~ ~~ p~7 'eG=~.3 ~ _rr ~7 ~~~ ~~ i . ~ ~,~. ~J ees ~a~ ~gg~ ~ #5 Wg ~ Exhibit B -Page g Pad C.-West Elevat/on ar.~.m CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DETMEN'T STAFF REPORT FOR TIC I~ARING~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment ADA COUNTY ~p , .., .. ~ ~4, PHONE i 208! 28 i •7900 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ~~ - "_T FAX t208) 287-7909 200 W. FRONT, BOISE, IDAHO 83702.7300 ~ - ~., BUILDING E.'JGINEERIA'G PLAlr'NIIVG ~ ZONING May 6, 2008 DMG Real Estate Partners/ R Greg Coins 350 N. 9~ Suite 201 Boise 1D, 83702 RE: PROJECT RTUMBER 20080056-PBA. Application for a Properey Boundary Adjustment involving Tax Parcel Numbers 51128223073 and 83193250010 looted at 3210 S Eagle Road, Meridian, ID; Township 3 North, Range I East, Section 28 Dear Applicant: On April 7, 20~ Ada County Development Services received your application for a property boundary adjustment Based on staff's review of the Ada County Code, this application has been given tentative approval, subject to the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit °A°. Pleas note, this approval shall become null and void if the Conditions of Approval have not been met, and if you have not obtained a valid Zoning CettiFicate within one (1) year of the date of this approval letter. This determination was made based upon current information contained in the public record and interpretation of the Ada County Zoning Ordinance. You may appeal this decision to the Board of Ada County Commissioners. To do so, you must file the appeal within fifteen days of the date of this letter. The fee for filing an appeal is $350. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6535, this letter is to further inform you that to the extent a final decision has been made on asite-specific land use request, an applicant has the right to request a regulatory takings analysis under Idaho Code § 67-8003. Tf you have any questions, I can be reached at (208) 287-7901. Sincerelly{','y, Sid Anderson, Plarurer 11 Ada County Development Services cc: Mark Perfect, Planner llT Supervisor; Ada County Development Services Sonya Wafters, Assotiabe City Planner; Meridian City Proje~ N20080D056-PBA - DMd / c3oirss Page 1 of S Exhibit B -Page 9 CTi'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DF~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF ANALYSES This application is for a Property Boundary Adjustment involving Tax Parcel Numbers S 1128223075 located at 3210 S Eagle Road and 8319325001 d located at 3300 E Falcon Drive. On Apn14, 20~ Ada County Development Services received your application for a property boundary adjustment. On April 7, 2008 your aeceptance letter was sent to you indicating that your application would be aeted upon within 60 days. There is a single family residence located on each of the properties. Parcel number 831193250010 contains 4.8 acres, it is coned RIJT, it is lot 3 of Golden Eagle Estates and was platted th 1'74. This property is a 4.8 acre legal nonconforming lot and wrll become a conforming parcel containitg 5.0 acres. Parcel number 51128223!775 contains 3.9 acres it is zoned RUT and was created on 8/ 18j200b by instrument number 10613406. This parcel was split form parcel 511~2Z3070 when a portion of the property was deeded to Ada County Highway District. Parcel number 51128223070 was created in 1954 and was 5 acres per deed recorded in book 392 and page 250. Since this property was conforming prior to it being reduced by governmental action it is deemed a conforming property for development purposes. This property contains 3.9 acres and will be 3.6 acres this property will be annexed into the city of Meridian. APPLICABLE LAW This section details Ada County zoning ordinance regulations and other applicable standards regarding development of the subject property. 811A-19: FROPBRTY REDUCED BY GOVERNMENTAL ACTION: tf a govemmental action (such as acquisition through prescription, purvchase, or other means by the Ada County highway district, Idaho transportation department, utility company or corporation under the jurisdiction of the Idaho public utilities commission, or other local, state, or federal agency) reduces an existing property below the required properly size, such property shall be deemed as a conforming property for the purposes of development See also section 8-1B-3 of this title. (Ord. 389. (r14-~0: amd. Ord. 591, 7-27- 2005) Section 8~1C-4: PROPERTY BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT STANDARDS: A. A property boundary adjustment shall not nduce the property size below the minimum dimensional standards prescribed by this ti@e including regulations for individual wastewater treatment systems and wells as set forth in sections 8.4A-~ and 8-4A Z3 of this title respectively. B. If one or more of the propertfes i5 nonconforming as m the minimum dimensional standards pnescn'bed by this title, the property boundary ad justment shall not i~rease the nonconformity. Prnjed H2O0800056-PBA DMd / t3oia~ Pie 2 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. A property boundary adjustment shall not increase the original number of properties. D. A property boundary adjustment shall not change or move any public streets, private roads, easements, or publicly dedicated areas in any manner. E. The property boundary adjustment shall not constitute a relocation of a property. F. For platted lots, the property boundary adjustrnent shall be in substantial conformance to the recorded plat- Section 8-1A-1 Definftions SUBSTANTIAL CONF(7RMANCE: A final plat shall b8 deemed to be th substantial conformance to a preliminary plat provided that the final plat represer-ts no increase in the number of lots as approved for the preliminary plat and a ten percent (10~) or less deviation of any dimensional standard shown on the preliminary plat, provided that the density and lot dimensions meet the standards of the coning base district. Unless required by a public highway agency, public utility, or federal or state agency, deviations greater than ten percent (10%) or more of any dimensional standard shown on the preliminary plat shall not be deemed in substantial conformance. Final plats in rural districts and the RUT and RSW districts shall be allowed a twenty five percent (25%) deviation of dimensional standards 3. Section 8-4G-5: ARGPERTY EOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED FINDING: In order to approve the application, the decision-making body shall find that the proposed property boundary adjustment complies with the standards in Section 8-4C-4 of this Title. FINDIAIGS OF FACT If any of these Findings of Fact are deemed Conclusions of Law, they are incorporated into the Conclusions of Law section. The Director finds that Project Number x(1056-PBA complies with Section 8-4A-19 of the Ada County Code as follows. Parcel number SI128223070 was a legal conforming.5 acre property in the RUT zone and was then reduced in size by an acquisition through purchase by Ada County highway district reducing the existing property below the required property size. This created parcel number S11~223075 tiffs property is deemed a conforming property for the purposes of development The Director finds that Project Number ZO~OOOS6-PBA complies with Section 8-4C-5, A- E of the Ada County Code as follows: A. As conditioned die property boundary adjustment will not reduce the property size of the parcels below the nunimum dimensional standards set forth in their respective districts. Project #256-PBA DMC} 1 Goiav Page 3 of S Exhibit B -Page 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. As evidenced in the record, Parcel A is a conforming property based on the dimensional standards set forth in the RUT District for the property before it was reduced by governmental action: As evidenced in the record Parcel B is a nonconforming property based on the dimensional standards set forth th the RUT District Parcel B will be increased in size and will become a conforming property. Thus the property boundary adjustment will not increase die nonconformity of a nonconforming property. C. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, tfie property boundary adjustment does not change or move any public streets, private roads, easements, or publicly dedicated areas in any manner. D. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing the property boundary adjustment w~11 not constitute the relocation of property. E. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, the property boundary adjustment w~71 not constitute a relocation of the property. F. As evidenced by the record the submitted site plane complies with Section & 4C-5, F of the Ada County Code as follows: As evidenced in the record Lois lot 3 of Golden Eagle Estates contains 4.8 acres. Per the code, the maximum allowed dimensional deviation is 25°b in the RUT zone or 1.2 acres on this property. As proposed, the property boundary adjustment would change the dimensional deviation by .2 acres. As proposed, the property boundary adjustm~t is in substai-tial conformance with the recorded plat. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW If any of these Conclusions of Law are deemed Findings of Fact, they are incorporated into the Findings of Fact section 1. The Director concludes Project Number 2056-PBA complies with Section 8- 4C-5 ofthe Ada County Code ORDER Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law contained in this Staff Report; the Director tentatively approves Project Number 200~OOSfrPBA, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A. Project raoot~o0s6-PEA DMU / Ouin9 Pace 4 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D• OF AUGUST 26, 2008 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PROJECT NUMBER 20QSOOCI~,-PBA DMG Real Estate Partners/ R. Greg Goins REQUIIiED ACTIONS. THE FOLLOWING LIST DETAILS THE TASKS THAT MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE TIIE APPROVAL OF PROJECT NUMBER 200500056-PBA WILL BE CONSIDIRED FQITAL THE APPLICANT AND/OR OWNERS SHALL HAVE UNTIL ONE YEAR FROM THE WRIT'T'EN DECISION TO COMPLETE T8B REQUIRED ACTI©N3 AND- TO OBTAIN tiV'RT['TE~1T APPROVAL FROM THE DIRECTQR. THIS APPROVAL SI3ALL BECOME VOID IF WRITTEN APPROVAL HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED BY THAT DATE. 1. The applicant and/or owners shall cause the property tD be surveyed and a record of survey recorded. 2. The applicantand/or owners shall execute and record the necessary deeds to accomplish the property boundary adjustment. 3. The applicant and/or owners shall obtain new parcel numbers from the Ada County Asse~or. 4. The applicant and / or owners shall cause parcel "A" to be annexed into the city of Meridian. The applicant shall complete condition number 6 after Meridian City Council has voted. to approve the annexation for parcel "A", but prior to the ordinance being adapted and published. 5. The applicant and/or owners shall provide the following documentation to the Director. a) One copy of the recorded record of survey. b) One Copy of the recorded deed(s). c) Proof of a~Ignment of tax parcel numbers. d) Documentation that parcel "A" has been approved for annexation by Meridian City Council. 6. Upon completing the above , the applicant shall request a letter from the Director stating that the Property Boundary Adjustment has received final approval. 7. If the property is not amtexed into the City of Meridian within one year of the date of this letter file number 200f~D56-PBA will become null and void. Project X200800056-PBA DMG /Groins Page 5 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on Mazch 17, 2008 by Aazon L. Ballazd, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 ,Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. (The Planning Department required DA provisions are in Section 10 of the .Staff Report.) 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIlVIINARY PLAT 1.2.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007), associated Development Agreement, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011) shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006). 1.2.2 Prior to issuance of any CZC and/or building permit, the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.2.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A, prepared by The Land Crroup on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), is approved with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACRD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. • The applicant shall construct a buffer adjacent to the existing residential uses to the east and south in accordance with the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in this report. A reduction in the required 25- footwide buf~ j`er was approved in certain areas depicted on the landscape plan through Alternative Compliance with this application. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • The applicant shall construct a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Said sidewa k sha 1 extend acro the Al rid e one Eas'le Road to Falcon Drive and be located wit in a nub i pedestrian easement. • The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated, and approval of the tree mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Exhibit B -Page 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape azchitect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes shall be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.4 All commercial street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association, per UDC 11-3B-7C2. 1.2.5 Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.6 All existing buildings on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.2.7 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits. 1.2.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.3.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space aze subject to UDC 11- 3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-11. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standazds of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable azea. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.5 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3.6 Per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterways (Ten Mile Creek) that intersect, cross or lie within the azea being subdivided shall be covered. This requirement doe not apply to the Ten Mile Creek which is classified as a natural waterway and must be protected as stated in UDC 11-6A-1H. 'This requirement shall not apply to the Beasley Lateral if the applicant improves it as a lineaz open space water amenity. Exhibit B -Page 1 S CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1.3.7 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.8 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 1.4 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1.4.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007) application and associated Development Agreement and Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006) shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011). 1.4.2 The Applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards for drive-through establishments listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 as follows: a. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; b. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; c. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; d. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; e. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, f. A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. 1.4.3 The hours of operation for the pharmacy drive-through shall be limited to 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. 1.4.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed pharmacy drive-through with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to commencement of the use. 1.4.5 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above (iJDC 11-SB-6F). If the drive-through use has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 2. Public Works Departunent 2.1 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of the 12 inch main located in E Victory Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install at the developer's expense two water connections one in E Victory Road and one in S Eagle Road due to fire flow requirements. The applicant will also be required to stub a future connection to 3300 E Falcon Drive. The applicant will be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works department. 2.2 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in E Victory Road with service provided to 3250 E Victory Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide Exhibit B -Page 16 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING ~ OF. AUGUST 26, 2008 service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.4 The applicant has indicated the required pressurized irrigation system in this development will be owned and operated by an irrigation district, therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized imgation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface water for the primary source. If a surface source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 Meridian Public Works specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation requirement and comply with all landscape requirements. 2.7 Additional width to the public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement along the right-of way shall be dedicated where the sidewalk is located past the right-of--way. The additional width needs to be sufficient to allow for 10 feet of easement past the sidewalk. 2.8 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval ornon-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.10 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be installed and activated, sewer system shall have passed air-testing and video inspection, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District ,prior to applying for building permits. 2.11 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.12 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.13 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat. Exhibit B -Page 17 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.15 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.16 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or neaz sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations aze set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of building pads are at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25'' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs aze completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by .the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant mazkers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.3 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn azound. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. The required turning radius shall be maintained adjacent to the landscape islands off Taconic. 3.5 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Pazking Fire Lane". 3.6 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Exhibit B -Page 18 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3.7 Fire lanes, streets, and structures including the canopy height of mature trees shall have a vertical cleazance of 13'6. 3.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.9 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.10 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D 3.11 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.12 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.13 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 3.14 The first digit of the Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 3.15 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the Intemational Fire Code. 3.16 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.17 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.18 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections 3.19 Buildings over 30' in height aze required to have access roads in accordance with The International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 3.20 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 3.21 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL -Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144mm) or three stories in height shall have at least three means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Two of the access roads shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or azea to be served, measured in a straight line. 3.22 The Fire Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the Victory/Eagle intersection not be approved. If these access points aYe approved, the Fire Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 4. Police Department 4.1 The Police Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the Victory/Eagle intersection not be approved. If these access points are approved, the Police Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 5. Parks Department 5.1 The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 No comments were submitted by S5C for this project. Exhibit B -Page 19 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 7.1.1 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Eagle Road abutting the site: a) Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $9,600 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection project. 7.1.2 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Victory Road abutting the site: a) Constnact a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $10,000 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection project Construct one of the following: • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge). OR • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 220-feet from the north property line on Eagle Road; AND • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 215-feet from the west property line on Victory Road; AND • Install a 6-inch raised median from the intersection back 50-feet beyond the driveways to restrict the turn movements. Coordinate the design and ultimate location of the raised median with District Development Review and Traffic Services staff. • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located 427-feet from the northernmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located 25.5-feet from the easternmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND Pave the driveways their full widths and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. Commercial driveways are restricted to a width of 36-feet. Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to Eagle Road and Victory Road. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 20 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.3 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.4 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.5 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standazds and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepaze and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.6 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.7 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.8 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.9 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spaze or filled) aze compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.10 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County HighwayDistrict. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B -Page 21 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~ OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map ~/ ~, .~ TliBIAND GHAUP, 3NC. March 14, 20118 Projeat No. 47167 Annexation and Razonc DMG Real Estate Partners 4.79 Acres Exhibit "A" A tract of laud for annexation aiul rezone purposes situated in a pardon of the Northwest One Quarter of the Northwest One Quarter of 3ecticm 28, Township 3 Noah., Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, ldalto, described as follows: BEGINNING at a found lsrass cap manumenting the Northwest Carver of said Section 28 on the inters~tion of the aenterline of East Victory Road and the centorllne of South Eagle Road; Thence following she northerly lino of the Northwest One Quarter of said Section 28 and the centerline of said F.aet Viaoory Road, South 89°35'51" Bast a distance of 530.40 fcct to a point, which bears North 89°35'51" West a distance of 2,127.05 feet from a found brass cap monumenting the Noth One Quarter Comer of said Section 28; Thoaca leaving said northerly line and said centerline, South 00°31'02" West a distance of 200.00 feet to a found 112-inch steel pin; Thence South 18° 19'52'° West a distancc+ of 138.72 feet to a set S18-inch steel pin; Thence North 89°35'51" West a distance of 245.5? feet to a set 5/8-inch steel pin; Thence South 46°26'1)6" Wo.at a distance of 103.83 feat to a set 5/8-inch steel pia; Thence North 89°31' 13' Wewt a distance of 90.01 foot to a set 5/8-inch atael pin; T1lence South 00°31'02" West a distanae of 73.75 feet to a sat SJS-inch steel pin; Thence North 89°31' 13" West a distance of 92.85 feat to a set 5/8-inch steel pin on 1iu3 easterly nigh-of-way line of said Srnrth Eagle Road; Thence following said easterlyright-of-way, South 00°28' 11" West a dista~c of 34.86 feat to a set 5/8-inch elect pin; Thence following said easterly right-of--way, North 30°03'45" West a distance of 29.53 fee# to a set 518-inch steal pin; Thence leaving said easterlyright-of--way line, North 89°31'48" West a distance of 33.00 feet to a point on the westerly line of said Section 28 and the centerline of said South Eagle Road; Thence fallowing said westerly Tina and said centerline, North QO°28' 11"East a distance of 518. l 2 feet to the PO1NT OF BEGINNING. I~,cdrccJuAsdsitrrbrn • sib P .GaJt3'~.Calf GrrgeAaa ~'~+;a8. Gs~da Co~anshndee 462 F_ Sl~otr Dliar, Ste. tOD, Pie, tdah° >D616 ~ r 268.939.4041 P Z~.939.d445 • G.\2C071M7671,AdminlLegalsV _07167 Q8fl314 Pnrcel~Ammo,~n.dos Exhibit C -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DKTE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 '~r~-.+~ Y°HB LAND CiRptip, iNC. The obove~csen'baci tract of land contains 4.79 acres, more or tens, subject to ell existing easements and rights-of--way. 77tis description is intended for annexation purposes only end shall not be used for the p12r111y5E OI; CO>1VC~lenCe. Prc;pared By: 't'fli] LANG GROUP. INC. 462 L. $IiORE DRIVE, BUTTE 100 IsACiLfi, >DAH® 83b16 208-939-40#1 208-939-~44S {FAX} ~p4 ~~ ~+' $ {~''~ b 1 o ~G ifnsdra~w.4iebihutme • St1sPl~aeiag . uor/ErnbB • Co~''Cdev7r /m~+linu a3'Er~imenaa rGmjldo Coarasaierrwai 462 F 5hnra Ceive, Ste. 100, Ea~de, Idaho 83616 • P ~tS.939,4~11~ 2Q&939.444> ~ u~arv.ehel~m~genAgnrtc.eam Gr',2007'~O1tG71Ad~\Legnlail _07167_Ob0314..I~a~xelA_Aupr~eadetudx Exhibit C -Page 2 3wl't•a$ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5ltuated in a potion of the Northwest 1!4 of the Nor9twest 114 of Section 28, Township 3 t+lorth, Range 1 East, B.M., Ada County, Idaho FOUND BRASS CAP raw coRNeR sEC1noN as C.P.dtF.No. 94002906 FOUND BRASS CAP N 1/a CORNER SECTIO;d 28 L'. VICTORY ROAD PER CP&F No. 97003907 20 2t N89'35'51 "W 530.00' 21 28 28 VAS 28 t ~V1 O $ $ 589'35'51 "E • ,~pY ~ 12~ ~ 2127.05' M ~ C ' . wog S 31128223475 ..- ~ CUItR~NT TAX DISTRICT: RUT a • ~ ~ PROPO~ TAX DISTRICT: C-C "' ~ ~ 4,79E AC. ~ a , ry ov SEty ~crtr~ ' ~ ~~ rw A a ~ ' N89'35'S1 "W ~ 245.57' a ° N89'31'13"W _ o ~ v~ t~AAr~ ~ ~ 91).01' `~.,° o Q©LDENEA©LE ~°'~yG N30°03'46"W ~ ~ ~srA7~s 0 29.53' 12459 ~ °' A o v~ . ~ ' " SO'31'02"W 99,pa~ OF ~y~p 'b ~ 8931 13 73 75' L • ~~ ' • 92.85 50.28'11 °a1 . Legend '?~ . 34.86' ~ FUUND eRnss cAP ° N89'31'48"W FOUND s/a° sTEne PRI ~ 33.00' O ser s/e° siEa. Pill 2e FOUND 5~6` ® ® FOUND 1/2' STEEL PIN STECL PON CALCULATED POINT N 1/16 CORNER 80UNDARY LfNE _ _ ~ - - SECTION UNE ENOlNEERf9URVEYOR PROJECT INFORRIATION 9cALE:1" =1GN ~` G~~ '~ EXHIBIT "B" 03~14•DB •~~ ~~ ° PROJECT N0 07187 . Parcel S1428223075 J ~. .~ ~'1 Annexatlan end Rezone ~ Q F '~ ~ Exhibit C -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. "In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all the subject property C-C; the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report for more information. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the purpose statement of the commercial districts and the established regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for a reduction in buffer width adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. The applicant is requesting a reduced buffer width in certain areas through Alternative Compliance with this application. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-5B-3.E). The City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in general compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This is a logical expansion of the City limits. In accordance with the findings listed above, the City Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to C-C would be in the best interest of the City if a Development Agreement is required with the provisions noted in the staff report. Exhibit D -Page I CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D• OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The City Council fmds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The City Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff fmds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See finding Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The City Council finds that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the pubic health, safety or general welfare. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The City Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D~TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The decision maldng body shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed nse and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The City Council finds that the existing site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and comply with the dimensional and development regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for the required buffer width to residential uses. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south property boundary. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Exhibit B and the DA provisions listed in Section 10, development of this site should meet the intent of the UDC. B. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council finds that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The property is proposed to be zoned C-C, which complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use). C. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the e~sting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed drive-through use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the City Council believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. D. That the proposed nse, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed nse will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council fmds that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned public facilities and services. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the Applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. Exhibit D -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEP~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is a concern; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the public as there are no nearby residents. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. H. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. 'The City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use. The City Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. 4. Alternative Compliance Findings (LTDC 11-SB-SE): A. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR Staff finds that the subject property has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape, which makes strict adherence to the buffer requirements not feasible. Staff finds that the proposed alternative means of request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum Crfoot tall verb-crete wall is constricted adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along with added landscaping along the entire boundary adjacent to residential uses. This does, in fact, preclude full compliance with the City's landscaping standards. B. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Staff fords the alternative compliance proposal to construct a verti-crete wall in areas where the buffer is below the required 25-feet and 6-foot tall vinyl fencing in all other areas, and added landscaping along the entire perimeter adjacent to residential uses does provide an alternative means for meeting the City's landscape buffer requirements. Therefore, Staff supports the proposed concept landscape plan, as depicted in Exhibit A. C. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. Staff finds that the proposed alternative will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the use%haracter of the surrounding properties. Exhibit D -Page 4 =~ September 5, 2008 PP 08-OOb MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT LDR-II/DMG, LLC ITEM NO. 5-D REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 3 building lots on 3.68 acers in a proposed C-C zone for Shops at Victory - 327 0 South Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN PQST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See 'a!itached Findings ~~~~ Contacted: ~~,-~~~,~ Date: Phone: Emailed: ^,, ~ itials_ Mate ' ais presented at pubdc meetings II become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER • ~E IDR IAN`~- ~J In the Matter of the Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat for 3 Commercial Building Lots on 3.68 Acres; Conditional Use Permit for aDrive-Through Pharmacy in a proposed C-C Zoning District within 300 Feet of an Existing Residence; and Alternative Compliance is Requested for a Reduced Buffer Width in Certain Areas Adjacent to the Existing Residential Use along the Southern Property Boundary, by LDR IUDMG, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing day August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attar' '~e hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the pow' ,,.)° Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter ~0 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all c- Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which ve Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION ; CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -1- C~ J • 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008,incorporated byreference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Annexation and Zoning request as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated March 17, 2008 by Aaron Ballard, PLS, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. A Development Agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated 4/24/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 4. The applicant's Conditional Use Permit as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, dated 4/24/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 5. The applicant's request for Alternative Compliance is hereby approved; and, 6. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-08-O12 -2- • D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B-7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-SB-6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-08-012 -3- Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -4- (~-l~' ` By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the -` day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_1~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) ~% ~ 1V~a~yor Tammy Weerd O Attest: `~~ C1' 1T ~ .'y ~ ~~ ~~'A~ ~ ~' aycee an, City Clerk = ~ P.j~ . 1~ o Copy served upon Applicant, The,Pla gent, Public Works D artment and Cit ff ~~l ~ Y Attorney. BY~ Dated: ~ - ~ ~ - (~ 2( City Clerk' Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -5- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT hearing Date: August 26, 2008 E IDIAN TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Shops at Victory • AZ-OS-007 Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District) • PP-08-006 Preliminary Plat for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres • CUP-08-011 Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence • ALT-08-012 Alternative Compliance is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the existing residential use along the southern property boundary 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, LDR-IUDMG, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) approval of 4.79 acres of land from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C (Community Business District) zoning district. Preliminary Plat (PP) approval is also requested for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land. Alternative Compliance (ALT) is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. Lastly, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is requested for approval of adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence. See Section 10 of the staff report for more information. The proposed development is planned to include neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drug store, complimentary retail shops, services, office, and restaurant components. The fmal mix of these uses will be dependant on market conditions at the time of development. The site is located at 3210 S. Eagle Road on the southeast corner of E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home with a pasture on this site. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area and is contiguous to the current City limits. 2. 5UNIMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, ALT, and CUP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Alternative Compliance applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (A~08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with the Development Agreement provisions listed in Section 10, and the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. Note: Per UDC 11-SA-2, Alternative Compliance applications are approved at administrative level by the Planning Director. However, because ALT is requested concurrently with the AZ, PP, and CUP, Staff Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 has included analysis on the ALT request in this staff report; the ALT application does not require Commission/Council action. The Meridian Plannnng & Zoning Commission heard these items on June 19 and July 17 2008 At the public hearing on July 17.2008 they moved to recommend approval of the subiect AZ, PP. and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara Thompson; Bob Aldridge• Bob Carpenter• Greg Owens ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Charles Axelrod v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff commenting on application: Scott Steckline• Caleb Hood b. Kev Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Eligibility of this site for a reimbursement agreement with the City for a mainline extension to the site; ii. The extent of the verb-crete wall fencing along the south property boundary iii. The number, type (right-in/riaht-out, full access) and location of access points to the site from Eagle & Victory Roads; and iv. The proximity of the southern access point for the site to/from Eagle Road in relation to E. Falcon Drive. c. Kev Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation• i. Modify DA provision #g, page 10. to restrict access to/from the site to one full-access point to Eagle Road. located as far north as possible in compliance with ACRD distance requirements for intersections. Allow both access points to/from Victory Road. as proposed by the applicant. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Access points to/from the site Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: The site is located on the southeast corner of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road, in Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 1 East. b. Owner(s): Axelrod Living Trust, Charles Axekod 211 S. Spalding Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 c. Applicant: LDR-lI/DMG, LLC 350 N. 9~', Ste. 201 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Tamara Thompson, Landmark Development Group 2462 Sunshine Drive Boise, ID 83712 e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Community g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for: Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres; Alternative Compliance of a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to an existing residence; and a Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy within 300 feet of an existing residence. The proposed development is planned and designed to include neighborhood commercial retail uses. 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 3. Date of Conceptual Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: "The site is in the City of Meridian's impact area and its Comprehensive plan designation is Mixed Use -Community. Our proposed zoning and development comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is intended to fill a need for neighborhood services on the southern boundary of the City. Due to its proximity in the surrounding trade area, the proposed project will reduce trips out of the area for daily consumer needs and services." See applicant's narrative submitted with application for move information. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use permit as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. d. Newspaper notifications published on: June 2, and 16, 2008 (Commission); August 4, and 18, 2008 (City Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 23, 2008 (Commission); August 1, 2008 (City Council) f. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 4, 2008 (Commission); August 12.2008 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): There is currently asingle-family residence, associated outbuildings, and a pasture on this property. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property is currently surrounded by rural residential properties. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family home on a large rural parcel, zoned RUT (Ada County) 2. East: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-4 [The R-4 zoned property has received preliminary plat (Harcourt Subdivision) approval for 60 single- Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 family residential building lots on 22 acres.) 3. South: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-8 4. West: Single-family homes, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: • In 2005, the South Eagle Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-OS-001) application approved a change to the future land use map for this property from "Low Density Residential" to "Mixed Use -Community." e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: This property will sewer to an existing manhole located approximately 760 feet east of the intersection of S Eagle Road and E Victory Road. The manhole is located in E Victory Road. Location of water: E Victory Road and S Eagle Road. Issues or concerns: a.) Providing services to 3250 E Victory Road. Z. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: NA 3. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 4. Proposed Zoning: C-C (Community Business District) 5. Size of Property: 4.79 acres (3.68 acres included in the preliminary plat) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 0 2. Non-residential Lots: 3 3. Total Building Lots: 3 4. Common Lots: 0 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 3 7. Gross Density: NA 8. Minimum House Size: NA g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet adjacent to S. Eagle Road, a principal arterial street; and 25 feet adjacent to E. Victory Road, a minor arterial street 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: 25 feet (Applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas.) 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Tree Preservation: Mitigation is required for all existing healthy trees 4-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement. The application states that there are S existing trees of value Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 totaling 54 caliper inches on the site. Fifty four caliper inches are planned for mitigation onsite along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35' required by the UDC. The result is 27 mitigated trees at 2 "caliper = 54 caliper inches. h. Off-Street Pazking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires one off-street vehicle pazking space for every 500 squaze feet of gross floor azea in commercial districts. The total building squaze footage depicted on the site plan is 29,910. Based on this amount, 60 parking stalls would be required; 133 aze proposed, which complies with this requirement. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles aze proposed internally for access within the site. Cross-access easements aze proposed to be granted between all three pazcels. No stub streets aze proposed to adjacent residential properties. See Analysis, Section 10, below for Staff's analysis of the proposed access to the site. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On May 30, 2008 a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. These agencies submitted comments on this application, which are included in Exhibit B of this report. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This site is designated as "Mixed Use -Community" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Per Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, the Mixed Use land use category contains five sub- categories. "Generally, the mixed-use designation will provide for a combination of compatible land uses that are typically developed under a master or conceptual site plan. The purpose of this designation is to identify key azeas which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning azeas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities aze encouraged. The intent of this designation is to offer the developer a greater degree of design and use flexibility." The following standazds apply to the MU-C category: 1) Up to 25 acres may be non-residential uses; 2) Up to 200,000 square feet ofnon-residential building azea is allowed; and 3) Residential densities of 3 to 8 units/acre. Staff finds that the development request generally conforms to the stated purpose, intent, and standards of the MU-C land use category within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff fords the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Beyond what has been discussed above, the following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): • Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. The City of Nferidian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: - Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer s expense. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DETMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING D"ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). - The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACFID). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District No. 2. This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a commercial zoning district. In the proposed C-C district, a 2S foot wide buffer is required to be constructed adjacent to residential uses, per UDC Table 11-2B-3 to protect residential properties from the impacts of commercial development. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas with this application. As an alternative means of meeting the intent of the ordinance, the applicant is proposing additional landscaping within the buffer, a verti-crete wall adjacent to areas with a reduced buffer width, and 6 foot tall vinyl fencing on the remainder of the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. Staff believes that the proposed combination of landscaping and fencing should adequately protect the adjacent residential properties from the proposed commercial development. See Analysis below for more on the Applicant's alternative compliance request. • Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 5 -Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping. Street buffer landscaping and internal parking lot landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan for the proposed project. All landscaping shall be installed and maintained on the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B -Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. The proposed development, which consists of neighborhood commercial uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses, will provide a variety of commercial opportunities in this area of the City. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 3 -Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. The site is located on the corner of two arterial streets, E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. The site is surrounded by rural and urban density residential properties. Staff believes the proposed commercial development should complement the surrounding residential uses by providing needed services in this area of the City. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 6 -Require neighborhood commercial areas to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, fences, etc.) Six foot tall vinyl fencing, a verti-crete wall, and added landscaping are proposed around the perimeter boundary of the commercial development to assist in providing a buffer between the existing residences to the south and east. The applicant is requesting alternative compliance with this application to reduce the buffer width adjacent to residential uses from 2S feet to as low as 10 feet in one area (the majority of the buffer is 25 feet wide as required). Staff is requesting that the applicant provide pathway connections to the east and south with this application for connectivity to the adjacent residential uses. Staff believes the proposed site design should be compatible with surrounding uses if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval and DA provisions in the staff report. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all lots in the subdivision. Staff is requesting that the two right-in/right-out only accesses proposed closest to the intersection on Victory and Eagle be removed and only one access to/from Eagle and one access to/from Victory be approved with this application. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2B-21ists the permitted, accessory, and conditional uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed retail, restaurant, office, and service uses are all listed as principal permitted uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed drive- through requires conditional use permit approval in the C-C zoning district if it lies within 300 feet of an existing residential use or another drive-through facility. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district proximity to streets and highways. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots shall comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 for the proposed C-C zoning district. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone 4.79 acres from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C zoning district in the City. The applicant proposes to develop the property with neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses. The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map as Mixed Use -Community. The proposed use of the property and C-C zoning district are compatible with this designation. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 The C-N zoning district would also be compatible with the MU-C designation and would provide more of a transition in zoning between the adjacent residential uses and the proposed commercial development. Staff compared the permitted uses in the C-C district vs. the C-N district and found that the proposed retail, restaurant, and office uses are all principal permitted uses in both zoning districts. The major difference between the two districts is the dimensional standards, as follows: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS` C-N C•C Front setback in feet 20 0 Rear seffiack in feet 25 0 Interior side setback in feet 0 Street land buffer in feet Local 10 Collector 20 Arterial 25 En a corridor 35 Interstate 50 Landscape buffer to residential uses in feet ~' 20 25 Maxmum building hei ht in feet 35 50 Maximum building size without design standard approval as set forth in 11-3A-19 in s uare feet 7,500 60,000 Parking requirements See Chapter 3 Article C. ofF street arkin and loadin re uirements Landscaping requirements See Chapter 3 Article B. landscaping re uirements *All setbacks. shall be measured from the ultimate right-of-way for the street classification as shown on the adopted Transportation Plan. *'"minimum setback only allowed with reuse of existing residential structure. ~**Where the adjacent property is vacant, the Director shall determine the ad"acent pro a designation based on the Comprehensive Plan designation. Staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this site if the applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions in this report pertaining to maximum building footprint and minimum number of buildings on the site. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The proposed annexation area consists of a combination of two parcels; a majority of parcel S 1128223075 (Axelrod parcel) and a very small portion of 83193250010 (Aldridge parcel) to the south. The applicant has submitted a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application with Ada County Planning to modify the Axelrod parcel so that it is consistent with the annexation legal description and proposed plat. With the BLA, the Axelrod parcel is reduced from 3.92 acres to 3.69 acres; the Aldridge parcel is enlarged to 5.07 acres to conform to the Ada County requirement for RUT zoning. As a DA provision, Staff is requiring that the applicant submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING•TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Conceptual Site Plan: The conceptual site plan submitted with this application [prepared by The Land Group, labeled as Sheet C1.03, dated 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08)] depicts 3 buildings pads with footprints totaling 29,910 square feet (s.f.). The largest building pad, "Pad A," where the drugstore is proposed, consists of 15,885 s.f.; "Pad B" consists of 7,065 s.f.; and "Pad C" consists of 6,960 s.f. Off-street parking for the site is depicted on the plan. Based on the total building square footage proposed, 60 parking stalls are required; 133 parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds UDC requirements. Staff has reviewed the proposed concept plan and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B- 3 for the C-C zoning district, except for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses; the applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance to this requirement (see below). Staff is requesting as a provision of the DA that a minimum of 2 buildings be constructed on the site and that the maximum building footprint of any one building not exceed 20,000 square feet to assist in providing a transition to more intense commercial uses adjacent to the existing and future residential uses. A detailed site plan is required to be submitted and will be reviewed with individual Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for future buildings/uses on the site. Building Elevations: The Applicant has submitted conceptual building elevations with this application for each of the building pads that depict how future buildings on this site may be constructed. Building materials depicted on the elevations included in Exhibit A.6 are proposed to consist of stucco with stone and split face CMU blocks accents and green metal roofing. The buildings will be painted with 5 different shades of brown. These elevations are included in Exhibit A.6. Staff is supportive of the proposed elevations. Buildings constructed on the site shall substantially comply with these elevations. Hours of Operation: Hours of operation for the businesses within the development were not specified in the application, except for the proposed drive-through pharmacy which is proposed to operate from 6 am to 10 pm. Because of the adjacent residential uses, Staff is recommending as a provision of the DA that hours of operation for all businesses within this development be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. Development Agreement: UDC 11-SB-3.D.2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the City the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Staff believes that a DA is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and does not negatively impact nearby properties. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. The DA shall incorporate the following: a. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. b. Any and all existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 10 .J CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. c. No signs are approved with the subject annexation approval. All business signs will require a separate sign permit in compliance with UDC 11-3D. d. The request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential property to the south, is approved per the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and in accordance with the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in the Shops at Victory staff report. e. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall adjacent to the residential property to the south in the areas where the buffer width is below the required 25-feet, as shown on the fencing plan in Exhibit A.S, as approved through Alternative Compliance with this application. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing in all other areas along the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. All fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7C. f. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Said sidewalk shall extend across the Aldridge ~ronerty along Eagle Road to Falcon Drive and be located within a public pedestrian easement. g. Access to this site shall only be provided from one full-access and one right- in ri~ht~ut access to/from Eagle Road ~°*°-' °° ~ -' °°-~*~ °° essib~-~ . and one full- access and oner~ht-in/righht-out access to/from Victory Road ~aflewed, as proposed by the auplicant °^a :°* •°/~.°,,, v:,.~,,..., n,..,,1 ., +1,° lee~tie;a-app~ed~y-z=C~. Any other access points to/from the site are prohibited. h. Across-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded to/from Eagle Road and Victory Road benefitting all lots within the subdivision. i. Provide a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. , °..r:.,.. /.,.,rl,...~., ..„.1 l.r°~y :., rl,° F .,..°/.....11\ r.. tl,° .. ..°..r.. r., *L, tl, f ....,.,.......,..,., ~...~......~ ...,., .,.....,~ ,,. ..... ~..~z..~. j. A minimum of 2 buildings shall be constructed on the site and the maximum building footprint of any one building shall not exceed 20,000 square feet. k. Hours of operation for the businesses within this development shall be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. The Applicant shall comply with the tree preservation standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-10 for protection of existing trees that are proposed to be retained and existing trees 4-inch caliper and greater that are proposed to be removed. The applicant's proposal to plant trees along the southern and eastern property boundaries as mitigation for trees removed from the site is approved per the landscape plan included in Exhibit A. m. The detailed site plan and building elevations submitted with any future CUP and/or Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 11 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CZC application for this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual site plan and building elevations submitted to the City as shown in Exhibit A of this staff report, as amended herein, and with the requirements of the subject Development Agreement. n. The Applicant shall submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council and publication of the ordinance in the newspaper. o. he Ea~le/Victorv intersection 'mnrovemen ha 1 be comnle a nrior o relea e occunancv for anv b it in .wit in he i e or he annlicant ha 1 work wi CHD to determine a fundinu mechanism for the intersection imnrnvPmpnte 2. PP Application: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land in a proposed C-C zoning district. This property has not been previously platted. The applicant is proposing to plat this subdivision in one phase. Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in the UDC 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district except for the requirement of a 25-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to residential uses. The applicant has requested Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width (see below). Alternative Compliance: The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance with this application for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south and southeast property boundaries. As mitigation for a reduced buffer width, the applicant proposes to install a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall, and added landscaping along these boundaries to create more of a barrier between the proposed commercial uses and the existing residence. Per UDC 11-SB-SB.2, requests for alternative compliance are allowed when a site involves space limitations or an unusually shaped lot. Staff believes that this parcel has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape. For this reason, Staff is supportive of the request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum 6-foot tall verb-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along the perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to residential uses. See attached Findings in Exhibit D for more information. Existing Landscaping: The application states that there are 5 existing trees on site that are considered of value, totaling 54 caliper inches. Fifty-four caliper inches were mitigated on the site along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35 lineal feet required by UDC 11-3B-9. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the aforementioned figures and approval of the tree mitigation plan. The Applicant shall provide mitigation for existing healthy trees on the site that are proposed to removed as depicted on the landscape plan in accordance with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-lOC. Additionally, all trees that are retained should be protected during construction. The Applicant should contact Elroy Huff at 888-3579 for approval of the protection fence prior to construction. Landscaping: The applicant submitted a landscape plan [prepared by The Land Group, on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), labeled as Sheet L1.0] for the site with the subject application. Staff has reviewed the plan and approves of it with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACHD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~ TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING BATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. (Note: In 2011, the Victory/Eagle intersection is planned to be reconstructed and widened to S lanes on all legs, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes, per ACIID's 2009-2013 Five Year YYork Program.) • The applicant shall construct a 7-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Sidewalk maybe located within the required buffer area. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the proposed protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated and approval of the tree mitigation plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the fmal plat application(s). Sidewalks: The conceptual site plan depicts a 7-foot wide sidewalk along S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road. The Comprehensive Plan (page 55) requires detached sidewalks along all arterial streets within the City. Staff is requesting as a provision of the Development Agreement that a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk be constructed as a detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Pathways: No pathways are proposed for interconnectivity and pedestrian access to adjacent residential properties. However, the approved preliminary plat for Harcourt Subdivision to the east depicts amicro-path connection to this property at the east boundary. Staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) be provided from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. Additionally, staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence/wall) be provided to the property to the south for pedestrian access to the proposed commercial development. Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright- in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. Planning Staff, the Fire Department, and Police Department are supportive of the two full-access points proposed furthest from the intersection, but are not supportive of the two right-in/right-out only access points proposed closest to the intersection. Staff is including a DA provision that access be restricted to the one access point from Eagle Road and one access point from Victory Road in locations approved by ACHD. If the Commission and Council should decide to approve the right-it~right-out accesses proposed closest to the intersection, Staff recommends that a center median be required in Eagle Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 13 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Road to restrict left-in/left--out traffic movements. Further, staff is supportive of the internal driveways proposed within the site and does not believe that stub streets should be required to adjacent residential properties. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between the parcels (see Analysis, Section 10, below for more information). Easements and notes regarding access should be placed on the face of the final plat. As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ACFID on this application. Stub Streets: No stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties and no stub streets are provided to this site from adjacent residential properties. Because residential properties exist to the east and south of this property and because these properties are designated on the future land use map for low density residential uses, Staff is supportive of no stub streets being provided. Eidsting Structures: The existing building(s) on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. Fencing: The applicant is proposing a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall along the southern and eastern perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. With approval of the request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses, Staff is requesting that the proposed verti-crete wall be installed adjacent to areas where a reduced buffer width is proposed, as shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S, to provide more of a barrier to the bordering residential uses. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, a minimum Crfoot tall solid vinyl fence shall be installed. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the fmal plat. Fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed, prior to release of building permits. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are no laterals, canals, or ditches on this site. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single- point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 11-SB-lA). To ensure that all of the requirements of the Development Agreement and preliminary plat, as listed in Section 10 and Exhibit B of this staff report are complied with, the Applicant will be required to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to building/parking lot construction, and all improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. 3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): The applicant is requesting CUP approval for adrive- through window for the proposed pharmacy within 300' of an existing residence. Per UDC 11-4-3-11, if adrive-through window is proposed to be located within 300' of an existing residence, CUP approval is required. The drive-through window is proposed to be located on the south side of Pad A at the southeast corner of the building. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Per UDC 11-4-3-11, Specific Use Standards apply to the proposed drive-through use of the property as follows: - All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; The site plan depicts a stacking lane that is separate from the drive aisle needed for circulation. The speaker location and window location shall be depicted on a revised site plan submitted with the CZC application. - Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; There is sufficient room for patrons to stack without obstructing the public right-of-way. - The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; The stacking Zane is separate from the circulation lane. - The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is approximately 95 feet from of a residential district, which complies with this requirement. - Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, There is a drive aisle adjacent to the stacking lane which will serve as an escape lane if needed. - A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. As of the print deadline, comments have not been received from ACfID. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Staff believes that the proposed drive-thru does comply with the aforementioned standards. The applicant shall demonstrate continued compliance with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the drive-through window. Hours of Operation: The proposed hours of operation for the drive-through pharmacy are 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. Staff has no objections to the proposed hours of operation. However, the Commission and Council should rely on testimony presented at the public hearing to determine if the nearby neighbors have objections to the proposed hours. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted, prior to issuance of building permits, for the proposed drive-through pharmacy use. The site plan submitted with the CZC shall be revised to comply with the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this report and shall be submitted prior to establishment of the new use. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with a Development Agreement and the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on June 19, and July 17, 2008. At the public hearing on July 17, 2008 they moved to recommend approval of the subject AZ PP, and CUP request The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on August 26 2008 At the public hearinu the Council anuroved the subiect AZ PP and CUP request Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE I S • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 5. Fencing Plan 6. Building Elevations 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 16 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map Exhibit B -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) ~8 ~~ ~./i ® ~~ --- - ___ -..- - - - ._ e ®..v.._ q _ s~ ~ ~ i ~ 1 ej ~ - _ ~ ~ -- ~ Ndnhy~ a ~ __ _ ~ ------- 1dm~$'~a ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ '114 - ~ ~ ~R/b ~ _ L¢ 1 0. N1fj~f m1Y1® W p } j h b ~, ~ ~ID6 ~ iYtr~Y~s ^ 4UOpR v ®~~ x _ - lppam ~Ot~ ', - ~ - su. ~ - g~~~L~IN84 T'RtgD~Yla Wdgbi ® fNA4 ~ T bm.~ ~ aeml~.mo"m ao~ ! ~ ~ fin' cammm em ° rs a ~.~. .~..~ a a ~ ~a ' +~ "!7~ e ~hH Sam,°tlm • owi"mlva"sR'o ~ r®m f t~ .~ ', ~ ~® ems a oa a n~ s 41 ®mn ®e Y: ~ ~'e_3.',., ~ PF.. 6l~ls®Otln'a1tlO~°N~li ~ ®~~~0op~vQ tea. ~ I ~'°. a 1 +~ R ~~~ `~S Ol°P 1~4 6P~Q341YT on°a+iz Menem r-e 4~.0~ Exhibit B -Page Z CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4!24/08) ~~: -----o---~ -- ,, o ~u `a~q~ ` -ir~a-'- ~~ fV ~~~ ~rm W ~` W [] ~ ew o .m ~ ~ ~ `' ®®~ ~ } ,~~ r-----~ ma~m~~~,,m~. 1tA.ea N ni :,edbi to T-a-9~y s evm. o $ ama i [aa. em, uc waw ~4 N a m c aaun >iaq mra~ ~ ~~~~ Qa mmmse~ xa «~uainN.oc «.vamm~~wc 1 e~omn.oemv,®mw~~ ic*aearsa ro'm mn~a c. ~awna-~ v a® ° ~ ° O° ° ~ °1° C m~ema ~ ~ cm un vva o mn a ^~~ aa¢amm arenas:n~,m~w~z~u:m~ A 4 N~a ~ • ft~ oia+ xm uco as w~+s. n 59 pYP ~R+rt mmRaa .ome®wruwm~mws mw a. &3~ O ~ - pp a o' r~ 0 0 ~~ t h ~ _. __. ___.. _ _-___-.. __ O ~ 4 •~ ° ~ o ® u 0 ^ ® ~ ~cvn~.c6m am i Vf O k 9 ~ u ~ ~ ~~ m v. w+mn I ~ i ,~~ --_ iil ~ - i + ~ e ~~~~ J ~ ` \\ ~ '' 7 .~ ~. ~b~ _-_~ `,;~~,\~ ~a.~aa awn nu d ~ \ ~~ 1 ~ ,,ma~yy Site Plan °® ~~V _ _ -- ~„ e., ~.~am ~, Exhibit B -Page 3 • A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4124/08) .o.~« .®o ~`°~~~ • `~:J ~ TREE PLANTING .~ ~ ..~~~ ~°~°.~°~ `~ CONIFEROUS TREE PLAIJP1NOtln.. C.LANOSCAPE WALL ___~~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~~ I Vl ". - s~ ~..m-.~ t7. S ~... ~' ~ ~ ' s$ ~ J t i ~ ~ ~~~ I ~ 'CANT 3 EDUL ~r aum ~maavm m oveawix -~~- ®~ry.'~ ..~,,,.,.m.. ~~ F.XI8TING TREE LEQEND ~ ~i ~ ~... ~ :~ uu `° . . a.. _. ~ . . ~~~a^N-r=~.saF i r-rraFNn isnds~ne vcuc r . as Pten -- - - w J e d ~ U ~ U W N ~V K ~ ^``'{ ~~ a ~ i Exhibit B -Page 4 ~. • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Fencing Plan vna ~ # '~ 'a ` r y~~ m q~~ "-1 a ; )f t~tSip ~ ~ i-; lip °a+- 1 ~ 1 i ~~.~ t ' i ~ ~ F' ~° ~ ~ ° ~ 4~ , i ~~ ~,~, ~ i i t ~ f ,: .~~ ._ ~o' Y~rfitr~fC w4.t1 &~. d~Y~1N~iQ +E9iFas ~~A Yt&~B .~ ~~. S~Ir'd Exhibit B -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 6. Building Elevations O ~ U O Q Q O Q C~ ,~:~,. _ _ ,:n., ,~ ,~.. m t .. ~ =-~ ~, , ~-T -- -- _ - _~ ,~ ,_ _ ~ -_.~ i i _ p ., ~„ • o ~ ~ o 0 .~ ,. - :.. ~~ - _. ~~---- ~. ~ :,rrare,N, --- _ .. ,.R ~. f 0 ~ _ :. .. ~ ~... _. _ ~ l -.. ~...Y F -.. - __. ~ ti ~- ~-. ---~~ . ~ ~ ~ ,.: 3 .. _ .-. _ - " ~ ~a ... '=-a=- , ~ ~ ~ Fa0 A-VPest Ele~a~un .: ra ' ~~ "i ?~ ~, .~ x. l-.__.-. _. _ j ... _. _.__~_. ~ ___ _ __ ~_ s,; ~.~._. ~~ .. .__ _ •_ a - -- - - - _ a•, .. -_. Pad A~Bsailt 6faea~sn -. ~ ~' i I i 5 ~ ~ - - - _ -- -- _ IIil ~t~~•~. - - --- c tNllGiVa~ -n ~ i - -- ~ _ ._..r -- ,~~ Pad A-Bas! 6latfatlall a ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ n ~,.y ~_.. g~e ~$~ BA ~i T ~ ~8 $ Exhibit B -Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Q Q o 0 0 ---~=a ` ~ ~ _ -, - >> ~~~ ~; ~~ ~ - - ~ ~~ a -_-, ~; ,,:..... _ ~.r. Ped B-North Elevatlon ~.,~.«~ ~ ~ - ~~`~ Pm! e-aeuth0evaena~ .m«~.,. ~~ t~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ a ~~ +1 i,, '.~ ~;:=- ~~ ~e ~~~ 8E ~g ~ N x J Ws x Exhibit B -Page 7 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4 O O° 0` O ',9U' ~'e-.. ~ ., '. ~~. _~ .,.~L'. t~ -> ,emu-'; ~': ~-.. ~~HYdt ~~, ~:~ ~~~a Patl C.Boatl~ EtevaNon ~~ ~~ ~~~e ,. s ~Y~l'tiK" ~._ ~_ e ~~~ 68 ~~ ~ ~~ g J 8 W ; °s Exhibit B -Page 8 ~~ ~„A.. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment ~~? C~ '`~~ ! rf ~~ ". DE~VEL4PMENT SERVICES ~~~~' Pxo~ r2osa zs~-~~a - -- ~ r FAX 1208'i ~7-7909 24Q Vid. FIiOI{IT, BOISE. IDAIi0 83702-?3Q0 - BiTII.DL`+iG ENGINEERIA'G PLANNGv*G ZOfit1~dG May 6, 2008 DMG Beat Estate Partners/ R Greg Gins 350 N, 9d+ Suite 201 Boise ID, 83702 HE; PR4JEG°P IYUAiBF,R 2Q08905G-pBA. Application for s Propety Boundar}- Adjustment iawlviag Tax farce[ Numbers 51128223075 and 83193250010 located at 3210 S Eagle Road, Meridian, ID; Township 3 North, Range I East, 5e~tion 28. Deaz Applicant; On Apn7 ?, 2~ Ada County t?evelopment Services rereived your application for a property boundary adjustment Based on staffs review of the Ada County Code, ties application has been given tentative approval, subject to the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit °A". Please motel this approval shall become null and void if the Conditions of Approve! have not bey met, and if you have not obtained a valid Zoning to within one (1) year of the date of this approval letter. y - This deterntanataon was made based upon current information contained in the public record and interpremtion of the Ada County Zoning Ordnnance. You may appeal this derision to the Board of Ada County Commissioners. To do so, you mint .file the appeal within fifteen days of the dam of this letter. The fee for fdutg an appeal is $350. Puts~ant to Idaho Code § 67-535, thin .letter is to furdmr inform you that to the extent a final decision has been made on a site-specific land use request; an applicant has the right to request a regulatory takings analysis under Idaho Code § 6?003. If you have any questloris, l can be reached at ( 287-7901. Sinreivly, ,, /~ f/v C~ Sid Anderson, Planner Il Ada County Development 5ervaces cr. Mark Ferfert, Planner llI Supervisor; Ada Coataty Development Services Sonya Wafters, Assoaa~ Cate Planner; Meridian City Proj~ a2 PBA nNtG ~ ctoiffi ~ t oi's Exhibit B -Page 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF ANALYSES This application is far a Property &suredary Adjustment invoking Tax Parcel Numbers S t 128Z230751o~ted at 3210 S Eagle Road and 83193250010 lord at 33~ E Falcon 'Driae. On Apn14, 20Q8 Ada County Development Services received your application for a property boundary adjustment On April ?, SOS your acceptance Utter was sen4 to you indicating tiiat your application would be acted upon within 60 days. There is a single family residence located on each of the properties. Parcel number R311g325DO1Q eons 4.8 aerv~ it is zoned RU'l; it is lot 3 of Golden Eagle and sues platted in 1.9x4. This property is a 48 ~ legal nonccn#ornureg lot and wr71 become a confortnir-g parcel cor~inireg 5.0 acres. Parcel number 511~2~15 contains 3.9 acres it is zoned RUT and was created on 8 j 18/257, by uestnm~ertt number 106134046. This parcel was split form parcel Si12&2235y10 when a portion of 9re property was deeded to Ada County Highway District. Parvicei number 5112822307Q was created in 1954 and was 5 ages per deed recorded ~ boots 392 and page 250 Sinoe this property was confoaning prior to ft being reduced by govenemental action it is deemed a conforming property for development purposes. This propery- contains 3.9 acres and will be 3.6 ages this property will be annexed into the city of Meridian. Al'PLICAELE LAW "This section details Ada Cotmty zoning ordinance regerlatioms and other applicable standards regaading developmment of the subject property. 1. 8~A-19: P1OPERTY REDUCI?D BY GOVERNIViENTAL AC['IO1V: if a govemmentat action (such as acquisition through pn~ription, pun-hase, ar other means by the Ada County highway district, Idaho transportation department, utility coaepazry or corporation under the jurisdiction of the Idaho public. utilities tommissionf or other loco),. stoic, ar federal agenryj reduces an ea~sting property blow the rsequired properly size, seYeh properly shall be deemed as a conforming property for the purposes of development See alb section 8-1B-3 of this title. (Ord. 389, 6-142{IOd; amd. Ord. 591, 7-27- 2005j 2 Section 23.40-4: PROPERTY ~?UNDARY ADJUSTMENT STANDARDS: A. A property boundary adjrrsmneret shag not r~uce the property size below the rnininurm dirreeensionai standards primed by this ttt~ irectuding regulations for individual wastewater traalmer+t systems and wills as set Earth in sections 8.4A?2 and 8~4A 23 of this title respectively. E. if one or .more of the pr' fa nmu:ttnfarming as to the mfrdmum ctimecesional standards prescribed by this title, the property boundary adjustia~t shad not increase flee noncon#ormtty. Project d25trPI3A DM(i / Ctaiffi Page 2 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 1 ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. A property boundary adjustment shall not increase the original number of properties. D. A property boundary admit shaA not change or move any public streets, priests roads, easements, or publicly dedieabed areas in any manner. E. The property boundary adjustment shall not constitute a relocation of a property. F, For platted lots, the properly boundary adjnst<nent shall be in substantial conformance to the recorded plat Section 8-1A-1 Definitions SUBSTANTIAL C4NFQRlV1ANCE: A final plat shall be deemed to be in substantial conformance to a prelimina~ry- Plat provided that the final plat rePres~n-ts na increase in the number of lots as approved for the preliminar}+ plat and a ben perscent (10~) or lei deviation of any dimensional standard shaven on t~ preliminary plat; provided that the density and lot dimensions meet the standards of the zoning base district Unless wired by a public highway ag+enry, public atiliiy, or federal or state agency, deviations greater than ben penrent (10%) or more of any dimensional standard shown on the preliminary plat shag not be deemed in substantial eonformance. Final plats in rural districts and the RUT and R.SW districts shall be allowed a twenty five percent (25~) deviation of dimensional standards 3. Section 8-~3C-5: PROPERTY l~Ul~+tDARY ADJUSI`MEN7' REQUIRED FIAIDIlVG: In order bo approve the application, the decision-making body shall find that the propcssed properly boundary adjustn~t complies with the standards in Section S-4C-4 of this Title. FINDINGS OF FACT If any of these Findings of Fact one deemed Conclusions of Law, they are incor~rated into the Conclusions of Law section. The Ilinector finds that Project Number PBA complies with Section 8-~A-19 of the Ada County Code as follows. Parcel number 51128223/0 was a legal conforming 5 acre property in the RUT zone and was then rsduced in sip by an acquisition through purchase by Ada County highway district reducing the existing propearty below the r~uired property size. This treated parcel number S11282230~75 this property is deemed a conforming property for the purposes of development The Director finds that Project Number 200800t?56-PBA complies with Section 8110-5. A- E of dzs Ada County Code as follows: A. As conditioned the property boundary adjustment wdl not reduce the property size of the parcels below t~ mirrinium dimensional standards set forth in their resp~tive districts. Pmjed ~2~ooos~-P>j~, DMd i Goi~ Page 3 of 5 Exhibit B -Pagel l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. As evidenced in the record, Parcel A is a eartforming property based an dre dinusnsional standards set forifi in the RUT District for the property before it was reduced by gov~ernntental actian_ As evidenced h- the record Parcel B is a nonconforming property bared on the dinustsicnal standards set forlfi ut the RUT Distriek Parcel B will be in size and w~71 become a conforming properly. Thus the property boundary adjustrne,nt will not increase the nonconformity of a nonconforming property. C. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, the property boundary adjustment does not change or move any public streets, private roads, easements, or publicly dedicated areas in arty rttarrner. D. As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawings the property boundary adjustment wBl not constitute the relocation of property. E, As evidenced by the submitted site plan drawing, ifie property boundary ad jusiment will not car~stitute a ration of ~e property. F. As evidenced by the record the submitted site plane complies with Section 8- 4C-5, F of tfie Ada County Cade as follows: As evidenced in the record Lofts lot 3 of Golden Eagle Estates contains 4,6 ages. Per the code, the maximum allowed dimensional deviation is 25~ in the RUT zone or 1.2 ae~ on this property. As proposed, the property boundary adjustment would change the disicmal de=viation by .2 acres. As the boundary adjustmem is in substantial conforntanee with the recorded plat. CQNCLUSIONS OF LAW if airy of these Conclusions of Law are deemed. Findings of Fact, they are incorporated into the Findings of Fact see~tan, ~. The Director concludes Project Number flBA complies with Section S- 4C-5 of the Ada Cvius#l- Code: CfRDBR Basest upon the Findings of Fact and Candusior~s of Law contained in this Siff Report; the t~er-iwahvely approves Project Number ~6-PBA~ subject to the Conditias~ of Approval attached as Exhibit A. Pcajeet 56-PBA DM414oims Page 4 ~5 Exhibit B -Page 12 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 E7CIDBIT A coNDrr>toNS of A~ovAL l'ROjEG'I' N[JMEIiR PBA DMG Real Estate Partners/ R Greg Goi~ REQL-IREDf ACTIONS. THE FOLLOVViNG LIST DETAHS THB TASKS TIIeAT MUST BE COMPLET'laD BEFORE THE APPROVAL QF FROf ECT NUMBfa1t P8A WI[.L BL CONSIDERED FINAL THE APPLICANT ANDi4R owlv>~RS sHALL HAVE UNTIL oNE YEAR FROIdI TAE srYR1TTEN D>crs><oly ~o COMI'LETE'I`fl`l REQ .: AC't'IC3NS AND Tfl IryBTAIIY WRTCI'EN APP1tflYAL FROM'THE 17IRECTOR, THTS APPRO~YAL 3~ALL BECOlbiE VOp? IFW`1t1ZTEAT OVAE Ht1.5 NOT BEFsN ISSUED BY THAT DATE. 1. The applicant andPor owners shall cause the property to be surveyed and a record of survey recorded. 2, The applicant andf or owners shall execute and record the nary deeds to accomplish the property boundary adjustment. 3. The applicaz~t and/or owners shall obtatn new parcel nuatbers from the Ada County or. 4. The applicant and / or owners shaIl cause parcel "A" to be annexed Into the city of Meridian. The applicant shall complete condi#ion number 6 after ltiteridian City Council has voted t4 approve the annexation for parcel "A", but prior to the ordinance being adopted and published 5. 'The applicant and/or owners shall provide the following d~umentation to the Director: a} one copy of dte recorded record of survey. b) (3ne copy of the r+ecorderi deem(s). c~ Froof of assignment of tax parcel numbers. d} Documentation that pare "A" has beer- approved for annexation by Meridian City Council. b. Upon comple~g file above tasks, the applicant shall request a letter from the Director statir-g filet the l'rnperty Boundary A ' t has received fi~l approval 7. If the prope~rtg+ is not annexed into the City of Meridian within are year of the date of this letter file number 6-P8A wiill become null and void. Project #2 sG-PBA DMG i Cmi~ Page 5 of 5 Exhibit B -Pagel 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. (The Planning Department required DA provisions are in Section 10 of the Staff Report.) 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIlVIINARY PLAT 1.2.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-OS-007), associated Development Agreement, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011) shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006). 1.2.2 Prior to issuance of any CZC and/or building permit, the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.2.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A, prepared by The Land Group on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), is approved with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACHD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. • The applicant shall construct a buffer adjacent to the existing residential uses to the east and south in accordance with the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in this report. A reduction in the required 25- footwide buffer was approved in certain areas depicted on the landscape plan through Alternative Compliance with this application. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • The applicant shall construct a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. aid sidewalk shall extend acro the 1 rid e uronerty ~lon~ Eagle Road to Falcon Drive and be located within a nnblic pedestrian easement. • The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated, and approval of the tree mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Exhibit B -Page 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes shall be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.4 All commercial street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association, per UDC 11-3B-7C2. 1.2.5 Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.6 All existing buildings on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.2.7 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits. 1.2.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.3.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-11. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.5 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3.6 Per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterways (Ten Mile Creek) that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. This requirement doe not apply to the Ten Mile Creek which is classified as a natural waterway and must be protected as stated in UDC 11-6A-1H. This requirement shall not apply to the Beasley Lateral if the applicant improves it as a linear open space water amenity. Exhibit B -Page 15 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1.3.7 Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.8 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 1.4 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1.4.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007) application and associated Development Agreement and Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006) shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011). 1.4.2 The Applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards for drive-through establishments listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 as follows: a. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; b. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; c. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; d. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; e. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, f. A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. 1.4.3 The hours of operation for the pharmacy drive-through shall be limited to 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. 1.4.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed pharmacy drive-through with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to commencement of the use. 1.4.5 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above (iJDC 11-SB-6F). If the drive-through use has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of the 12 inch main located in E Victory Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install at the developer's expense two water connections one in E Victory Road and one in S Eagle Road due to fire flow requirements. The applicant will also be required to stub a future connection to 3300 E Falcon Drive. The applicant will be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works department. 2.2 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in E Victory Road with service provided to 3250 E Victory Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide Exhibit B -Page 16 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.4 The applicant has indicated the required pressurized irrigation system in this development will be owned and operated by an irrigation district, therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface water for the primary source. If a surface source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 Meridian Public Works specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation requirement and comply with all landscape requirements. 2.7 Additional width to the public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement along the right-of way shall be dedicated where the sidewalk is located past the right-of--way. The additional width needs to be sufficient to allow for 10 feet of easement past the sidewalk. 2.8 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval ornon-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.10 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be installed and activated, sewer system shall have passed air-testing and video inspection, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District ,prior to applying for building permits. 2.11 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.12 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.13 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat. Exhibit B -Page 17 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.15 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.16 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of building pads are at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above fuiish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.3 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. The required turning radius shall be maintained adjacent to the landscape islands off Taconic. 3.5 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.6 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Exhibit B -Page 18 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3.7 Fire lanes, streets, and structures including the canopy height of mature trees shall have a vertical clearance of 13' 6. 3.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.9 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.10 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D 3.11 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.12 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.13 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 3.14 The first digit of the Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 3.15 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.16 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.17 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.18 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections 3.19 Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with The International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 3.20 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 3.21 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL -Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144mm) or three stories in height shall have at least three means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Two of the access roads shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line. 3.22 The Fire Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the VictorylEagle intersection not be approved. If these access points are approved, the Fire Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 4. Police Department 4.1 The Police Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the Victory/Eagle intersection not be approved. If these access points are approved, the Police Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 5. Parks Department 5.1 The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 No comments were submitted by SSC for this project. Exhibit B -Page 19 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 7.1.1 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Eagle Road abutting the site: a) Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $9,600 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection project. 7.1.2 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Victory Road abutting the site: a) Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $10,000 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection prof ect Construct one of the following: • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge). OR • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 220-feet from the north property line on Eagle Road; AND • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 215-feet from the west property line on Victory Road; AND • Install a 6-inch raised median from the intersection back 50-feet beyond the driveways to restrict the turn movements. Coordinate the design and ultimate location of the raised median with District Development Review and Traffic Services staff. • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located 427-feet from the northernmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located 25.5-feet from the easternmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND Pave the driveways their full widths and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. Commercial driveways are restricted to a width of 36-feet. Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to Eagle Road and Victory Road. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 2~ ! ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.3 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.4 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.5 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.6 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.7 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.8 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.9 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.10 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B -Page 21 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map r~r l ,.' '~~$ ~ c~eour, avc, i~[am,$ 246 2Up8 2'roject ria. X7167 Aaaon aad Rczoac DMG Real I~tel~arts-ers 4.79 Acres tfit "A" A tract of lazed for exataian sad reao~ p~to~ situated in a portion of the Nlortkawest Oae !Qu~r of the Northwes¢ Clue t~uart~ of Section Z$, Tavenship 3 N4tth, RanSe I Boise Meridian, Ada Courtly. Idaho, descn'bed as follows: BEt33INN2NG ai a found hrass rap mornmmeating the Noi4hweat Comer of said Seolica 28 on the intersection gf the ccntertiue of V'iatlary Road and the centerline of South l~aa Road; Thence following the northerly lies of the l~ordrt One Q of sa#d Section 28 aral the eaenterliae of said Bast Vict~sry Road, South 89~35'S 2" Bad a d of 53C3.t1U feast to a point, which.)t~rs North 89°35'52" West a diseases of 2,127.Q5 feat frssm a found lt!ta~ ~ rr~numea~ag the Idorih Otte Quarter Corm ofd Section 28; '! h~nca leavinS said aorther22r tine azrd said conteriine, Sovti~ ~(i°31'OZ" West a daatauc®ofSi)tl.U(? feet to a #bu~ad I f~-iac2a steel pin; Theatre South 18°l9'S2" Wit a distance of 1.8:72 feet to s eat S/&inch steel per; Thetece North 84°35'51" 1~4+'est a distance of245.57 Chet to a set 5/8 ~ sieeD pin; Tltenc~ 9~wth t3b°26"s16"'W~ a distat~e of tl)3.83 Prot to a set S/$-inch stead pia: Thence 1Vot1h 89°31' 13' West a distances of 9t).i91 f~ to a s~ 5/ti-inch steel Pte; Thence South dp°32't32" West a distaatce of 73.75 fee# to a set 5/8-inch steel pia; Thrace North 84°3 t' i3" West a distatt~ ctf 92,83 f~ t4 a set SJ8-inch sUcel pin em tht~ easily right-of-way l~ae of said South EaSlc Road; Tftaics followut~ said eastea~ly ri~ght-uf-way, South OQ'°28' 21" West a dista~ of 34.8f- Poet ~ e set StR-~c& stmt p~fa; Tl~ce follrewipg said easterly rightro~ way, North 3t3°i23 °45" V4le~st a dstance of 29,53 feet to s set Sl8-inch steel pin; Thenea3 ieat-Iteg said easterly right-of-vray lme. North 89°3I'~28" West s distance of 33.flCl feat to a paint on ~e vvesteriyline of sand Section 28 ~ the c~terllhtte of~id South F,agie Read; 1~atce foAowiteg said westerly lies asd said cereterliae, Noa'th 04°28't l"East a dietetics of 518.12 feefi to the POINT OF HF.f'rtlVNlrt'G. 1 4fa2 #~ Llrlat, Ste,1O0, Id~tta &4616 - P 2.tf8.439.4t1~t ~ .3345 • eal~lmmz6 tte~Is~a,,o~tt~a~osu~ra fn„n Exhibit C -Page I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ~-~ ~ r~wB r.atvp waacr~, nvG The abc~r~~-d~scrt`~a t of d c~nr~~ e~.79 ~cr~, ~aec or Tess, ~ta~je~t tai r~u existing easeffiente east riaf way. '1'~ 'tiara ie id®cl far, ~rnaexatic~€- puipasEa antS~ anti ~t~I! nat be weed for t12e ~~ crf ~vwy~ce, B3+: °fl~LTi LAI~TD Q~C~L1I', ING. 4b2 L~, S~OR.E d~N18, SLJTI~ 100 )~-GLE, IDAI~O 8361 b 2U€I-5+39<1 208-939~k45 CFAX~ 462 F Slmra ~ &m. toC~. Fdgho s3sf6 • P .939.4~i ~ 2t#1439.444~ ~ -~elaa~t~~,u,,y,,,, GcV2QU+'~97~1f~"1tal,Legals~L_97'1fa7_G$09i4~ParcdA doc Exhibit C -Page 2 ~•p't`d~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 SYtUated its a Ott Of the NortEtw~t 9d4 cif the Nottht t14 of Set~on 28, T~vaetsh~p 3 tVsarth, Rsnge '! East, ~.M., Ada aunty, Edaha FOIIldfl BRASS CAP Cdr CaRa~R s~c~ora 2a C.P. Rr~ 94~Z90B ~. V1G"T~RY RUAD 1` «~ M .~ •-• ~- ~' ~~ ~. N~9'31'13°W N30'03'~6°11t zQ.53' ~ ' ~~ lil.dS3 34.6' 1~E931'4$"W ~ ~ 33.00' srm ~ N t/is CCRiVER LIJ Legend '~ ' « '~ ~ F~~ • ~+~ ~/e sT~t, auv O seT s7s~ s~ ~ 4 ~ou~ro ,/a• sTa~ ® cur~» ac~r BOt!'N2ARY l~ - - -- - s~c~ota urn ~ ~ ~ -- PROJECT tNFC~f[tAA~T10tJ _ T B~ALE;1°~'i~b' E3(HIB1T AB° °3.,~.~ Parcel S412$~30~5 PRA rrca. ~a,~ ~ Annexation and Rezone '~ ~~ '~ FpUND BRASS CAP N 1/4 COt~i SECiItNI 28 PFR GPBtF No. 9T(l039i}~ 28 28 ~ ~~"35"51p~ ~ 2127.05 r e ;rs tt GL~I.DEN.EAGLB BSTi1 TD'S ~Lna~v.~a®1~ ~s~~r~s SO`31'02"tRi 73.75' Exhibit C -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all the subject property C-C; the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report for more information. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the purpose statement of the commercial districts and the established regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for a reduction in buffer width adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. The applicant is requesting a reduced buffer width in certain areas through Alternative Compliance with this application. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (LTDC 11-SB-3.E). The City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in general compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This is a logical expansion of the City limits. In accordance with the findings listed above, the City Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to C-C would be in the best interest of the City if a Development Agreement is required with the provisions noted in the staff report. Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMEN'T' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The City Council finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The City Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff fords that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this fording. (See fording Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The City Council finds that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the pubic health, safety or general welfare. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The City Council fords that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The decision making body shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The City Council finds that the existing site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and comply with the dimensional and development regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for the required buffer width to residential uses. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south property boundary. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Exhibit B and the DA provisions listed in Section 10, development of this site should meet the intent of the UDC. B. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council fmds that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The property is proposed to be zoned C-C, which complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use). C. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the e~sting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed drive-through use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the City Council believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council fmds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council fmds that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned public facilities and services. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the Applicant will be fmancing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. Exhibit D -Page 3 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is a concern; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the public as there are no nearby residents. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. H. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The City Council fords that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use. The City Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. 4. Alternative Compliance Findings (iJDC 11-SB-SE): A. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR Staff finds that the subject property has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape, which makes strict adherence to the buffer requirements not feasible. Staff finds that the proposed alternative means of request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum Crfoot tall verb-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along with added landscaping along the entire boundary adjacent to residential uses. This does, in fact, preclude full compliance with the City's landscaping standards. B. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Staff finds the alternative compliance proposal to construct a verti-crete wall in areas where the buffer is below the required 25-feet and 6-foot tall vinyl fencing in all other areas, and added landscaping along the entire perimeter adjacent to residential uses does provide an alternative means for meeting the City's landscape buffer requirements. Therefore, Staff supports the proposed concept landscape plan, as depicted in Exhibit A. C. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. Staff fords that the proposed alternative will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the use/character of the surrounding properties. Exhibit D -Page 4 September 5, 2008 CUP 08-011 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT LDR-II/DMG, LLC ITEM NO. S-E REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for adrive-thru pharmacy in a proposed C-C zone within 3~ feet of an existing residence per UDC 11-43-11 for Shops at Victory - 3210 South Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See gffached F~dings A~~ Contacted: Date: - - ~ S Phone: Emailed: ~ T~ Materta present®d at public meetings s ecome property of fhe Cffy of Mer(dian. CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ IDI /- AT FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS 1 1L'~1~I OF LAW AND ~ DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 Acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat for 3 Commercial Building Lots on 3.68 Acres; Conditional Use Permit for aDrive-Through Pharmacy in a proposed C-C Zoning District within 300 Feet of an Existing Residence; and Alternative Compliance is Requested for a Reduced Buffer Width in Certain Areas Adjacent to the Existing Residential Use along the Southern Property Boundary, by LDR-IUDMG, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26. ~`' incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing ~~' incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see atta 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Develops hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporates CC~ B. Conclusions of Law J 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers coy Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its ~~de codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current ~~reof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area , ~rlended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was a~pted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -1- • • 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing. services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008,incorporated byreference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Annexation and Zoning request as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated March 17, 2008 by Aaron Ballard, PLS, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. A Development Agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. 3. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated 4/24/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 4. The applicant's Conditional Use Permit as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, dated 4/24/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 5. The applicant's request for Alternative Compliance is hereby approved; and, 6. 'The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -2- • D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B-7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void: Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-SB-6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-08-012 -3- Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011; ALT-08-012 -4- • By ction of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED~G~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED__~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) `. ~ OMay~Or.'~ammy d eerd Attest. _ _ ' Ci ~pAp'ORI r~ q~ ~~~~.'s ~-- SEAL Jaycee loran, City Clerk , G~, ~ '. ,,~~ ~,~(1NZ'{ ~~~ Copy served upon Applicant, The~~'#,l}$,i~'~`artment, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: ~ VYlOliirl Dated: ®- - - (~ City Cler s Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-007; PP-08-006; CUP-08-011;ALT-08-012 -5- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT I-searing Date: August 26, 2008 E IDILll ~I ~'~' TO: Mayor & City Council .- FROM: Sonya Watters, Associate City Planner ~ O 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Shops at Victory • AZ-08-007 Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District) • PP-08-006 Preliminary Plat for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres • CUP-08-011 Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence • ALT-OS-012 Alternative Compliance is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the existing residential use along the southern property boundary 1. SUIVIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, LDR-IUDMG, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) approval of 4.79 acres of land from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C (Community Business District) zoning district. Preliminary Plat (PP) approval is also requested for 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land. Alternative Compliance (ALT) is requested for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. Lastly, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is requested for approval of adrive-through pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an existing residence. See Section 10 of the staff report for more information. The proposed development is planned to include neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drug store, complimentary retail shops, services, office, and restaurant components. The final mix of these uses will be dependant on market conditions at the tone of development. The site is located at 3210 S. Eagle Road on the southeast corner of E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home with a pasture on this site. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area and is contiguous to the current City limits. 2. SUNIMARY RECONIlVIENDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, ALT, and CUP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Alternative Compliance applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (A~08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with the Development Agreement provisions listed in Section 10, and the conditions listed in Ezhibit B of the Staff Report. Note: Per UDC 11-SA-2, Alternative Compliance applications are approved at administrative level by the Planning Director. However, because ALT is requested concurrently with the AZ, PP, and CUP, Staff Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 has included analysis on the ALT request in this staff report; the ALT application does not require Commission/Council action. The Meridian Planning & ZOn1IIg Commission heard these items on June 19 and July 17 2008 At the public hearing on July 17, 2008 they moved to recommend aaaroval of the subiect AZ. PP. and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Tamara Thomason; Bob Aldridge• Bob Caraenter• Greg Owens ii. In oaaosition: None iii. Commenting• None iv. Written testimony: Charles Axelrod v. Staff aresenting application: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff commenting on application: Scott Steckline• Caleb Hood b. Kev Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Eligibility of this site for a reimbursement agreement with the City for a mainline extension to the site: ii. The extent of the verb-crate wall fencing along the south aroaerty boundary iii. The number. tune (right-in/right-out, full access) and location of access aoints to the site from Eagle & Victory Roads; and iv. The proximity of the southern access point for the site to/from Eagle Road in relation to E. Falcon Drive. c. Kev Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. Modify DA arovision #g, sage 10. to restrict access to/from the site to one full-access point to Eagle Road, located as far north as possible in comaliance with ACHD distance requirements for intersections. Allow both access points to/from Victory Road, as proposed by the applicant. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Access aoints to/from the site Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-08-007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: The site is located on the southeast corner of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road, in Section 32, Township 3 North, Range 1 East. b. Owner(s): Axekod Living Trust, Chazles Axekod 211 S. Spalding Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 c. Applicant: LDR-II/DMG, LLC 350 N. 9~', Ste. 201 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Tamara Thompson, Landmazk Development Group 2462 Sunshine Drive Boise, ID 83712 e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN • TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Community g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for: Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C-C (Community Business District); Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres; Alternative Compliance of a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to an existing residence; and a Conditional Use Permit for adrive-through pharmacy within 300 feet of an existing residence. The proposed development is planned and designed to include neighborhood commercial retail uses. 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 3. Date of Conceptual Plan (attached in Exhibit A): 4/18/08 h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: "The site is in the City of Meridian's impact area and its Comprehensive plan designation is Mixed Use -Community. Our proposed zoning and development comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is intended to fill a need for neighborhood services on the southern boundary of the City. Due to its proximity in the surrounding trade area, the proposed project will reduce trips out of the area for daily consumer needs and services." See applicant's narrative submitted with application foY move information. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use permit as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. d. Newspaper notifications published on: June 2, and 16, 2008 (Commission); August 4, and 18, 2008 (City Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 23, 2008 (Commission); August 1, 2008 (City Councill f. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 4, 2008 (Commission); August 12, 2008 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): There is currently asingle-family residence, associated outbuildings, and a pasture on this property. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property is currently surrounded by rural residential properties. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family home on a large rural parcel, zoned RUT (Ada County) 2. East: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-4 [The R-4 zoned property has received preliminary plat (Harcourt Subdivision) approval foY 60 single- Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 family residential building lots on 22 acres.) 3. South: Single-family homes on large rural parcels, zoned RUT (Ada County) and R-8 4. West: Single-family homes, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: • In 2005, the South Eagle Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-OS-001) application approved a change to the future land use map for this property from "Low Density Residential" to "Mixed Use -Community." e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: This property will sewer to an existing manhole located approximately 760 feet east of the intersection of S Eagle Road and E Victory Road. The manhole is located in E Victory Road. Location of water: E Victory Road and S Eagle Road. Issues or concerns: a.) Providing services to 3250 E Victory Road. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: NA 3. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazaxds that exist on this property. 4. Proposed Zoning: C-C (Community Business District) 5. Size of Property: 4.79 acres (3.68 acres included in the preliminary plat) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 0 2. Non-residential Lots: 3 3. Total Building Lots: 3 4. Common Lots: 0 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 3 7. Gross Density: NA 8. Minimum House Size: NA g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet adjacent to S. Eagle Road, a principal arterial street; and 25 feet adjacent to E. Victory Road, a minor arterial street 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: 25 feet (Applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas.) 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Tree Preservation: Mitigation is required for all existing healthy trees 4-inch caliper or greater that are removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement. The application states that there are S existing trees of value Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 totaling 54 caliper inches on the site. Fifty four caliper inches are planned for mitigation onsite along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35' required by the UDC. The result is 27 mitigated trees at 2 "caliper = 54 caliper inches. h. Off-Street Pazking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires one off-street vehicle pazking space for every 500 square feet of gross floor area in commercial districts. The total building squaze footage depicted on the site plan is 29,910. Based on this amount, 60 pazking stalls would be required; 133 are proposed, which complies with this requirement. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Two access points to the site aze proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points aze proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles aze proposed internally for access within the site. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all three parcels. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. See Analysis, Section 10, below for Staff's analysis of the proposed access to the site. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On May 30, 2008 a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this. area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Pazks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. These agencies submitted comments on this application, which aze included in Exhibit B of this report. S. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This site is designated as "Mixed Use -Community" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Per Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, the Mixed Use land use category contains five sub- categories. "Generally, the mixed-use designation will provide for a combination of compatible land uses that aze typically developed under a master or conceptual site plan. The purpose of this designation is to identify key azeas which aze either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning azeas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The intent of this designation is to offer the developer a greater degree of design and use flexibility." The following standazds apply to the MU-C category: 1) Up to 25 acres may be non-residential uses; 2) Up to 200,000 square feet ofnon-residential building azea is allowed; and 3) Residential densities of 3 to 8 units/acre. Staff finds that the development request generally conforms to the stated purpose, intent, and standazds of the MU-C land use category within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff fords the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Beyond what has been discussed above, the following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): • Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: - Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 6 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sherijf "s Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). - The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACfID). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District No. 2. This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a commercial zoning district. In the proposed C-C district, a 25 foot wide buffer is required to be constructed adjacent to residential uses, per UDC Table 11-2B-3 to protect residential properties from the impacts of commercial development. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas with this application. As an alternative means of meeting the intent of the ordinance, the applicant is proposing additional landscaping within the buffer, a verti-crete wall adjacent to areas with a reduced buffer width, and 6 foot tall vinyl fencing on the remainder of the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. Staff believes that the proposed combination of landscaping and fencing should adequately protect the adjacent residential properties from the proposed commercial development. See Analysis below for more on the Applicant's alternative compliance request. • Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 5 -Require all commercial and industrial businesses to install and maintain landscaping. Street buffer landscaping and internal parking lot landscaping is depicted on the landscape plan for the proposed project. All landscaping shall be installed and maintained on the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B. Chapter VII, Goal I, Obj ective B -Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. The proposed development, which consists of neighborhood commercial uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses, will provide a variety of commercial opportunities in this area of the City. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 3 -Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. The site is located on the corner of two arterial streets, E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road. The site is surrounded by rural and urban density residential properties. Staff believes the proposed commercial development should complement the surrounding residential uses by providing needed services in this area of the City. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 6 -Require neighborhood commercial areas to create a site design compatible with surrounding uses (e.g., landscaping, fences, etc.) Six foot tall vinyl fencing, a verti-crete wall, and added landscaping are proposed around the perimeter boundary of the commercial development to assist in providing a buffer between the existing residences to the south and east. The applicant is requesting alternative compliance with this application to reduce the buffer width adjacent to residential uses from 2S feet to as low as 10 feet in one area (the majority of the buffer is 25 feet wide as required). Staff is requesting that the applicant provide pathway connections to the east and south with this application for connectivity to the adjacent residential uses. Staff believes the proposed site design should be compatible with surrounding uses if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval and DA provisions in the staff report. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between all lots in the subdivision. Staff is requesting that the two right-in/right--out only accesses proposed closest to the intersection on Victory and Eagle be removed and only one access to/from Eagle and one access to/from Victory be approved with this application. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant s zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 1 i-2B-21ists the permitted, accessory, and conditional uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed retail, restaurant, office, and service uses are all listed as principal permitted uses in the C-C zoning district. The proposed drive- through requires conditional use permit approval in the C-C zoning district if it lies within 300 feet of an existing residential use or another drive-through facility. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district proximity to streets and highways. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots shall comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 for the proposed C-C zoning district. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone 4.79 acres from the RUT zoning district in Ada County to the C-C zoning district in the City. The applicant proposes to develop the property with neighborhood commercial retail uses such as a drugstore, retail shops, services, office and restaurant uses. The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map as Mixed Use -Community. The proposed use of the property and C-C zoning district are compatible with this designation. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 The C-N zoning district would also be compatible with the MU-C designation and would provide more of a transition in zoning between the adjacent residential uses and the proposed commercial development. Staff compared the permitted uses in the C-C district vs. the C-N district and found that the proposed retail, restaurant, and office uses are all principal permitted uses in both zoning districts. The major difference between the two districts is the dimensional standards, as follows: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS' C-N C•C Front setback in feet 20 0 Rear setback in feet 25 0 Interior side setback in feet 0 Street landscape buffer in feet Local 10 Collector 20 Arterial 25 En a corridor 35 Interstate 50 Landscape buffer to residential uses in feet "* 20 25 Mapmum buildin hei ht in feet 35 50 Maximum building size without design standard approval asset forth in 11-3A-19 in square feet 7,500 60,000 Parking requirements See Chapter 3 Article C. off-street arkin and loadin re uirements Landscaping requirements See Chapter 3 Article B. landscaping re uirements *All setbacks shall be measured from the ultimate right-of--way for the street classification as shown on the adopted Transportation Plana **minimum setback only allowed with reuse of existing residential structure. **'"Where the adjacent property is vacant, the Director shall determine the ad'acent roe desi nation based on the Com rehensive Plan desi nation. Staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this site if the applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions in this report pertaining to maximum building footprint and minimum number of buildings on the site. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested C-C zoning district is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The proposed annexation area consists of a combination of two parcels; a majority of parcel S 1128223075 (Axelrod parcel) and a very small portion of 83193250010 (Aldridge parcel) to the south. The applicant has submitted a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application with Ada County Planning to modify the Axelrod parcel so that it is consistent with the annexation legal description and proposed plat. With the BLA, the Axelrod parcel is reduced from 3.92 acres to 3.69 acres; the Aldridge parcel is enlarged to 5.07 acres to conform to the Ada County requirement for RUT zoning. As a DA provision, Staff is requiring that the applicant submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Conceptual Site Plan: The conceptual site plan submitted with this application [prepared by The Land Group, labeled as Sheet C1.03, dated 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08)] depicts 3 buildings pads with footprints totaling 29,910 square feet (s.f.). The largest building pad, "Pad A," where the drugstore is proposed, consists of 15,885 s.f.; "Pad B" consists of 7,065 s.f.; and "Pad C" consists of 6,960 s.f. Off-street parking for the site is depicted on the plan. Based on the total building square footage proposed, 60 parking stalls are required; 133 parking stalls are proposed, which exceeds UDC requirements. Staff has reviewed the proposed concept plan and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B- 3 for the C-C zoning district, except for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses; the applicant is requesting Alternative Compliance to this requirement (see below). Staff is requesting as a provision of the DA that a minimum of 2 buildings be constructed on the site and that the maximum building footprint of any one building not exceed 20,000 square feet to assist in providing a transition to more intense commercial uses adjacent to the existing and future residential uses. A detailed site plan is required to be submitted and will be reviewed with individual Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for future buildings/uses on the site. Building Elevations: The Applicant has submitted conceptual building elevations with this application for each of the building pads that depict how future buildings on this site may be constructed. Building materials depicted on the elevations included in Exhibit A.6 are proposed to consist of stucco with stone and split face CMU blocks accents and green metal roofing. The buildings will be painted with 5 different shades of brown. These elevations are included in Exhibit A.6. Staff is supportive of the proposed elevations. Buildings constructed on the site shall substantially comply with these elevations. Hours of Operation: Hours of operation for the businesses within the development were not specified in the application, except for the proposed drive-through pharmacy which is proposed to operate from 6 am to 10 pm. Because of the adjacent residential uses, Staff is recommending as a provision of the DA that hours of operation for all businesses within this development be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. Development Agreement: UDC 11-SB-3.D.2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the City the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Staff believes that a DA is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and does not negatively impact nearby properties. Prior to annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. The DA shall incorporate the following: a. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. b. Any and all existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE~ TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING ISATE OF AUGUST 26 2008 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. c. No signs are approved with the subject annexation approval. All business signs will require a separate sign permit in compliance with UDC 11-3D. d. The request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas adjacent to the residential property to the south, is approved per the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and in accordance with the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in the Shops at Victory staff report. e. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall adjacent to the residential property to the south in the areas where the buffer width is below the required 25-feet, as shown on the fencing plan in Exhibit A.S, as approved through Alternative Compliance with this application. Construct a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing in all other areas along the perimeter boundary adjacent to residential uses. All fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-7C. f. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Said sidewalk shall extend across the Aldridge Property aloes Eagle Road to Falcon Drive and be located within a public pedestrian easement. g. Access to this site shall only be provided from one full-access and one right_ in/right~ut access to/from Eagle Road n:+~. ~ ruT, a•~ ~ ~ ~.-,- and one full- access and one right-in/right-out access to/from Victory Road ~s-aliewed, as proposed b t~ he applicant ~.a ,,..., ..,,,,,,,,,, ^* *~~~..~... ~~• * D a ~>, i9sati9ns--appre;~ed~~AC~. • Any other access points to/from the site are prohibited. h. Across-access/ingress-egress easement shall be recorded to/from Eagle Road and Victory Road benefitting all lots within the subdivision. i. Provide a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. , FFtntaa-~ti.nn_Ln.~thuz~, ~••a t...o.,t :., +t,o ~F .,..e/..,.,tt~ +„ *t,® ..«. ~ .t. ..i, r ~ ~ ~ao~+.. ~ r.. rt,o o.t .. .,t ,7e et,. -... r j. A minimum of 2 buildings shall be constructed on the site and the maximum building footprint of any one building shall not exceed 20,000 square feet. k. Hours of operation for the businesses within this development shall be restricted to the hours between 6 am and 10 pm. 1. The Applicant shall comply with the tree preservation standards listed in UDC 11- 3B-10 for protection of existing trees that are proposed to be retained and existing trees 4-inch caliper and greater that are proposed to be removed. The applicant's proposal to plant trees along the southern and eastern property boundaries as mitigation for trees removed from the site is approved per the landscape plan included in Exhibit A. m. The detailed site plan and building elevations submitted with any future CUP and/or Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TILE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 CZC application for this site shall substantially comply with the conceptual site plan and building elevations submitted to the City as shown in Exhibit A of this staff report, as amended herein, and with the requirements of the subject Development Agreement. n. The Applicant shall submit a letter of final approval from Ada County Development Services for the Boundary Line Adjustment and a recorded copy of the Record of Survey, prior to approval of the annexation ordinance by City Council and publication of the ordinance in the newspaper. o. he a le/Vi orv 'n er ection imnrovemen ha 1 be comnle a nrior o relea e occunancv for anv b it inu. wi in the ite or he ann icant hall work wit ACRD to determine 8 funding mechanism fnr the intercertinn imnrnvamnnta 2. PP Application: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of 3 commercial building lots on 3.68 acres of land in a proposed C-C zoning district. This property has not been previously platted. The applicant is proposing to plat this subdivision in one phase. Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary plat and found it substantially complies with the dimensional standards listed in the UDC 11-2B-3 for the C-C zoning district except for the requirement of a 25-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to residential uses. The applicant has requested Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width (see below). Alternative Compliance: The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance with this application for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south and southeast properly boundaries. As mitigation for a reduced buffer width, the applicant proposes to install a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall, and added landscaping along these boundaries to create more of a barrier between the proposed commercial uses and the existing residence. Per UDC 11-SB-SB.2, requests for alternative compliance are allowed when a site involves space limitations or an unusually shaped lot. Staff believes that this parcel has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape. For this reason, Staff is supportive of the request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along the perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to residential uses. See attached Findings in Exhibit D for more infof mation. Existing Landscaping: The application states that there are 5 existing trees on site that are considered of value, totaling 54 caliper inches. Fifty-four caliper inches were mitigated on the site along the eastern and southern boundaries in addition to the 1 tree per 35 lineal feet required by UDC 11-3B-9. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the aforementioned figures and approval of the tree mitigation plan. The Applicant shall provide mitigation for existing healthy trees on the site that are proposed to removed as depicted on the landscape plan in accordance with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-lOC. Additionally, all trees that are retained should be protected during construction. The Applicant should contact Elroy Huff at 888-3579 for approval of the protection fence prior to construction. Landscaping: The applicant submitted a landscape plan [prepared by The Land Group, on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), labeled as Sheet L1.0] for the site with the subject application. Staff has reviewed the plan and approves of it with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACHD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 12 • . CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. (Note: In 2011, the Victory/Eagle intersection is planned to be reconstructed and widened to S lanes on all legs, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bike lanes, per ACfID's 2009-2013 Five Year Work Program.) • The applicant shall construct a 7-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Sidewalk maybe located within the required buffer area. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on implementing the proposed protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for ' confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated and approval of the tree mitigation plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Sidewalks: The conceptual site plan depicts a 7-foot wide sidewalk along S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road. The Comprehensive Plan (page 55) requires detached sidewalks along all arterial streets within the City. Staff is requesting as a provision of the Development Agreement that a minimum 5-foot wide sidewalk be constructed as a detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of-way of the reconstructed and widened intersection. Pathways: No pathways are proposed for interconnectivity and pedestrian access to adjacent residential properties. However, the approved preliminary plat for Harcourt Subdivision to the east depicts amicro-path connection to this property at the east boundary. Staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence) be provided from this site to the future pathway in Harcourt Subdivision. Additionally, staff recommends that a pedestrian connection (pathway and break in the fence/wall) be provided to the property to the south for pedestrian access to the proposed commercial development. Access: Two access points to the site are proposed from S. Eagle Road (the first, aright- in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet south of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 460+/- feet south of the intersection). Two access points are proposed from E. Victory Road (the first, aright-in/right-out only access, 250+/- feet east of the intersection; and the second, a full access, 470+/- feet east of the intersection). Drive aisles are proposed internally for access within the site. No stub streets are proposed to adjacent residential properties. Planning Staff, the Fire Department, and Police Department are supportive of the two full-access points proposed furthest from the intersection, but are not supportive of the two right-in/right-out only access points proposed closest to the intersection. Staff is including a DA provision that access be restricted to the one access point from Eagle Road and one access point from Victory Road in locations approved by ACRD. If the Commission and Council should decide to approve the right-in/right--out accesses proposed closest to the intersection, Staff recommends that a center median be required in Eagle Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Road to restrict left-in/left-out traffic movements. Further, staff is supportive of the internal driveways proposed within the site and does not believe that stub streets should be required to adjacent residential properties. Cross-access easements are proposed to be granted between the parcels (see Analysis, Section 10, below for more information). Easements and notes regarding access should be placed on the face of the fmal plat. As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ACFID on this application. Stub Streets: No stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties and no stub streets are provided to this site from adjacent residential properties. Because residential properties exist to the east and south of this property and because these properties are designated on the future land use map for low density residential uses, Staff is supportive of no stub streets being provided. E~sting Structures: The existing building(s) on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. Fencing: The applicant is proposing a mix of 6-foot tall vinyl fencing and verti-crete wall along the southern and eastern perimeter boundaries of the subdivision. With approval of the request for Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width adjacent to residential uses, Staff is requesting that the proposed verti-crete wall be installed adjacent to areas where a reduced buffer width is proposed, as shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S, to provide more of a barrier to the bordering residential uses. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, a minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fence shall be installed. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the fmal plat. Fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed, prior to release of building permits. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are no laterals, canals, or ditches on this site. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single- point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 11-SB-lA). To ensure that all of the requirements of the Development Agreement and preliminary plat, as listed in Section 10 and Exhibit B of this staff report are complied with, the Applicant will be required to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to building/parking lot construction, and all improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. 3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): The applicant is requesting CUP approval for adrive- through window for the proposed pharmacy within 300' of an existing residence. Per UDC 11-4-3-11, if adrive-through window is proposed to be located within 300' of an existing residence, CUP approval is required. The drive-through window is proposed to be located on the south side of Pad A at the southeast comer of the building. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 14 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Per UDC 11-4-3-11, Specific Use Standards apply to the proposed drive-through use of the property as follows: - All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; The site plan depicts a stacking lane that is separate from the drive aisle needed for circulation. The speaker location and window location shall be depicted on a revised site plan submitted with the CZC application. - Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; There is sufficient room for patrons to stack without obstructing the public right-of-way. - The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking; The stacking lane is separate from the circulation lane. - The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; The stacking lane is approximately 95 feet from of a residential district, which complies with this requirement. - Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, There is a drive aisle adjacent to the stacking lane which will serve as an escape lane if needed. - A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. As of the print deadline, comments have not been received from ACFID. The Applicant shall comply with this requirement. Staff believes that the proposed drive-thru does comply with the aforementioned standards. The applicant shall demonstrate continued compliance with submittal of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the drive-through window. Hours of Operation: The proposed hours of operation for the drive-through pharmacy are 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. Staff has no objections to the proposed hours of operation. However, the Commission and Council should rely on testimony presented at the public hearing to determine if the nearby neighbors have objections to the proposed hours. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted, prior to issuance of building permits, for the proposed drive-through pharmacy use. The site plan submitted with the CZC shall be revised to comply with the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this report and shall be submitted prior to establishment of the new use. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed development (AZ-08- 007, PP-08-006, and CUP-08-011) with a Development Agreement and the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on June 19, and July 17, 2008. At the public hearing on July 17, 2008 they moved to recommend apuroval of the subiect AZ PP, and CUP request The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on August 26 2008 At the public hearing the Council approved the subiect AZ. PP, and CUP reauest. Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 15 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) 5. Fencing Plan 6. Building Elevations 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Shops at Victory AZ PP CUP PAGE 16 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. VicinitylZoning Map Exhibit B -Page 1 ® ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) _ ~A I ~ .,~-. - E v~csac as~~~ _ e.-,_ ~~ . ~~ ~1 ..~ ~ 'w ;', ~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ _ ~ ~ ~_ -'- i ,i I ~ ~~. b~~"i, > ` - ® ~ N. t ~~~ ' -- ...-..-4r ~~ ~ ~ . V ~ @ i' p ,.j~~~ tYNdo ~~ ~ ~~ ,~- 4 1 ~ \ i , ' ~ .~ ~' L Cj ~ ~, e~"~° ~ ~~ ~i __ ~ -- ~, -- ~ m -air ~ 67 miOC®R ~_® W N ~irYlY ~Y • emu r ®ae~s~e r ~ ^ epa4~m i ®m i n ab~e{~aew ~rslb~ratpaaq~ •mi~ ~o ,_ ~a® em o caeca ®i~f~ to+o~6usrj 006~etrP~ m~ rrae aarrua 1 ~ ^e.oaa ~~ a ~a~~.~gp~v r~ a G~'v'ii'~ ~a rw as ° ~~°~ rt ws~' ~°oa `Tir"'iSrt' ~~ ~ ®Im ®R a os as a~ ~ r ~rrs® osa 6 6 ~s 9t ®Fdd C.IDC~IB 4 ~~~p 6 evrlomesrswr0pth P0® • ~ Y 4 R r 1~1@~Qa1T e® re~ier~e®~retreara eaa®o®am®a a ~M !i ~' F Exhibit B -Page 2 4 ip CTI'I' OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conceptual Site Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4/24/08) ~ ~ z ~~ ~ w ~ ~ _.__ _ s~ d ®~ J= :oJ ?fie®.-~.~_a_-_o_- ~ ~ mm _ Aso °am - _ - _. _ =~ E°~ ________~___.-- - 0 1. ~rac-- Q ~ ~ ~ J i ~ d ~ ~ Vk~t3y ~ ~ b"~ ~ a ~ s' - ---~~ A I rm~ae~c $ ~ ~:~ u a ~' ~ y , . ~ ® .m. S s m ~ ~ rt~ i o ®'° ~ t - - - ~ - r-----~ ~~ r a~ ~ i ~ ~ L______I ~ _ OO a ~'' ~ ~' ~' mw ~,mea m o ~ m eu rcumi i p m u. r~mn¢ +H a seam w r.-~p ~ mm, ~ ~ ' ~ ~~ ~ rto s i rte. ar. 4m ~w+a~ way ~ ` 9 .. ~ --- _ _ ~ _. __ om, NoEas ® rsc acRavm ~ amv.cn~mmmm d ~ 0+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ® '~ .a..~mesm a, lama e+sc..®~eas 1 ~ ~ . v O' ' Y ~ i46° °16 ~i9 ~ menp aa sa.c ~ rv ~w cmw w~°~m m..m. armm.n~ure O ~ ®' ~ ~ mum.e sous o ~.., aiomOQ~'es ~ ~m m m°`~' fir: ~ A , m„ ®' ~ l~I ! 4-- ~ ~ ~v ~ ~~ ~ A ~ ti, ~~~ °''~`~~ -~--- J ~ ~~ asb~ ~" ~ ~`~ ~~ y `~ \ ~ ~ '° . . ~ac~ ~ ~ . ~., 8~~ ~ , ~~o~~ 4 ~~m~ ~n . ~.d Site Plan - ~ ~~ ®°`®~••"°" , C1.03 Exhibit B -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE• TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING~"ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Landscape Plan (Dated: 4/18/08, Revised: 4124!08) F ~.-~~~ ;~ r~r., " :~ ~ `' °~° ~_ =~ ~, m~, ~°° M~~ ~y~ ~ EE PLAM'ING f- ~.,, j SHRUB PLANTING ems, 1' ~ ' °~~` ~~~, ~~ ` "~~ ~ ,e, ~~ '~,m °° _~~ ~ rm~ .~ ~~,:~,.;.. r~ ,PLANreR BEO cur Ff][sf ~,e ;~. e...,,, AN~GAPE WALL _~ M~~~ a~ ~. ° ~ e ~ } aOa ~ jr ~ g I ~ i~ ~ ~ "~ Pca~cxunnoNB ;® : V w '~ "0 1 FGiFNt] X lB E TING TRE E R019FRIfl' @ ~ ,~ aT¢-m ~vm~e®wmn ('~ ase~[ let~H _ :i'~w . ~~ ~r _~- y: `m.® m ~ LAN6S(:APF I FRFIJI~ : ~- ter. ~ ~ ~ndsceoe .ee e~ m~ ®m Plan ~ U Q '""~oP~" gY• • . sr -~ •- . ~~ U ~'L1.0 ~ Exhibit B -Page 4 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Fencing Plan 2021-----~ ~$-.~ - - - ~"-~- - - -' 291 ~ '_ -~~ "~~ _ ~ -~'' ~ ~. ate, r n ~.~ ~ _ ~: ,~~ ;r p~iA• .. ~~ s,~-lid w~-r ~' Verfiicr~e+e ~~ . ~~ .~~, ~ lIPSA mftl 4]D6~4 .}~ Exhibit B -Page 5 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 6. Building Elevations O (~ Q O -Q O 4~ ~, G ~ t 5 `. ~. ~1 VmlAd~mlb - _ _-_ ~``J ..., A ,r L _. _ ~~ 'ro„ .; --~g ~ h d~ C~ ., _. S" '.., . ~- I _» _ ~a _ ~~-- --~ -~ _ ~ ~ ,.~- d = __ _~ ---= -~ --~ ~. ~ ~ °/'Q' i ~ ~'~r~,,._~ • ~ i ;._ ,~ , __ _ ~,.~` via ~.: ~. ~- ~~~ - .4.-..a~.a O O -..~„ ~~r Q L/. O° 0` i' ~, ~`_ _ ~ .,... <,, ~5~~ ~~~ e. ~ G, ~~1 r ,~ --~ - I ~® ~~~ ~~ ee , 1 ~'a a Exhibit B -Page 6 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1 r t ~~~ ~~~~ ~' 5 ~~ .1. _.~-1 mil Q~ ~~8 ~~~ 8 ® i N J ~ Wg ~ Exhibit B -Page 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Q Q Q U Q „ u, ~ ~ ~ ~, t., -+ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~: ~ ~ ~ -. __ _ _ ~~ Ped CdHerfb Elevation . ~~-- ,2 (~ Y ~ Q CJ Q Q (~ ~ r ~ I _.:_ i . - ~ ,y~~~ a -. ., ~ v ._ ~----f-...nom .,~ .~r..ro ,: ,... Pad C~East Elevation Pad C-Weat Elevetiea _- esrr.,w ~ ~ c~~ ~~ i '~' - - i ~ i ~.~. _- 3 6~~. p l ti. c_.`.:de ..'S`am wr.l•~rt.~i~ ~O • _f ~~ Pad C-8arti~ Elevation eoc. .r Bg B i 55 ~ ~t_ ~ ~~ ~ Exhibit B -Page g • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Letter from Ada County Development Services Pertaining to Property Boundary Adjustment DE~VELOFMENT SER~TICES FHO1vE canal 28?-9900 FAX X208) 2~9-7909 ~ W. FONT, $4ISE. IDAHO @3702-93a0 ~~ "'~,,?- ..-~. Bi~ILDING ENGINE>RIN13 PLAIv1VINf3 Zt)IdIN® May 6, 2008 DMG Real Estate Parsers/ R Greg Gins 3~ N. 9d+ Sttifie 207 Boise ID, 83702 RE: PItQ.iEL`T I~iUA'iB1:`R 20l18~S6-PBA. Applic~nian for a PropeRY ~'Y Adjustment involving Tax Parcel Numbers Sl 128223075 a~1 83193250010 located at 3210 S Eagle Road, Meridian, lD; Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Section 28. i?ear Applicant: On Apn7 7, ~ Ada County 1?evelopn~ent Services rseoeived your application for a property boundary adjustment Based on staffs review of the Ada County Cade, this application has been given tentative approval, subject to the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit °A". Please note, this approval sfraD became null and void if the Conditions of Approval have not been met, and if you have not obtained a valid ?O Certificate within one {1) year of the date of this approval letter. This deeermination was made (rased upon currentinformation conta~ed in the public record and intQrpre~tion of the Ada County Zoning Ordinance. You may appeal this decision to the Board of Ada County CommiccinnPre, To do so, you must file the appeal within fifte~t days of the date of this letter. The fee for filing an appeal is $350. Pua~ant to Idaho Cede § 67-b53.s, this letl~a is to further inforat you thaf to the extQnt a final decision has been made on a sic land use request; an applicant has the right to request a regulatory takings analysis undr-s Idaho Code § 67,8003. If you have any questions, I can iae reached at (208) 287-701. /~ e/v Sid Anderson, Planner II Ada County Developnent Services ec Mark Perfect, Plarurer qI Supervisor, Ada Comaty Development Services Sonya Walters, Associate City Planner, Meridian City From 82 PHA DMt3! Gaiffi Fags 1 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF ANALYSES This appHratian is far a Property Bourtdary Adjustment involving Tax Parcel Numbers S] 128223075 located at 32]0 S Eagte Raad and R3]9325~10 located at 3300 E Falcon Drive. On Apri14, 20~ Ada County f3eue]opment Services ra9eived your app]ication for a property boundary adjustment. On April ?, 2~ your acceptance letter was sent to you indicating that your application would be acted upon within (A days. There is a single family hesidence located on each of the properties. Parcel number R3119325fl010 contain 4.8 aase~ it is zavned RLTT. it is lot 3 of Gflldert Eagle and was platfied #n 1974. This propertp is a 4$ acre Iegal nonconforming lot and will became a confomroing panel containing 5A acres. Parcel atm~tber 5128223tT75 contains 3.9 acres it is zoned RUT and was cheated on 8/ 18/2tTOb by in5#twiuuit number 10613404b. This parcel was split farm parcel S11213223~0 when a portion of tize property was deeded in Ada County Highway District. Paheel number SI1~223070 was crnated in 1954 and was 5 acres per deed hecarded ~ book 392 and page 25~ Sinoe this property was conforniing prior to it being reduced by governmental action it is deemed a confornning property for development purposes. This property canter 3.9 ages and wIIl be 3.6 acres this property will be annexed Into the city of Meridian. APPLICABLE LAW This secdon details Ada County zaaiing ordinance regulations and other applicable standards regarding development of the subject property. 1. S-9~A-19: PROPERI^fl REDUCED BY GOVERNMENTAL ACTION: [f a governmentai action (such as az~giiisition through prescription, puischase, or other means by the Ada County Mghway district, Idaho trans~rtation department, utility company or corporation under the p>risdiction of the Idaho pablic utilities coinnussion, c-r other k skate, or federal agerny) redu©es an exstiiig property below the required property size, such properly shall be deemed as a canforniing property for the purposes of development. See ako section 8-18-3 of this title. (Ord. X9.6-14-x: amd. Ord. 591, 7-27- ~D Pmjeot ~iaa~oosd-PBA DMO / (iaias Page Z a~CS Exhibit B -Page 1 ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. A property 1xsro~tdaty adjustment shall not increase the original number of properties. D. A property boundary adjustamettt shall not change oa rnove any public streets, privai~e roans, easements, or publicly dedicataed areas in any manner. E. The property ~undary adjustment shall not constitute a reloca#lion of a Pr• F. For platted lots, the property boundary adjustrnQrtt shall be in substantial conformance to the retarded plat Section 8-1A-1 Definta[ons 5UliSTANTtAL CC7PdFOli1VIANCB: A final plat shall be deemed to be in substan13a1 conformance to a pn?liautnary plat provided. that the final plat represents no increase in tfte number of lots as approved for the P~~' Plat and a ten percent (10%) or less deviation of any dimensional standard shown on the preliminary plait' provided that the density and lot dimensions meet the standards of the zoning base district Unless required by a public highway agency, public utility, or federal or state agency, deviations greater than ten percent (10%) or more of a~- dimensional standard shown on the preliminary plat shall not be deemed in substan~al conformance. Final plats in rural districts and the RUT and RSW districts shall be allowed a twenty five percent {25~) deviation of dimensional standards 3. Section 8-9C-5: PROPERTY BpU[~TDARY ADJt,TS7'MENT REQUIRED FINDING: In order to approve the application, the decision-mal~g body shall find that Rte proposed property boundary adjustment complies with the standards in Section 8.4C-4 of this Tile. FINDIAIGS OF FACT If any of these Findings of Fact arse deemed Conclusions of Law, they are incorporated into the Conclusions of L,aw section. The Director finds that Proj~t Number PBA complies with Section 8-~A-19 of the Ada County Code as follows. Parcel number 5112822/0 was a legal conforming 5 acre property in the RUT zone and was then reduced in size by an acquisition tltrough purchase by Ada County highway district reducing the existing property below the required property size. This created parcel number 51128?Z3ff75 this property is deemed a conforming property for the purposes of development The Director finds that Frc>ject Number 21DO~Q56-PBA complies wide Section $~lC-5, A- E of the Ada County Code as follows: A. As conditioned ttte property lmundary adjnstntent will rat reduce the property size of the parcels below the minimum dimensional standards set forth in their respective districts. Project tl PI3A ®Mti / GoimZ Page 3 of 5 Exhibit B -Pagel l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING•TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. As evidenc~i in the record, Parcel A is a eonforrnistg property based on dte dimensional standards set forte in the RUT District for tk~e property before it was reduced by govermnental action. A& evidenced in the record Parcel B is a nonconfom~ing property bated or the dimensional standards set forth in tike RUT District Parcel B will be increased in siia~e and will became a conforming PmP~'tY- Thus the property boundary adjustment wi71 not increase the nanconforneity of a noneonforn~ing property. C. As evidenced by the snbmitted site plan drawing, the property boundary ad justment does not change or move any public streets, Private roads, or publicly dedicated. areas in any ~. D. As evidenCecl C'y the submit~?d site plan drawing, the property boundary adjustment wiu not constitute ~ relocation of property. E. As evidenced by dte submitted site plan drawing, the property boundary adjustment will rat constitute a relocation of the property. F. As evidenced by dte record the subnnit~d site plane complies wid'i Section S- 4C 5, F of the Ada aunty Code ~ folloa-s: As evidenced in the record Cats lot 3 of Golden Eagle Estates con~ins 4.8 acres. Per the code, the maxinnum allowed dimensional deviation is 25°b ~ d~re ftiJT zone or 9aZ acres on this property. As proposed, die property boundary adjustment would change the dimensional deviation by .2 acres. A-s proposed, ifie property boundary adjustment is in substam3al conformance with the recorded plat. CQNCZUSIONS OF LAW If any of these Conclusions of Law are deemed. Fatdictgs of Facih, they are incorporated into the Findings of Fact section. 1. The Dir~tor concludes Praject Number flBA complies with Section 8- 4C-5 of the Ada Coenty Cade ORUIIt Based urn the Findings of Fact and Condvsions of Law cantuined in this Staff Reparr; the Director ten~hvely approves Project Number 2BDdt10056-P'BA, sub~ct to the Conditior~ of Approval attached as Lxtubit A Project ~ IAA Dlataec~ P~~.ot's Exhibit B -Page 12 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 EXHIBIT A colwrr~olvs of APPROVAL PROJECT N[IM>;ER PBA DMG Real Palate Partners/ R Greg Goias REQUIRBD ACTIQNS THE FOLLOWIAtG LIST DETAILS THE TASKS THAT MUST l~E CQMFLETEI3 BEFORE TSE APhIiC1dAL t?F PROJECT NUMBER PBA IAdILL Bt CONSIDERED FINAL THE APPLICANT AND/OR ©Wl1tERS SIiALt HAdL iTN[7L ONE YEAR FROM T$E WftTT1'~T DECISION TO COMPLETE TIIE R ACTIONS AND TO QBTAIl1T VVltt`CTIIN APPSOYAL FROI'~I TIIE L#IRPC'TO1L T APPR~YAL SHALL BECOME VOIQ IF WRITTEN ~1~TAL SAS NOT BEEi~T ISSUED BY THAT DATE. 1. The applicantand/or owners shall cause the property to be surveyed and a record of survey recorded. 2. The applicant and/or owners shall execu#e and record the necessary deeds to accomplish the property boundary adjustment. 3, The applicant and/or owners shall obtain new parc~i numbers from tits Ada County ~ The applicant and Jor owners shall rain garcei "A" to be annexed into the city of Meridiian. The applicant shall complete condition number 6 after Meridian City Cauntcii has voted to approve $te annexatIon for parcel "A", but prior to the ordnance being adopted and published. 5. The applicant and/or owners shall provide the following daeumenYatian tD the Director. a} t?ne copy of dte recorded record of survey. b} thte ropy of cite n~orded deed(s). c} Proof of assignment of tax parcel numbers. d) Documentation itta# pared "A" has been approved for annexation by Meridian City Council. 6. Upon eamgleLntg the abotre , the applicant shall request a letter from the Director stating that the p~ Boundary Adjustm.,ent has received final agprovaL ?. If the grvperly is not annexed into the City of Mericlfan within one year of the date of this letter file number 2 PBA will become null and void. Project g2 3G-PBA DibIG t Cmiffi Page 5 of 5 Exhibit B -Page 13 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on March 17, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, properly owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 898-5506 to initiate this process. Said DA shall be completed within 1 year of City Council action. (The Planning Department required DA provisions are in Section 10 of the Staff Report.) 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIlVIINARY PLAT 1.2.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007), associated Development Agreement, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011) shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006). 1.2.2 Prior to issuance of any CZC and/or building permit, the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.2.3 The landscape plan included in Exhibit A, prepared by The Land Group on 4/18/08 (revised 4/24/08), is approved with the following modifications/notes: • The applicant shall construct a minimum 25-foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of S. Eagle Road and E. Victory Road (both arterial streets), exclusive of ACHD right-of--way required for the ultimate street section. Said buffer shall be designed and constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. Per UDC 11-3B-7.2b, street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association. • The applicant shall construct a buffer adjacent to the existing residential uses to the east and south in accordance with the landscape plan attached in Exhibit A and the DA provisions and conditions of approval noted in this report. A reduction in the required 25- footwide buffer was approved in certain areas depicted on the landscape plan through Alternative Compliance with this application. • Depict a minimum 6-foot tall verti-crete wall along the south property boundary in the areas shown on the fencing plan attached in Exhibit A.S. In all other areas adjacent to residential uses, depict minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing. • The applicant shall construct a minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along both Eagle Road and Victory Road beyond the ultimate right-of--way of the reconstructed and widened Eagle/Victory intersection. Said sidewalk shall extend acrocs the ldrid~e nrouerty along F.a~le Road to Falcon Drive and be located within a n ~b is pedestrian easement. • The Applicant shall contact Elroy Huff, Parks Department, for confirmation of the caliper inches of trees to be mitigated, and approval of the tree mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Ekoy Huff, on implementing the protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Exhibit B -Page 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes shall be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.4 All commercial street buffers shall be on a common lot or on a permanent dedicated buffer, maintained by the property owner or business owners' association, per UDC 11-3B-7C2. 1.2.5 Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of any building permits on the site to contain debris during construction. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed where permanent fencing is not proposed. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.6 All existing buildings on the site shall be removed, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.2.7 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits. 1.2.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.3.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-11. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.5 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3.6 Per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterways (Ten Mile Creek) that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. This requirement doe not apply to the Ten Mile Creek which is classified as a natural waterway and must be protected as stated in UDC 11-6A-1H. This requirement shall not apply to the Beasley Lateral if the applicant improves it as a linear open space water amenity. Exhibit B -Page 1 S • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1.3.7 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.8 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 1.4 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS -CONDITIONAL USE PERMI'T' 1.4.1 All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-08-007) application and associated Development Agreement and Preliminary Plat (PP-08-006) shall also be considered conditions of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP-08-011). 1.4.2 The Applicant shall comply with the Specific Use Standards for drive-through establishments listed in UDC 11-4-3-11 as follows: a. All establishments providing drive-through service shall identify the stacking lane, speaker location, and window (pneumatic tube) location on the plans submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application; b. Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public right-of- way by patrons; c. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking, d. The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district or existing residence; e. Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an escape lane; and, f. A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies shall be required. 1.4.3 The hours of operation for the pharmacy drive-through shall be limited to 6 am to 10 pm/7 days a week. 1.4.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed pharmacy drive-through with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to commencement of the use. 1.4.5 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above (UDC 11-SB-6F). If the drive-through use has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 2. Public Works Departffient 2.1 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of the 12 inch main located in E Victory Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install at the developer's expense two water connections one in E Victory Road and one in S Eagle Road due to fire flow requirements. The applicant will also be required to stub a future connection to 3300 E Falcon Drive. The applicant will be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works department. 2.2 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in E Victory Road with service provided to 3250 E Victory Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide Exhibit B -Page 16 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.4 The applicant has indicated the required pressurized irrigation system in this development will be owned and operated by an irrigation district, therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface water for the primary source. If a surface source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 Meridian Public Works specifications do not allow any large landscaping within a five foot radius of water meters. The applicant shall make the necessary adjustments to achieve this separation requirement and comply with all landscape requirements. 2.7 Additional width to the public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement along the right-of way shall be dedicated where the sidewalk is located past the right-of--way. The additional width needs to be sufficient to allow for 10 feet of easement past the sidewalk. 2.8 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.10 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be installed and activated, sewer system shall have passed air-testing and video inspection, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District ,prior to applying for building permits. 2.11 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.12 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.13 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat. Exhibit B -Page 17 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D• TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.15 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.16 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of building pads are at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.3 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. The required turning radius shall be maintained adjacent to the landscape islands off Taconic. 3.5 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.6 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Exhibit B -Page 18 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3.7 Fire lanes, streets, and structures including the canopy height of mature trees shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6. 3.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.9 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.10 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D 3.11 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.12 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.13 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 3.14 The first digit of the Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 3.15 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.16 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.17 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.18 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections 3.19 Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with The International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 3.20 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 3.21 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL -Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144mm) or three stories in height shall have at least three means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Two of the access roads shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line. 3.22 The Fire Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the Victory/Eagle intersection not be approved. If these access points are approved, the Fire Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 4. Police Department 4.1 The Police Department strongly recommends that the access points depicted on the plans closest to the Victory/Eagle intersection not be approved. If these access points are approved, the Police Department recommends that these accesses be restricted to right-in/right-out only as proposed. 5. Parks Department 5.1 The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 No comments were submitted by SSC for this project. Exhibit B -Page 19 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 7.1.1 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Eagle Road abutting the site: a) Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $9,600 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection project. 7.1.2 The applicant is required to construct one of the following along Victory Road abutting the site: a) Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41-feet from the centerline of the roadway; Or b) Provide the District with a road trust in the amount of $10,000 for construction of the sidewalk with the District's scheduled intersection.project Construct one of the following: • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located a minimum of 315-feet from the near edge from the new curb line (measured near edge to near edge). OR • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 220-feet from the north property line on Eagle Road; AND • Construct one right-in/right-out access driveway 215-feet from the west property line on Victory Road; AND • Install a 6-inch raised median from the intersection back 50-feet beyond the driveways to restrict the turn movements. Coordinate the design and ultimate location of the raised median with District Development Review and Traffic Services staff. • Construct one full access driveway on Eagle Road located 427-feet from the northernmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND • Construct one full access driveway on Victory Road located 25.5-feet from the easternmost property line (measured property line to near edge); AND Pave the driveways their full widths and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. Commercial driveways are restricted to a width of 36-feet. Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to Eagle Road and Victory Road. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 20 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D• TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.3 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.4 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five yeazs old aze not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.5 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.6 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.7 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.8 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.9 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spaze or filled) aze compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.10 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they aze in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/vaziance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B -Page 21 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map ,... , ~.ni rxa sexes csoue, nvc, March 14, 2~8 Prajeci Ma. 07167 Atsnelretaaa and R~ac UMG Real Partners 4.79 Acres Eahlbtt "A" A tract of lsaad for annexatiion and restage purposes situated in a pardon of th® !d'o~r~ One (~umter of the l~iorthwest Qne Quarter df Sactiort 2$, Tawnship 3 North, Range I ~. »aiHS Meridiact, Ads County. Idaho, da~n'bed as ftillc~~s: Ii~ClIi~VENG at a found brass cap mornaneating the iVctrthw~t Coruas• bf said Section 28 oa tha intersecd~ of tkte centers of East Victory Road and the ceatcsrlhre of South eagle Road; 1`&e~rce following tk~ arn3lterly iiaa ©f ~e t~or~w~t One Queuier of e~ S~eeg~ ~ and ~ of said vi~ry Road, South mss 1 ~ t a distance of s3a.ad? ii~t to a point, which. bars plorth 69°35'51" west a distaatsr of 2,J 27.(!5 fit from a fomad ~ motaurneating the Ids One ter earner ofssid Sion 26; Thane®lea said n~rrtherly Ilse and sad centeriin~ South ~(1°3I'02~ ~Vesi a distance of 2tI0.00 feet to a .lbural 112-inch steel pin; 1 h~ace South 1$°19'52" West a distanc8 of 1$.72 feet do a e~et 5#8-Inch steel pin; Thence h'forth 89$35'51" W eat a dist~ce of 245.5? feet to a set 518-1ac~ steel }rin; Thence South 06°26'06" Wei a d of 103:$3 feet ~ a set 5i8-inch steel pin; Thence North $9°31' 13' Wiese ~ dis#an~ of 90.01 fc~ to a SB-inch steal Pte; Theme South -00°31't32" West a distance ctf 73.75 feet to a set S/$-inch steel Pin: TheaceNorth $9°31' i 3" West a disfianc®c~f 92,85 fast to a set 518-inch st~l pin on the ~starly d~ht-of--way line of said g Road; Thence following Bald aasterly~tt-of-waya 5as~ch 00°2$' 11"'1~est a dist~ace of 34.85 feet ~ a set StR-i~h steel pink mac followi~ Bald ea~ariy rightcaf-way, North 30°03'46" West a distsgce of 29.53 feet to a set 5!8 inch steeel pine 'Thenca leaving sari easterly ~$bft-of-wa}+line. TSertit 89°3I'4$" '@Vest a distaaca of 33.00 feet to a paint on the Iute of mid Simon 28 and the centerline of mid South Eagla Road; Thence foIlowing said westerly line and ~ centcrHne,lVoyth QO°2$'11 " a dis~nce of 518. l2 feet to the POIi~T OR Bl?GIIVN1riG. pax ~ S6°re t1d~r, sg. tos, .Idahw s~cta+r ,~.as~at ~ z~s.9~4 ~a4s • ottm~te~inas~su'ttzcat~r,-3-~ Exhibit C -Page I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ,~ r~rs ~.navn wancrr, n~c. The abovs~tes~rtri tract of Iand cAntsins 4.79 ~cr~as, ra~are or Imo, s~u~,ject t4 all exist~~ ants and rights-af vaa~. This diption is itttendcd fur atnaeaatu~~e PttcAoses only and shall n®t b~ seed fc~r t~ PAP csf c~nveyrrntce. 83+: 'lam 1,,A3+tp t3RgT:~, IIV~, 462 E. ~T•I~tRE D~IVt;+, SU1TE 1fl0 RAGLE, IDAF~6 6351 f- 2t~-S~39-i 248-934~i445 CFAX} 462 R Slmra P3ri~; fiat 1iKt, ~, Idaho 836Yb ~ P 4['~7 F ~8,~39,444a • waror-ehe9analmm G.g~17i1,i~73G1,Ls~a1s1,L tJ7`1U?_A909i1-0{1Aartd~A ;~rtiwudcx Exhibit C -Page 2 3~r-~•~~ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Situated in ~ won of tt~ Northwest 1!4 of the No t/4 of Section 28, To~amship 3 North, i~a~nge !East, ~.M., Ada ~ourtty, Idaho FOUN9 BRASS CAP ld1M Ct3RidER SECTI®I~ 28 C.P.d~.No. 94~ ~. ~'ICTQRY RC3.~1U gr'`~-- ~ 41 ~~ ~~, c 3111~2231P75 ~ CUR~t~'I' ~°AX DLS~iGT: RUT .- i;'ROPO~ TAB D~b"Ii`'1tIG°T: C-G 4.79f ABC. F~II~D BRASS CAP ~ ~/~ a s~C~o~v ~ i~R CP~r.F' No. 87i1D39i}7 ai __-.,.. ~~ ~~,' Si3935'S1 °E ~ 2127.05' .~ ;~a ~ ~ ~ra~n.~i~ o ~ ~ ~° ~~ ~ • Pd89`35'51 ~'P! N89 31'13°W $ a"'c~ 245.5 a~ I~~ 90.01' ~ o ~p>.u~t.r~tt~r.~ ~~,~ N30`03'46°W ' r`r~ `° 1~~'ATE~' ~" 29.53 a ~12~459 ® ~ ' 5031'02°W ~9,~'~ OF •~'~4 8939 93 73.75' '~- L. ~~~' • 8?..$5 Stl'28'11°W ~~~@11C~ ~' 7 • 34.86' '~ ' 1~1~931'48"W • Ffl~ 5J~ tom. gnu 33.00' ~ SET sj~" SiFE! ~- ~ ~ 5 B" Q ~3 FOUND t/'2' STEEL F'p1 A " Sl'E{L PON G LCULAfED PtTG DT Pl 1 /15 CORNER BOUN9ARY l~ - -- -~ &ECflON W+tE ^ rrv,acevc~rsraa,ncvcrutt E RiRt7JECT tNft}Rh1ATtOri! - i 8CAI.E: "#" a 1~ ,~~„~ E~HIBiT ~B" Parcel S1 ~282~3~~5 ~;~..~ ~ Annexation end Rezone i PRa~~ar ao. ~res~r f 1 ~~' 1 Exhibit C -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all the subject property C-C; the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report for more information. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the purpose statement of the commercial districts and the established regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for a reduction in buffer width adjacent to the residential use along the southern property boundary. The applicant is requesting a reduced buffer width in certain areas through Alternative Compliance with this application. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (iJDC 11-5B-3.E). The City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in general compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This is a logical expansion of the City limits. In accordance with the findings listed above, the City Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to C-C would be in the best interest of the City if a Development Agreement is required with the provisions noted in the staff report. Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The City Council fords that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The City Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff fmds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this fording. (See fording Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Ciry Council fmds that the proposed development will not be detrimental to the pubic health, safety or general welfare. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Ciry Council fmds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The decision malting body shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The City Council finds that the existing site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and comply with the dimensional and development regulations of the C-C zoning district, except for the required buffer width to residential uses. The applicant is requesting approval of Alternative Compliance for a reduced buffer width in certain areas along the south properly boundary. The City Council fords that if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval in Exhibit B and the DA provisions listed in Section 10, development of this site should meet the intent of the UDC. B. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council finds that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Mixed Use -Community. The property is proposed to be zoned C-C, which complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use). C. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions and DA provisions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed drive-through use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the City Council believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council finds that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned public facilities and services. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the Applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council fords there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. Exhibit D -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment , and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is a concern; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the public as there are no nearby residents. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. H. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use. The City Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. 4. Alternative Compliance Findings (UDC 11-SB-SE): A. Strict adherence or application of the requirements is not feasible; OR Staff finds that the subject property has space limitations due to its size and irregular shape, which makes strict adherence to the buffer requirements not feasible. Staff finds that the proposed alternative means of request for Alternative Compliance provided that a minimum 6-foot tall verb-crete wall is constructed adjacent to all areas with a decreased buffer width and minimum 6-foot tall solid vinyl fencing is constructed in all other areas along with added landscaping along the entire boundary adjacent to residential uses. This does, in fact, preclude full compliance with the City's landscaping standards. B. The alternative compliance provides an equal or superior means for meeting the requirements; and Staff fmds the alternative compliance proposal to construct a verti-crete wall in areas where the buffer is below the required 25-feet and 6-foot tall vinyl fencing in all other areas, and added landscaping along the entire perimeter adjacent to residential uses does provide an alternative means for meeting the City's landscape buffer requirements. Therefore, Staff supports the proposed concept landscape plan, as depicted in Exhibit A. C. The alternative means will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or impair the intended uses and character of the surrounding properties. Staff fmds that the proposed alternative will not be detrimental to the public welfare or impair the use%haracter of the surrounding properties. ' Exhibit D -Page 4 September 5, 2008 PFP 08-~ 1 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Jeffrey Fullmer ITEM NO. 5-F REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for Preliminary / Fnal Plat approval of 2single-family residential building tots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-9 zoning district for Fullmer -end of East Carlton between E. Fiffh Street & Cathy Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See artFached findings ~~~~ Contacted: ~ Date: - -~ Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials resented at pubOc meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • CITY OF MERIDIAN E IDIAN'%--- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ~ DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Preliminary/Final Plat Approval for Fullmer Subdivision Consisting of 2Single-Family Residential Building Lots on 0.33 of an Acre in an R-8 Zone, by Jeffrey Fullmer. Case No(s). PFP-08-001 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PFP-08-001 -1- 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Deparment, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Preliminary Plat and Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008,incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated 5/15/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The applicant's Final Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Final Plat, dated 6/3/08, is hereby conditionally approved; 3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B-7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PFP-08-001 -2- i • time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action o£the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant. to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PFP-08-001 -3- i • -~ By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of _JQ~~~~~~, 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) Attest: Jaycee Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. VOTED_ i~~Q,GL~ VOTED VOTED VOTED `~~~~~"" ` or Tammy a Weerd `\~~,~~~y O R,~ y~ ~ ~ -a,d~ Ci `~pRP~Rgrcr ~'~ -. $~i~L = ~`~~ p ,' 9Q ~T iS'~ • .r ``. ~~~ ~ ~~~ The ~'1'~ing-D~~artment, Public Works Deparhnent and City By: Dated: ~ ' / I ' ~ 4 City Cl 's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PFP-08-001 -4- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING•DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: August 26, 2008 TO: Mayor & City Council E IDIAN~~ '` FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner i 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Fullmer Subdivision • PFP-08-001 Preliminary/Final Plat consisting of 2single-family residential building lots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-8 Zone 1. SUNIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicant, Jeffrey Fullmer, has applied for Preliminary/Final Plat (PFP) approval of two (2) single- family residential lots on 0.33 of an acre. The property is currently zoned R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and is located southeast of and at the terminus of E. Cazlton Street, east of N.E. 5~` Street. The majority of this site is currently designated "Old Town" on the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map; a smaller part along the north boundary of this site is designated as "High Density Residential" The portion of the subject property that lies at the terminus of E. Cazlton Street consists of un-platted land. The southern portion of the property was previously platted in 1897 as Lot 12 and a portion of Lot 11, Block 8, of Cottage Home Addition to Meridian Subdivision. A property boundary adjustment application is in process but has not yet been recorded, to provide frontage for the two adjacent previously platted lots to the west (Lots 10 & 11, Block 8, Cottage Home Addition). The two proposed lots as well as the two adjacent lots will all share a proposed common driveway as access to the public street system. The subject property is depicted as Parcel C on the on the Pazcel Boundary Adjustment Survey (see Exhibit A.2). The subject development is eligible for a combined preliminary/final plat application because the proposed subdivision does not exceed four lots, there aze no new streets being dedicated, and this development is not located within a floodplain, hillside, or the like (UDC 11-6B-4A). The subject property is within the corporate boundaries of the City, the City's Area of Impact, and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUbIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of PFP-08-001 for Fullmer Subdivision, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 17, 2008, based on the Findings of Fact listed in Exhibit D and subject to the comments listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on July 17 2008 At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval of the subject PFP request a. Summary of Commission Public Hearin: i. In favor: Shari Stiles. Engineerine Solutions ii. In opposition: None iii. Commentin• None iv. Written testimony: None v. Staff presentin application: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff commenting on application: Scott Steckline b. Kev Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. Method of irrigation for proposed lots c. Kev Commission Chaise(s) to Staff Recommendation: Fullmer PFP PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 i. Strike condition of approval #1.2.4 in Ezhibit B reauirina the applicant to submit evidence of approval of ROW construction and public utility improvements (per Staff recommendation); and ii. Strike condition of approval #1.3.1 in Ezhibit B reauirin~ construction of a sidewalk along E. Carlton Street (per Staff recommendationl. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Number PFP-08-001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications) Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Number PFP-08-001, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (state specific reasons for denial of preliminary and/or final plat request) Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Number PFP-08- 001 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (state specific reason(s) for a continuance) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: The site is located southeast of and at the terminus of E. Carlton Street, east of N.E. 5~' Street NW % of Section 7, Township 3, North Range 1 East, B.M. b. Owner: Jeffrey B. Fullmer Fullmer PFP PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2370 W. Amity Road Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Same as Owner d. Present Zoning: R-8 (Medium Density Residential) e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Residential & Old Town f. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting combined preliminary/final plat approval of 2single-family residential building lots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-8 zoning district. 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (See Exhibit A.3): 5/15/08 2. Date of Final Plat (See Exhibit A.4): 6/3/08 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a preliminary plat, as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a final plat, as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: June 30, 2008, & July 14, 2008 (Commission); August 4, and 18, 2008 (Gifu Councill d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 20, 2008 (Commission); August 1, 2008 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: July 7, 2008 (Commission); August 16, 2008 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): The property consists of vacant land; the previous structures have been removed from the site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The surrounding area consists of existing single family residential properties. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family residential properties in Sterling Creek Subdivision, zoned R-8 2. East: Single-family residential properties in Catherine Park Subdivision and N. Cathy Lane, zoned R-8 3. South: Single-family residential properties in Cottage Home Addition Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Single-family residential properties in Cottage Home Addition Subdivision and E. Carlton Avenue, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: ~ The southern portion of the subject property was platted as Lots 11 & 12, Block 8 of Cottage Home Addition to Meridian Subdivision in 1897. (The proposed plat includes a very small portion of Lot 11.) Fullmer PFP PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • A Property Boundary Adjustment (PBA) was approved by the Planning Department on 6/11/08 that includes Lots 10 through 12, Block 8, platted in Cottage Home Addition to Meridian and the un-platted parcel at the end of E. Carlton Avenue. The PBA proposes to create 3 new parcels from the previous lot/parcel configuration with frontage for each of the parcels on E. Carlton Avenue (see Exhibit A.2). (All of these lots were platted without public street frontage. The PBA proposes to flag frontage for each parcel out to Carlton Avenue). e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: There is currently sewer in N. Cathy Lane Location of water: There is currently water in N. Cathy Lane Issues or concerns: None 2. Vegetation: There are 2 existing trees on the site consisting of a total of 66 caliper inches (per the preliminary plat). 3. Floodplain: The subject property is not located within a floodplain or floodway. 4. Canals/Ditches/Irrigation: There are no canals, ditches, or irrigation facilities that cross this site. 5. Hazards: Staff is unaware of any hazards that may exist on this site. 6. Size of Property: 0.33 of an acre f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 2 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 2 4. Common Lots: 0 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 2 7. Gross Density: 6.25 dwelling units per acre g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): N/A 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: N/A 4. Other landscaping standards: N/A h. Required Residential Setbacks for the R-8 zone (UDC 11-2A-6): R-8 STANDARD REQUIREMENT Mi nimum roe size /dwellin unit ins uare feet Sin le-famil detached dwellin unit with gara a facin the front roe line 5,000 Sin le-famil detached dwellin unit with shared drivewa , alle loaded gara e, or rivate street mew lots 4,000 Sin le-famil attached & two-famil du lex dwellin unit 4,000 An comer roe 5,000 Minimum street frontage-Single-famil detached dwellin unit in feet with gara a facin street 50 Fullmer PFP PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 R-8 STANDARD REQUIREMENT with shared drivewa , alle loaded ara e, or private street mew lots 40 Minimum street fronta a-Sin le-famil attached, townhouse, andtwo -famil du lex dwellin unit in feet 40 Street setbacks to garage (in feet) Local 20 Collector 25 Street setbacks to living area (in feet) Local 15 Collector 25 Side setback 5 Rear setback 12 Street landscape buffer (in feet) Collector 20 Arterial 25 Entryway corridor 35 Interstate 50 Maximum buildin hei ht in feet 35 Note: ~ Measured from back of sidewalk. or pro a line where there is no ad'acent sidewalk. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to the subdivision is proposed from E. Carlton Avenue via a 20-foot wide ingress/egress common driveway easement that will benefit the 2 proposed lots and also 2 adjacent lots that are not part of the subject plat (see preliminary plat in Exhibit A.3). An unimproved alley runs along the rear property line of the proposed Lot 2. Direct lot access to N. Cathy Lane shall be prohibited. However, an emergency only access with gate/bollards is proposed at the east boundary to/from N. Cathy Lane, as requested by the Meridian Fire Department. As of the print date of this report, comments-have not been received from ACHD. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On June 27, 2008, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present included: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the southern portion of the subject property as "Old Town." Per Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan (pg.106), the Old Town land use category "includes the historic downtown and the true community center. Uses in this category would include offices, retail, and lodging, theatres, restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. A variety of residential uses could include reuse of existing buildings for residential uses, new construction of multi-family residential over ground floor retail or office uses. In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historical character, specific design requirements may be imposed. Pedestrian amenities would be emphasized. Public investment to ensure that Old Town becomes a centralized activity center with public, cultural, and recreational structures would be encouraged. The boundary of the Old Town district predominantly follows Meridian's historic plat boundaries. In several areas, both sides of a street were incorporated into the boundary to encourage similar uses and complimentary design of the facing houses and buildings." The northern portion of this property is designated "High Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Chapter VII, Section C (pg. 99) of the Comprehensive Plan states that the High Density Residential designation allows for the development of multi-family homes in areas where urban services are provided. Residential densities may exceed eight dwelling units per acre. This residential development might include duplexes, apartment buildings, townhouses, and other multi-unit structures. Fullmer PFP PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Other uses within a development may be considered under a planned development permit process. A desirable project would consider the placement of parking areas, fences, berms, and other landscaping features to serve as buffers between neighboring uses." The applicant is proposing to construct 2single-family residential detached homes on the subject 0.33 of an acre property for a gross density of 6.25 dwelling units per acre. The proposed use of the property is consistent with the current R-8 zoning designation for the property. Although the future land use map designates this property for High Density Residential and Old Town use, because a rezone is not requested at this time, Staff believes that the proposed use generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan as follows: • Chapter VII, Goal ffi, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the subject development in the following manner: - Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer s expense. - The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACFID). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change. Municipal, fee-supported services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. Staff finds that the adjacent single family residential properties are compatible with the proposed single family residential subdivision. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density .single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. Staff finds that the proposed single family residential (medium density) use of the property will contribute to the existing single family residential product within the City of Meridian. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C -Encourage residential infill to utilize existing services. City water and sewer service can be extended to the proposed development from main lines currently installed in N. Cathy Lane. Existing services will be used to provide service to the proposed development. • Chapter VII, Goal V, Objective A, Action 11 -Support infill of random vacant lots in substantially developed, single-family areas at densities similar to surrounding development. The density of the proposed infill development is similar to surrounding developments. Two houses are proposed to be constructed on the subject 0.33 of an acre, which complies with the R-8 zoning district. Staff believes that the proposed development and density (6.25 d.u.'s/acre) for this property is appropriate and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and surrounding uses. Staff recommends that the Commission Fullmer PFP PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the Applicant's development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC Table 11-2A-2 lists single-family detached dwellings as a principal permitted use in the R-8 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of the Residential Districts: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation PRELINIINARY/F]INAL PLAT ANALYSIS: The proposed plat consists of 2 building lots with one future single-family detached home planned for each lot. An ingress/egress common driveway easement is depicted on the plat for access to both of the lots from E. Carlton Avenue. Two adjacent pazcels will also take access from the proposed common driveway. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Z lot single-family residential subdivision. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings for a preliminary plat. Property Boundary Adjustment (PBA): A PBA was approved by the Planning Department on 6/11/08 that includes 3 lots previously platted in Cottage Home Addition to Meridian Subdivision and the un-platted parcel at the end of E. Cazlton Avenue that is included within the boundaries of the subject project. The PBA created 3 new parcels from the previous lot/pazcel configuration with frontage for each of the parcels on E. Carlton Avenue. Because the two proposed lots are Parcel C of the PBA, the record of survey for the PBA shall be recorded prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer Dimensional Standards: The property lies within an R-8 zoning district. Staff has reviewed the proposed preliminary and final plat and found they comply with the dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2A-6 for minimum property size and minimum street frontage for 4 properties sharing a common drive. The building footprints depicted on the preliminary plat comply with the street setbacks to garage, living area, and side yard setback. Access: Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided from E. Cazlton Avenue via a 20-foot wide ingress/egress common driveway easement that will benefit the 2 proposed lots and also 2 adjacent lots (Lots 10 & 11, Block 8, Cottage Home Addition to Meridian)/parcels (Parcels A & B on the Property Boundary Adjustment Survey) to the west (see Exhibits A.2 & A.3). An unimproved alley runs along the reaz property line of the proposed Lot 2. Direct lot access to N. Cathy Lane, a private street, shall be prohibited. An emergency access with gate/bollazds is proposed at the east boundary from N. Cathy Lane, as requested by the Meridian Fire Department. Staff is supportive of the proposed access to this subdivision. As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ACRD. Common Driveways: UDC 11-6C-3D lists standards for common driveways as follows: (Staff s analysis in italics) Fullmer PFP PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1. Maximum Dwelling Units Served: Common driveways shall serve a maximum of four (4) dwelling units. Four dwelling units will be served by the proposed common driveway, which complies with this requirement. 2. Width Standards: Common driveways shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') in width. The common driveway easement is depicted as 20 feet in width on the plat; said driveway shall be paved the full 20 feet in width. 3. Maximum Length: Common driveways shall be a maximum of one hundred fifty feet (150') in length or less, unless otherwise approved by the Meridian city fire department. The proposed common driveway exceeds 1 SO feet in length; however, the Fire Department approves of the common drive with the emergency access depicted on the plat. 4. Improvement Standards: Common driveways shall be paved with a surface with the capability of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. (Ord. OS-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The applicant shall construct the common driveway with a paved surface that complies with this requirement 5. Abutting Properties: Unless limited by a significant geographical feature, or separated by a minimum five foot (5') wide landscaped common lot, all properties that abut a common driveway shall take access from the driveway. (Ord. 07-1325, 7-10-2007) The driveways for all of the properties are depicted on the preliminary plat to/from the common driveway as required. 6. Turning Radius: Common driveways shall be straight or provide a twenty eight foot (28') inside and forty eight foot (48') outside turning radius. (Ord. OS-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The applicant shall comply with this requirement: 7. Depictions: For any plats using a common driveway, the setbacks, building envelope, and orientation of the lots and structures shall be shown on the preliminary plat and/or as an exhibit with the final plat application. (Ord. 07-1325, 7-10-2007) The preliminary plat includes the aforementioned items (see Exhibit A.3). 8. Easement: A perpetual ingress/egress easement shall be filed with the Ada County recorder, which shall include a requirement for maintenance of a paved surface capable of supporting fire vehicles and equipment. The applicant shall comply with this requirement, as shown on the final pla& Landscaping: No landscaping or open space is proposed or required for this development. Tree Mitigation: Any existing, on-site tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of those removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those that are removed. The Applicant should coordinate a mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department (888-3579) if trees are proposed to be removed or have been removed from the site. The existing tress on this site should be retained. E~sting trees shall be protected from damage to bark, branches, and roots during construction. The City of Meridian Parks Department arborist shall approve the protection fence(s) prior to construction. Any severely damaged tree shall be replaced in accord the standards above. Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted conceptual building elevations of the proposed single-family structures. The elevation shows 3 different types of construction materials on the fronts including stone/brick accents; the rear and sides of the structure consist of one type of building material. A 2-car garage is shown. Staff generally supportive of the proposed elevations. Fullmer PFP PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Fencing: No fencing is proposed or required with this development. Temporary fencing to contain debris during construction shall be installed around the perimeter boundary of the subdivision prior to release of building permits. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are no ditches, laterals, or canals that cross this property. E~sting Structures: There are no existing structures on the site. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The Applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all properties per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the subject preliminary/final plat application (PFP-08-001) substantially conforms to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of said PFP application subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on July 17 2008 At the public hearing they moved to recommend aAUroval of the subiect PFP reauest The eridian City ouncil heard_ this item nn Anm,a± ~.~ 2nn4 st t1.n .,,,~,~;.. r.o..,.:,.,, +w oLnc~ approved the subiect PFP reaue 11. EXI~BITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Property Boundary Adjustment Record of Survey (to be recorded) 3. Preliminary Plat (dated: 5/15/08) 4. Final Plat (dated: 6/3/08) 5. Conceptual Building Elevations (dated: 5/20/08) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Services Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 9. Central District Health Department C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Fullmer PFP PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map ~ ~ E WINSLDW DR P a~ s} .. Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. Property Boundary Adjustment Record of Survey (to be recorded) m~~m mauu.w p ~,.a` i ~ i,~ . _ bbb--~~~ Y 9 c ~ °e'Qem cewmn~°~ mr m ~Y,® PARCEL BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT SURVEY FOR JEFF FULLMER LOTS 10, 11 & 12, BLOCK 8, COTTAGE HOME ADDITION TO MERIDIAN, AND A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 7, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2008 I N"'~ I G ocKl° suBDlv~s~oH ~ L -- ~ I e `t~BEAS'fyDE PARKOte II ~ `'--- I` ~`~`~ I~~ `' I won ~ ~- ~ ~b~.-- .mum, ~--~ ~1 -"l E CAlC.TON AYE ~~ PARCEL a`~vowrBP~`euime ~ `. C ~p~ _ ,aera'.et do • 3'lo V Oami b -fiaoll - -f®7 may, - AN - - - f~7 1 4e Ge ~~, A I I ~1 ~ ~?"?. __ .. ~ ~I PARCEL PARCEL I I A g `,ry I ~ ~.> ~ ~ HI BLOCK~IOE PARK SUBDIN90N ~ p< ° c `~ ~~ S~ 0 I EA I I 8 E ADDIPON I BLOCK HOM I COTQA~IDI I (sa:r Horc ~) I -L -~~°' - ~ - -~' ~' --------- a~.,,~~~A~ m UfmlPROVED ALLEY .. _----~--,~----T--T-- ~-.d oT ~ I I ~~' ~ I ,9t % I of ~ I I I i ~ I ~ I BI-OCK B HDyE ADDITION i ~~I I ~ ~ TAO pIERIDIAN i t i I ~ II I~ I I I I ~ I ~ I -----L--~-~-----~---1-----I E SfAIE AVENUE ~ ~x'S~ ~ sv xa mmn I ~------ I 9 ~I -----_ I a- si ~~ _~ I ~ I r------ rn., e. 1~ ~ JC I~ ~ / ~ r / ~ ~ EN6/NEE LR. ~! cvasn SO//!T/1 I~WI~ 6 SVNVEY MO. wove oum~ u¢ . _ _ awa ua 0 _ _ - wuo aem w eaaamn mm Mc mt Pn a wm o wo~K eo,wn~ a„n.a~.wr.. a. ar on« ,~ .a G. e ~ u~ [~ ,~.~~ e a n~ s m ~ rm'°°°uma~i~ °a~ • +we a avo°m° °ma v and ~ ioom aar em ~c num ~aur,mT eu°F00°e ~~aia+° n°mmsna~ 1°"rc'uami m°e sic cmirvTenTE ac uero sm~vm~ `° er a°$~.u'®'Q`@'nw';,rm"~emmmm~Rair~ °9H r~~iiH awPwm,°r woa mz v mxo wm °m m vugn iam voncm mnr g ~, ~ ` °~ Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D• TMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Preliminary Plat (dated: 5/15/08) I ~ -s°~'"~.c ~ ~ a I I I I. I I I I ~~~ -- ---------- ~I I I I ~ I; I ~ ! I ,; I I~--------------- ' S5! I ; 4 ~ I I -- N Ai -- r mz.~ ~e ~ a i ~ i II r I II s~wnvo umt ii I i~'~ I ,~~~~~ i i __ d I ~ 1 GYa§l ~ -_-__ IT ~I ~i F ts1![ m6' - __1 gggg'' ----------- .a.v u~mamn. e°. ______ ______ r ~ ~• I ._____ ___________ - I ~ ,_-___ _tm~ ~I I_ _ ~ S ~~ ± -~L-OWIW Af11R ~ ~ ____i~_~_y,_~ yr~'~ -~1--' X42 I p®0( 0 ® ®c ~~ ~ 1 ~ I mua - ~~ gl@ I I _ ,1 r ~. ~ ~ m1a P i R~ i i I ~ -_- .°. [ a A ~ i ~ \~A~ e~rs~ti ~ ~ I a 6~~ I x a ~ i --- --_---- I -" ~ _~. h----i I wrz , I uv~ne Hoot .. i l I I~ ~® 1='~k, L ~_ 4mi r I ~m'~!~r~ _ I ___•~ .~~~ D y e I I i con~ruu~¢ m mmuar ~ i ~~ i 'i i-~ i~ ® I a 'ip ~+ I @I ~___~ Y I l ~°° 5~ 1 ~m I ~ p ~~~ I I n-B I `---~ I ii i ' I $ 9gg I I I ~ ~_-' i, III 9d ' my I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~~;;1 ' W~~ ~- 7 r,~ ~ I P ~I-y ~® ~I j 1, i iI_ I PRQIMMARY PLGT oATn 1 a~am®W ~~m~~~b offimr ~ ^~~ I I i ~ I I I R_B .I Oil ~ ® I mc.a.° r¢.wo~imm~ °~ ~ I I i ®I I _ I ~I I'I~ ~'.l I mawatcims ' 9~o~W~ emo-.~z.o®¢~¢ ~ ~~ I I. I ~~m~av ~ it lil I Mnw lmm ss ~..~'ane o.+~c~x~~ II i I I.. 1!I I >g j I I I I qq' ;II ~ ~~° ~~ x~ ~ I; I I I .y }I 'll ~ j IF ~ I I I~ ! , ! j,l ~ ~~ ~~ I I ~ I I I I I " ill ~ I ~ ~ I ~I ~ ! 1' !'I +••ar I ~ I ~" a' I PRE Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN•PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEA • DATE OF AUGUST 26 2008 4. Final Plat (dated: 6/3/08) sp~~m~ p~~~~~,sp~~,~~ PLAT SHOWING g 1/4 o d+~1~IGLCC~~ ®~ T ~~~ LOT 12, AND A PORTION OF LOTS 10 AND 11, BLOCK 8 OF COTTAGE HOME ADDITION TO MERIDIAN, AND A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 7, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA CWNTY, IDAHO ~ 2008 I~ I II I ~~ ~' ; ~--------------- I ~ E0.SISIDE PARK ~ I ~I I SIIBDMSION I 2S' BLOCI(I I I I STERI.QiO CREIX SUBOMSIpN I 3 I I 5B4'B"Q'E 19$1' ~ ~~_ I- - - I >o o a m m ~~ I LOT t I \ I sm. r - ~` - - -~. ~\~~b-- I E cNaTaa AYENUE ~ I utaev m i ~~ ~ seem ,ti 9.,s"'~ m x ~ ~~ m lK.OCK 2 g I _ ~6~ -_- __ ~~~ ~ _~.__~___ EansiDE PAPoC I ~ _ _ _ sueomsioN I I --~ - i a LOT 2 ~ I- ~ ~ ~ I ~ I o, e wuo eam or ~ sir ~m s h'.X ~ •A'u m av. ns un (~7 a4Wp nPA ~ I I $, ,~ I ~ ~ ~~I I I I ,~ ~.,~~>~~.~ ~ m ~ m~am.® ~` a P ~su~~~:m.~~~~:_ ®.~wm~~ I , COTTAGE H011E ADORION 70 MERIDIAN I i I I I a ma na>m mw mil¢enner.m®®uosA Om m~a®a ss°®m~ I I I ' °~o ¢°~i~v~°~om~°~¢°a ~'ro em~m'o~~°6um I I I I I ooamarmvmo ~ am m mwm ®~ om m¢ ®m-~R} P,oPn a a ~.¢ Pm®Pm rm e<ta mPa®vr su Prr om yam mm. P m ~e I I I ~ iw ~~aa0°®°1msa~~mrasmi mua~mw a®v~ I I I ' ima~m°n~am ~ma~P~r 01®o~m~m~ m 2S' I I~ I ~ ~ I ~-- S ~9~ 9LLZ11®~VUIOBimm9Hmmm®maaere ~1 1 W sessemti 9n•~ ~- I m[P®mmBPR nmmn maeaw®ac omm~ ;.®.,~mu„n.nos~a,,. ~~® IRID~ROVED ALLEY m NEet PRIM' $ I I dal I ® ®.~ m o~mm~a ~® m . ~ ~; mom n ~ I . ~! ~ ~ BLOCK 8 L COTTAGE HONE ADDITION TO NEWDNFI s C 1/1 ~p~ Q¢ ~ 44~ .Q:FF T•ULLYER "3 ~ E fNL f4 ~ i~ p Cgy}ypppT ~'a 1WAH. 0 Qrl `RRY PEJ Exs~x~txxe ID s ~s'i ~ z SOIUTIOxS ~~~ of Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DE ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Conceptual Building Elevations (dated: 5/20108) 8~ TYP. U.N.O ~~ a°- ~ ® ® i ------ ~ o® , ®~ REAR ELEVATION ~~~ v~y ~, v~f _,:~,.a~..~.x: .._._ . _ ~:~:~ Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet 1 of 1 PRE, prepared by Engineering Solutions, and dated 5/15/08, is approved with the conditions listed herein. 1.1.2 Fullmer Subdivision shall be subject to the dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning district. 1.1.3 The applicant shall comply with all of the standards for common driveways listed in UDC 11-6C- 3D. 1.1.4 Future buildings on the subject lots shall substantially comply with the elevations included in Exhibit A.S, as proposed. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-FINAL PLAT 1.2.1 The fmal plat, labeled as Sheet 1 of 2, prepared by Engineering Solutions, and dated 6/3/08, is approved with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 This subdivision lies within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District; the District will own and maintain the pressurized irrigation system within the development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the domestic water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable landscape areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 1.2.3 The water system shall be approved and activated and the fmal plat for this subdivision shall be recorded prior to applying for building permits. .,s„«e ,.F ~L. L" 1 Dl ~ ~l. A 1' + 1, 11 1. - '+ c r ~ ~ , 1.2.5 All development improvements including water, sewer, and pressurized irrigation shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining Certificates of Occupancy. 1.2.6 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all required fencing, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature of the final plat. 1.2.7 Applicant will be responsible to construct all required water and sewer lines to the proposed subdivision. Developer to coordinate sizing and routing with the Public Works Department, if necessary. 1.2.8 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 1.2.9 Revise or add the following notes on the face of the final plat, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP on 6/3/08, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer: 7. Include the recorded instrument number of the Record of Survey. *.) Add note, "Except for emergency vehicles, direct lot access to N. Cathy Lane is prohibited." 1.2.10 The record of survey for the Property Boundary Adjustment shall be recorded prior to Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING•DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.2.11 Temporary fencing to contain debris during construction shall be installed around the perimeter boundary of the subdivision prior to release of building permits. > > ~~„ 1.2.13 Retain the existing trees on site. Any existing, on-site tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of those removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those that are removed. The Applicant should coordinate a mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department (888-3579) if trees are proposed to be removed or have been removed from the site. 1.2.14 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or previous conditions of approval for this site does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY /FINAL PLAT ~z ~ 'a 11 1. 11 L. ~ 11 a ~R-S~~V4SiR~-a} ~ r 1. ~ -~~eAy~~~te-~TI~(~-~~ 1.3.2 All lot lines common to a public right-of--way shall reserve a 10' utility easement. 1.3.3 Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered bacl~ill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 1.3.4 The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 1.3.6 Where permanent fencing is not proposed on-site, temporary fencing shall be installed around the subdivision boundary perimeter to contain construction debris prior to issuance of a building permit. All permanent fencing shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of- way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 1.3.7 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation / preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 13.8 All development shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 1.3.9 Final plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in N Cathy Lane. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING~DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N Cathy Lane. The applicant shall be responsible to install an 8 inch water line connecting from N Cathy Lane to E Carlton Ave. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot common lot for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way. The common lot shall be covered with a blanket easement to the City of Meridian. FOR RESIDINTIAL ONLY 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells maybe used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.7 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.8 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.9 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.10 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.11 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.12 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.14 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.15 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2.16 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.18 The applicants design engineer shall be responsible for inspection of all irrigation and/or drainage facility within this project that do not fall under the jurisdiction of an irrigation district or ACHD. The design engineer shall provide certification that the facilities have been installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification will be required before a certificate of occupancy is issued for any structures within the project. 2.19 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute for a duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two family dwellings greater than 3600 square feet and greater will require a minimum fire flow as specified in Appendix B of the International Fire Code. Fire Hydrant spacing shall be provided as required by Appendix C of the International Fire Code. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %a" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be placed 18" above finished grade to the center of the 4 %" outlets. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or e~sting hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide and support an imposed weight of 75,000 GVW. 3.6 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.7 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.8 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ TE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 The Parks Department did not submit comments on this application. 6. SANITARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6.1 5SC did not submit comments on this application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 Site Specific Conditions of Approval 7.1.1 Construct rolled concrete curb and gutter at the terminus of E. Carlton Avenue. Coordinate the design with ACRD Development Services staff. 7.1.2 Construct a 20-foot wide driveway at the terminus of E. Carlton Avenue, as proposed. Pave the driveway to its full width and at least 30-feet into the site from the edge of pavement. 7.1.3 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 Standard Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction. The assessed impact fee will be based on the impact fee ordinance that is in effect at that time. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D~ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The City Council fmds that the proposed application is compatible with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The City Council supports the proposed density and proposed plat layout as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The City Council fmds that water and sewer service are available and can be extended to the subject property at the time of development. c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; All utilities are currently available to the subject property. Because any additional services will be installed by the developer at their own cost, if needed, the City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B, Agency Comments and Conditions, for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The City Council is not aware of any health or safety issues associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The City Council is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site. Therefore, the City Council fmds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit C ~ w September 5, 2008 AZ 08-008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT The Land Group, Inc. ITEM NO. 5-G REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services - 5075 W. Cherry Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Findings A~~ Date: ~ Phone: (~~ ~ ~~~Staff Initials: ~~ public meetings shad become property of the City of Meridian. • CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~E IDIAN~~ FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5 acres from Rl (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and Conditional Use Permit approval for a Treatment Facility Consisting of 2 Residential Treatment Buildings and 1 Administrative Building in a proposed R-8 zoning district for Redmont Health Services, by The Land Group Inc. Case No(s). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attache hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law she 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notic codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all . Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impac- Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which ~ Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pui. 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & OR CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 ~~ -1- 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations, Development Agreement, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Applicant's Annexation and Zoning request, as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated May 28, 2008, by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS, included in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference, is hereby conditionally approved. 2. A Development Agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. 3. The Applicant's Conditional Use Permit request as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations included in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, is hereby conditionally approved. 4. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -2- conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-SB-6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take nmtice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -3- i B action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_ C~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED u~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__!~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Attest: Jaycee Hdlhian, City Clerk Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. y~~ Mayor T de Weerd ~~``C?~~ OF ~~~2 ~`''-. `~,0 IE~ = EAL ~~' '~'~~ ,,~ .9 `~ `~,~ The Ifia~~i~art~ht Public Works Department and City BY~ ~ Dated: ~ - ~ ~ - (~ City Cler 's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -4- • • CTTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: August 26, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner E IDIAl~T~--- (208) 884-5533 11~ H SUBJECT: Redmont Health Services • AZ-08-008 Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres from Rl (Ada County) to R- 8 (Medium Density Residential) • CUP-08-015 Conditional Use Permit approval for a Treatment Facility Consisting of 2 Residential Treatment Buildings and 1 Administrative Building in a proposed R-8 zoning district 1. SUNIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicant, The Land Group, Inc., is requesting annexation and zoning (AZ) approval of 5 acres from Rl (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential). Concurrently, the applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to construct and operate a residential care facility consisting of two 9,000 square foot residential treatment buildings and one 6,000 square foot administrative building. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval to operate a nursing or residential care facility within an R-8 zoning district. The subject property is located at 5075 W. Cherry Lane, in Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 West. This property is within the City of Meridian's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. 5UNIMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ and CUP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. By City Ordinance, the Planning & Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council on a combined AZ and CUP application. Below, Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Conditional Use Permit applications. Staff recommends approval of AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 for Redmont Health Services, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 17, 2008, based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zonins Commission heard these items on July 17, 2008. At the public hearin the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subiect AZ and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Dou>i Russell (Applicant's Representative), Robin Hinkle ii. In opposition: None iii. Commentine: Don Glower, Jeff Morrell iv. Written testimony: Don Clower submitted written comments for denial after the P&Z meeting. v. Staff presentins application: Bill Parsons vi. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood, Scott Steckline b. Kev Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. The differences between residential care facilities and out-patient care facilities. ii. Sewer stub to Mr. Glower's property west of this site. iii. The need for private streets required by the Fire, Police and Plannine Departments. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 1 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 iv. Discussed the relocation of the trash enclosure from the location proposed on the submitted site. The Commission discussed the trash enclosure be placed within the stubbed driveway until future connectivity to east parcel was eztended throueh This location was discussed as a solution for meetine the 150-foot leneth for the Fire Department requirement without havine to provide a temporary turnaround. A motion was not made by the Commission to relocate the trash enclosure c. Key Commission Chance(s) to Staff Recommendation• i. The Commission modified several DA provisions as follows• 11 provision 1 12(b ) modified to allow continuine care (out-patient) for the past residents of the proposed facility and strike out out-patient care is prohibited• 2) provision 1 12(0) modified to require stripine instead of bollards as requested by the Fire Department at the 150-foot mark of the east lec of the proposed driveway/private street• 3) provision 1 12(s ) modified to require construction of a 5-foot detached sidewalk along the north boundary of the property instead of the 10-foot multi-use pathway ii. Condition 1.2.1 Bullet 4 was modified to be consistent with DA provision 1 12(0 ) removinc the bollard reauirement and adding striping at the 150-foot mark of the east leg, iii. Condition 1.2.13 was stricken as the Parks Department communicated to staff the multi-use pathway was proposed alone the north side of Cherry Lane instead of the northern property boundary of the site. d. Outstandine Issue(s) for City Council: i. The City Council should determine if the proposed treatment facility includine care of residents and follow-up care of past residents (out-patient) is appropriate in an R-8 zonine district. ii. The applicant should follow up with the Fire Department reeardinc the replacement of the bollards with the stripine at the 150-foot mark of the east lee of the drive aisle and modify condition 3.14 accordincly. If the Fire Department still requires the placement of the bollards it will impact the location of the trash enclosure and an appropriate location should be discussed and identified durinc the hearine The M eridian City Counc'1 heard thec .items nn Angns± 2~_ 2nn4_ st +ho ,,,,l,i;,. ~.oari.... tht~ (`minnil appro ved the subiect A7, and CLTp reaue ~_ ummarv of Citv ounc'1 Publi Nearinge 1. In favor: Van Elm. Robin Ffinkle 1L In opposition: None iiL Comm ntin~• None ~, Written tes 'mono Don lower Y. tall presentine app ication: nna annin¢ Yl. Other staff co men 'n on app i anon: hief A_n_derson. Kyle Radek 1L ev Issues of Diccuc. ion by ounc'l: 1. .mer~encv per onnel acc cc from he Harkin to o he entrance of he propos ai. 'vate street reauiremen for he propoc .d development ~. ouncil wanted cla 'fication on he ca iper inche required for iti ation iY. a site may rea ire a flood plan permi prior o develonm nt of he ite ~, eV COllnCll (~hAnaeR to staff/C'nmmiccinn i2arnmma 1. dded an additional nA provi ion 1.1.2( ~.1 and a .TTP onditinn of annrnval 1 _~. 17 t lIIate with the Meridian Fire nepartmen reQArdin¢ Pm[+rslpnnp annpcc frn.., tAn parkins lot to each of be boil in on he i Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 2 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 008 and CUP-08-015, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications). Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for denial and what the applicant could do to obtain your approval in the future). Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ-08- 008 and CUP-08-015 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 5075 W. Cherry Lane Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 West b. Owner: Thorval Howard Entrepreneurial Fund 1 LLC 519 W. Front Street Boise, ID 83642 c. Representative: Van Elg, The Land Group, Inc. 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100 Eagle, ID 83616 d. Present Zoning District: Rl (Ada County) e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential f. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning approval of approximately 5 acres from Rl Ada County to an R-8 zoning district and concurrently requesting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to construct and operate a residential care facility consisting of two residential treatment buildings and one administrative building. g. Description of Applicant's Justification for AZ and CUP Approval: "Redmont Health Services provides residential and outpatient drug and alcohol rehabilitation to adults and adolescents. The Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 3 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 facility under review will be a private campus consisting of multiple story buildings providing residential and outpatient counseling to families and individuals recovering from substance abuse or chemical dependency. Two buildings will be residential buildings and will house up to 24 patients. The third building is the administrative building. The facility is a 24 hour facility and will employ approximately 41-45 employees." See the applicant's narrative submitted with the AZ and CUP applications and Section 10, Analysis, below for more information. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, and UDC 11-SA-2D, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, and UDC 11-SA-2D, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: June 30, 2008 and July 14, 2008 (Commission); August 4 and August 18, 2008 (Gifu Council). d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 20, 2008 (Commission); August 1. 2008 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 18, 2008 (Commission); July 30, 2008 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Asingle-family residence and associated outbuildings are currently on the site and will be demolished to develop the site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This area is primarily single family homes and agricultural land and maintains a rural character. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) and Incline Village Subdivision; zoned R-4 2. East: Single Family Residence and vacant land; zoned Rl (Ada County) 3. South: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: N Black Cat Road. Location of water: N Black Cat Road and W Cherry Ln. Issues or concerns: Two water connections will need to be established. 2. Vegetation: The subject site has a large amount of trees (354 caliper inches) that are proposed to be mitigated for in accordance with UDC 11-3B-1 OCS. See Analysis, Section 10 for more information. 3. Floodplain: NA 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The Ten Mile Creek transverses along the southern property boundary. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 4 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Hazazds: No hazazds are known to exist on the site. 6. Existing Zoning: Rl (Ada County) 7. Lot Size: 5 acres f. Conditional Use Information: 1. Non-residential squaze footage: 24,000 squaze feet (two 9,000 squaze foot resident building and 6,000 squaze foot administrative building) 2. Hours of Operation: 24 hour g. Off-Street Pazking: 0. S per dwelling unit (Residential Buildings) and Iper S00 square feet of gross floor area (Administrative Building 1. Pazking spaces required: 36 (48 beds X 0.5 and 6,000 / 500} 2. Pazking spaces provided: 77 h. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): A minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required to be constructed along W. Cherry Lane; landscaping within the buffers shall comply with the current street buffer landscaping standazds listed in UDC 11-3B-7. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: NA (buffers between land uses aze not required between residential uses) 3. Other landscaping standazds: See 11-3B-8, Parking Lot Landscaping, for internal pazking lot landscaping requirements. i. Required dimensional standazds for the R-8 zone, per UDC 11-2A-6: - Maximum building height: 35' - Minimum Lot Size: 5,000 squaze feet - Setbacks: Front: 15 feet Side: 5 feet Reaz: 12 feet j. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to this site is proposed to/from W. Cherry Lane. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On June 27, 2008, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present included: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department and Meridian Public Works Department. Staff has included comments, conditions, and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas aze anticipated to contain three to eight dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). Staff fmds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ g _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. (Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1) • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACFID). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). • The subject site can be serviced by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer and water system. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1: Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The Comprehensive Plan Map envisions the adjacent properties in this area of Meridian to develop with residential land uses. For the proposed use to be compatible with future residential uses, Staff is proposing a development agreement on this site. Staff believes the proposed development can be harmonious with the existing and future residential developments in the area, if the conditions of approval are complied with. • Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective D, Action 5: Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridor (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.). The applicant is required to install and maintain a 25 foot landscape buffer adjacent to W Cherry Lane, an arterial roadway. • Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 3 (page 43) -Require all new parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands. The site plan depicts internal parking lot landscaping on the site. Said landscaping should be in compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-8. • Chapter IV, Goal I, Objective A, Action 6 (page 26) -Permit new residential, commercial, or industrial developments only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City. The subject property lies within the boundaries of the City of Meridian and can provide the necessary City services. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 6 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Encourage compatible uses to minimize conflicts and maximise use of land. (Chapter VII, Goal IV) The surrounding area is primarily rural residences however just west of the subject site the Comprehensive plan depicts a neighborhood center which envisions neighborhood friendly services in the area. Staff believes that the proposed use should be compatible with existing uses in the area and provide a necessary service in the surrounding area. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9: Require new residential development to provide penmapent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties. On the submitted landscape plan, the applicant is proposing a 6 foot vinyl fence along the western property boundary of the site. Prior to any building permits the proposed fencing and temporary fencing will need to be installed to contain debris. • Chapter VI Goal V, Objective A, Action 2: Insure that high-quality emergency care, primary, outpatient, home and log-term care and other types of health care are provided in the community. The UDC allows Residential Care Facilities in an R-8 zone with conditional use approval. Furthermore, staff believes this facility will be a high quality development, if the conditions of approval are complied with. • Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A, Action 11 -Improve and protect creeks (Five Mile, Eight Mile, South Slough ...etc.) throughout commercial, industrial, and residential areas. The Ten Mile Creek, which runs along the southern boundary of this site, should be protected during development of the site. • Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A.1 -Preserve and conserve our waterways, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural resources. The Ten Mile Creek, a natural waterway, runs along the southern boundary of this site. As a natural waterway, it will remain open and should be preserved. Staff believes that the proposed use is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and can be compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff recommends that the Commission rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists nursing or residential care facilities as conditional uses in the R-8 zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standards: There are several standards for nursing or residential care facilities listed in UDC 11-4-3.29. Analysis of these specific use standards are provided in Section 10 below. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ ~ _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Staff is generally supportive of the AZ and CUP request as proposed, with the following comments: AZ Application: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone approximately 5 acres from the Rl zoning district in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district in the City. The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for Medium Density Residential. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval for nursing or residential care facilities. The applicant is proposing to develop the site as a treatment facility (residential care facility) consisting of two 9,000 square foot residential treatment buildings and one 6,000 square foot administrative building. Future pad sites for two Alzheimer buildings are shown on the site plan; however, they are not proposed for construction with this CUP (they will require separate CUP approval in the future). The annexation path for this site is via Incline Village Subdivision located northwest of the subject site. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on May 28, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. UDC 11-SB-3D2 provides the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Because of the nature of the development, Staff believes that a DA is necessary to ensure that the site develops in a manor that is consistent with the approved plans and does not negatively impact adjacent properties. Staff has included a list of recommended DA provisions below. If the Commission or Council feels additional development agreement provisions are necessary, staff recommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer being required. Residential Care Facilities: As mentioned above, the proposed use is a conditional use in the proposed R-8 district. Staff believes that the proposed use can be compatible with future single- family homes in this area. However, Staff has some concerns with some of the uses proposed with the subject application. The applicant states that there will be outpatient counseling. Counseling and care for the patients staying at the facility is consistent with a residential care facility. But offering outpatient counseling is more a professional service use-than a residential care use and Staff believes is not appropriate in a residential district. This facility is proposed in an R-8 district and the uses should be related to living on the site. Staff requests that the applicant clarify at the public hearing how the outpatient counseling will function. Staff s initial reaction is to limit the treatment to the residents and relatives of residents. Therefore, a DA provision is included below restricting outpatient services on this site. Development Agreement: A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of annexation of this property. Prior to annexation approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433, within 12 months of City Council approval to initiate this process. Please be advised a $303.00 fee will required to process the development agreement. The DA shall include, at minimum, the following: a. Until a future CUP is approved, a maximum of 3 buildings (2 residential buildings and 1 administrative building) shall be allowed to be constructed on the site. All future uses on this site will require a new CUP, unless waived by the Planning Director because the use is principally permitted. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 8 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 b. Treatment on this site (counseling, therapy, etc.) shall be limited to the residents on the site; outpatient services shall be prohibited. c. At a minimum, amenities shall be constructed on the site as proposed on the site plan (i.e. walking path, garden area, rope course). d. The site/structures shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-29 for nursing or residential care facility. e. One access to this site, from W. Cherry Lane, is approved. f. All existing buildings on the site shall be removed prior to release of building permits for this development. g. Submit an application for private streets within the development. Two twenty-five foot wide private streets shall be provided within the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. h. A 25-foot wide street buffer will be required along W. Cherry Lane, per UDC Table 11-2A-8. Landscaping shall be provided in said buffer in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C, Landscape Buffers along Streets. i. With the CZC application, include mitigation details and a plan approved by the City Arborist, for the existing trees on the site, consisting of 354 caliper inches, proposed to be removed, in compliance with UDC 11-3B-10. Contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, 888-3579 for more details. j. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance is required prior to issuance of a building permit for any and all of the proposed buildings within this development. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. k. The Ten Mile Creek shall be preserved and protected during construction on the site. 1. Set aside 48-feet ofright-of--way measured from the centerline of Cherry lane for the future road widening. m. The development of this property shall substantially comply with the concept plan in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. n. Any future buildings shall substantially comply with the elevations in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. o. Construct private streets to the east and west properties. This includes the pavement and adjacent sidewalks. Place signs at the east and west property lines stating that the roads will be extended in the future. Due to the length and the lack of a turnaround for the east leg, place bollards in the asphalt at 150-feet. These bollards shall be removed once the property to the east is developed and the private street is extended. Cross-access shall be provided to the properties to the west and east of the development. A copy of a recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to occupancy of the first building. p. All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. q. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. r. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. s. The applicant shall construct a 10-foot pathway along the northern boundary of the property, as proposed. t. UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 9 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. In ACRD staff report, Cherry Lane is not scheduled for widening between 2019 and 2028. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to be in compliance with this requirement. CUP Application: The applicant is requesting CUP approval to .construct and operate a drug and alcohol treatment facility consisting of two residential treatment buildings and one administrative building. Square footages of the three proposed buildings total 24,000 square feet. The Alzheimer buildings shown on the submitted concept plan are not part of this application and will be reviewed at a later date with future CUP approval. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval to operate a nursing or residential care facility within an R-8 zoning district. In addition, the proposed use shall comply with the specific use standards of the UDC regarding Nursing or Residential Care Facilities. Specific Use Standards for Nursing or Residential Care Facilities per UDC 11-4-3-29: A. General standards: 1. If the use results in more than ten (10) persons occupying a dwelling at any one time, the applicant or owner shall concurrently apply for a change of occupancy as required by the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. The applicant is proposing to house up to 24 patients per resident building on- site which requires a change of occupancy. 2. The owner and/or operator of the facility shall secure and maintain a license from the state of Idaho department of health and welfare, facility standards division. The applicant should comply with this standard. B. Additional standards for uses providing care to children and juveniles under the age of eighteen (18) years: The applicant states in the narrative services will be provided to adolescents. 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by a minimum six foot (6') nonscalable fence to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. Not applicable. Z. Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. The proposed ropes course should comply with this requirement. 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts or uses adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk. The applicant is proposing a rope course at the rear of the proposed buildings. Currently there is a large berm that runs along the southern property line and the canal and should buffer the noise generated by the rope course. However, staff believes the applicant should comply with this standard of the UDC. C. Additional standards for uses providing care to patients who suffer from Alzheimer's disease, dementia or other similar disability that may cause disorientation: Abarrier with a minimum height of six feet (6'), along the perimeter of any portion of the site that is accessible to these patients shall be provided. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. (Ord. OS-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The future Alzheimer's buildings will have to comply with this requirement with future CUP approval. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 10 - L_J CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Dimensional Requirements of the R-8 zone per UDC Table 11-2A-6: On the submitted site plan the proposed buildings comply with the required setbacks and the R-8 dimensional standards. Building Elevations: Elevations for the proposed buildings were submitted with this application, prepared by BRS Architects, labeled as Sheets A4.1, and are included in Exhibit A. The UDC requires buildings to be constructed of high quality building materials such as stone, brick, wood or other native materials. As mentioned eazlier, the applicant is proposing to develop the site in phases with a total of three buildings in the first phase. All three of the buildings are proposed to be constructed of the same building materials. The applicant is proposing a variation is siding materials that includes stucco, lap, shake and board and batten wood siding with a stone veneer accents. Roofing materials aze to be 25 year azchitectural grade composition shingle. Staff believes the buildings will be constructed of quality materials and is supportive of the proposed elevations. Any future buildings constructed on the site shall also substantially comply with these elevations. Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit for nursing or residential care facilities. In addition, 1 per 500 squaze feet of gross floor azea is required for the administrative building. Each of the proposed residential buildings (2 total) is expected to house 24 patients and the administrative building is approximately 6,000 squaze feet. Based on the pazking requirements of the UDC (24 X 2 X 0.5) (6,000/500) the minimum pazking for the site is 36 and 77 stalls aze proposed. Staff believes this is enough pazking to meet the needs of the first three buildings, but may not be enough for the future buildings in the future. Pazking requirements will be further evaluated with additional development of this site. In addition, a bicycle rack is required to be installed on the site that is capable of holding a minimum of two bicycles and should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. If the above changed is made, staff is supportive of the parking for the site. Access: The applicant is proposing to take access to/from W. Cherry Lane. Staff and ACRD are supportive of the proposed access point. For internal circulation, the applicant is proposing a common 25-foot drive aisle for access within the development. The Meridian Fire Department and the Meridian Police Department have conditioned the applicant submit a private street application for addressing the future buildings. Furthermore, staff believes the applicant should provide cross-access to the parcels to the west and east of the subject site for future connectivity when those parcels propose to annex and develop within the City. Staff has made this a provision of the development agreement. Staff is requiring the applicant stub the west/east drive aisles to the adjacent properties, and place signs at the property line stating that these roads will be eztended in the future. Due to the Fire Department's concerns about length of the eastern leg, Staff is requiring the applicant place bollards at 150-feet length because there is not a turnaround. When the property to the east is developed the bollards shall be removed. Staff is also requiring a copy of the recorded cross-access agreement prior to occupancy of the first building. Site Plan: Staff has reviewed the site plan (prepazed by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled as CUP-1, included in Exhibit A) submitted with this application. The following items should to be shown on a revised site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application: • Per UDC 11-3C-6G, provide a minimum of 2 bicycle pazking spaces on the site in compliance with the standazds listed in UDC 11-3C-SC. • Per UDC 11-3C-SB3, the pazking stalls adjacent to the buildings shall have substantial wheel restraints to prevent cazs from encroaching beyond the stall azea onto the sidewalk or the sidewalk maybe widened to 7 feet to allow for overhang in this area. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 11 - CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Signs, and bollards on the east leg, should be along the west and east property boundaries stating road to be extended in the future. • Provide 77 parking stalls, as proposed. Landscaping: Staff has reviewed the landscape plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled as L1.00, included in Exhibit A) submitted with this application. The following items should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance: Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane, as depicted on the landscape plan. However, the landscape plan shows trees planted outside of the buffer. UDC 11-3B-7C3 requires all landscape buffers along streets be planted with trees and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to comply with this requirement. Staff has reviewed the internal parking lot landscaping depicted on the landscape plan and found it substantially complies with the landscaping requirements in UDC 11-3B-8. UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. In ACRD staff report, Cherry Lane is not scheduled for widening between 2019 and 2028. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to be in compliance with this requirement. Construct a 6-foot vinyl fence along the western and eastern property boundaries. Meridian Pathways Master Plan: The City's pathway plan has identified this site as a potential to extend the pathways network. In the text section of the Pathway plan (page 4-13) a portion along the northern and southern boundaries of the subject site are identified as possible pathway locations. The reason for the two locations on the subject site is one location is a short-term route and the other is a long term route. The document states the short term route is an on-street route along W. Cherry Lane located along the northern boundary of the site and the long term route is along the south side of Ten Mile Creek and does not require the pathway to be located on the subject property. The applicant is proposing a 10-foot detached pathway within the required landscape buffer to comply with this requirement. Staff is generally supportive of the pathway location; however, the applicant should contact the Parks Department to determine the preferred location of the proposed pathway and ACRD to verify that they are okay with the pathway too. Mitigation: The landscape plan depicts 5 e~sting trees, consisting of 167 caliper inches, on the site that are proposed to be remain during the development of the property. All other trees that were not labeled to remain are proposed for removal. The applicant states the total caliper inches proposed for mitigation is 354 caliper inches. Staff has been informed by the applicant that the City's Arborist has met with the applicant on site and is currently working on a mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, mitigation is required for all existing trees fl- inch caliper or greater removed form the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement. Staff recommends that the applicant comply with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-lOC. Amenities: As mentioned earlier, the applicant is providing amenities on the site for future Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 12 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 patrons to use. The amenities include areas for flower beds, a convenient and large common area, a pathway system and a rope course. Staff recommends that the Commission determine if the proposed amenities are appropriate for a development of this size. Hours of Operation: The proposed facility is requesting to operate as a 24 hour facility. Staff is recommending provisions be in place to allow for 24 hour care on the property. Staff recommends the shift changes for the staff not occur between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am to not disturb the residents of the current and future adjacent neighborhoods. )f the applicant complies with this recommendation, staff is supportive of the applicant's request for 24 hour use. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed building on this site. The applicant should submit revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this staff report, with the CZC application. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is use, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28: Existing Structures: The site currently contains an existing single family home with associated outbuildings which are slated for demolition to make way for the proposed treatment facility. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the existing home and outbuildings on this site shall be removed. Fencing: On the submitted landscape plan, fencing is being proposed along the western boundary of the site. No other fencing is being proposed with this application. However, staff is recommending a 6-foot vinyl fence be placed along the eastern boundary to buffer against future residential that has the potential develop in the area. The comprehensive plan designates the parcels to the east as Medium Density Residential and the use the applicant is proposing is more intense than a residential development. Prior to any building permits the proposed fencing and temporary fencing will be required to be installed to contain debris. Fencing should taper down to a 3 foot maximum within 20 feet of all rights-of--way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be covered. The Ten Mile Creek is a natural waterway and should be preserved and protected with development of this property. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-OS-015 - 13 - • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Private Streets: The applicant is not proposing private streets within this development. However, for addressing purposes, the Fire Department and the Police Department are requesting private streets be provided within this development. The applicant shall submit a Private Street application with the CZC application rf not before). Per UDC 11-3F-4, all private streets shall be designed and constructed to the following standards: A. Design standards: 1. Easement: The private street shall be constructed on a perpetual ingress/egress easement or a single platted lot that provides access to all applicable properties. 2. Connection point: Where the point of connection of the private street is to a public street, the private street shall be approved by the Transportation Authority. 3. Emergency vehicle: The private street shall provide sufficient maneuvering area for emergency vehicles as determined and approved by the Meridian Fire Department. 4. Gates: Gates or other obstacles shall not be allowed. B. Construction standards: 1. For conversion of an existing facility to a private street at the direction of the Fire Marshall: a. All drive aisles shall be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed. b. If a curb exists next to the drive aisle, it shall be painted red. 2. For all other private streets: a. Roadway and storm drainage: The private street shall be constructed in accord with the roadway and storm drainage standards of the Transportation Authority or as approved by the City of Meridian based on plans submitted by a certified engineer. b. Street width: The private street shall be constructed within the easement and shall have a travel lane width of twenty-four (24) feet or twenty-six (26) feet as determined by the Fire Marshal relative to the height and size of the proposed structures that adjoin the private street. The Fire Department is requiring a travel lane of at least 24 feet; however, the UDC requires a 25- foot two way drive aisle width. The submitted site plan complies with this requirement c. Sidewalks: Afive-foot (5') attached sidewalk or four-foot (4') detached sidewalk shall be provided on one side of the street in commercial districts. This requirement may be waived if the applicant can demonstrate that an alternative pedestrian path- exists. Five foot wide detached sidewalks are proposed in front of the structures adjacent to parking. These sidewalks shall be extended to the east and west property lines. d. Fire lanes: All drive aisles shall be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed. In addition, if a curb exists next to the drive aisle, it shall be painted red. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 for Redmont Health Services, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 17, 2008, based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on July 17 2008 At the public hearing Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 14 - • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 the Commission moved to recommend auproval of the subiect AZ and CUP reauest. The Meridian itv ounc'1 heard hpc .items nn An~~ct 2ti_ ?.nnQ_ s± the r^^hl;.. hes~r:~+Q tHp ounc'1 annrove~l the subiect 7, and TP reaue t 11. E~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. CUP Site Plan (prepazed by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled C1.00) 3. Landscape Plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled L1.OO) 4. Building Elevations/Floor Plans (prepared by BRS, labeled Sheet Al . l and A4.1) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Central District Health C. Legal Description and Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 15 - • i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2256 5322 5200 5150 W.N. 5321 a _ M `~ UT 1947 .5136 5103 .-,_ r ___ - Z Z , N! ` Z' N' 5287 5239 4831 4997 ~ 9294 293. ~ ~ , _: _. _ p ~ .__ o v _ _ ___ _ i N o 0 "' ~ ~ 'O - V ~ r, ~ 1 1148 ~ $ R 2 ~ ~ i 1132 ~~ - - 5135 ,~ ~,~ J >>>0 ~~- ~ ; ~ ~ c~ ~ g ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ _ o ~, u~ ~ un '~ ~~''~ o 1054 ~ ~ ~ - - tir~_ a N 5304 ` ~~ O 5150 1035 ~ 5038 537'7 496Q 855 ~ 999 Exhibit A _ I _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. C;TJP Site Plan ~ WsPI'~IWA~Y01p~11~ I e 44 O L9+ Y O '~ul '~I~S -BI~H luow~ ~Id e31S ~IiB~4~S ~ i i ®~ ~ r U e ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ R ~~ ~ - i ~. _-- - m ~ z '; r ~ ¢ [ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~a 3 x ~~a i ~,I I ~ ~ ~ i `~~ - = ~' ~ I~ i I o~ ! ~ I ~ o . ~~ ~ ~ _._ 11 a -"~_. I ~R~ _ a~ ~ o ~ ~ f \ "0• I ' ~ ~ --~ - ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~~-. ...- ~ U - ~. ~ .~ ~ Am~a~_~- J ~~~~$' ~~ ~ g /y m i~ av f! ~eae ~_ /~~ s ,~, i I ~ r /.ad ~ ~- ~~ i , ~ ,---- ~ /~~ ~' ~!~ : ~ ~~~( ~~- --~'- ,1_ ~ ~ ~ -- t. ~g~ ; ~ ~~ , ~ ~ l~_ _ ~ 1 __ ~ ° lli - --- -~-- -- ~-~- ~-T„ ~! I~ a -x- ~ - - ~ ~ t?~ ~ .f ~ .~l ~ ~_ ' I ;~ ~~ ~ y ri ~.___- ~ j~, I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, $ ~ 8 e ~~ L § esa~ ~ ~° _ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ _ _~ ~ ~ _-_ ~~~ f-~ a P ~l ~ d ~~u ~ o ~.~ - ~T ~ 8 g ~ ~ _ffi ` G z a~ ~~~®g Q ~ U g ty ~ ~ I~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~e ,~ ~ ~~~~ t ~ ~ ~ ~am~ " ~ E CI I' '~ ~ ~ s o ~~~~ ~~~~ 1k0~~~ s:i ~ i- Exhibit A -2- • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Landscape Plan Exhibit A -3- ~J • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Elevations Exhibit A -4- Resident Buildings ~ .a~ • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TAE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ~ ~4 Exhibit A _ 5 _ • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 ANNEXATION/ZONING 1.1.1 The annexation and zoning legal descriptions submitted with the application (stamped on May 28, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) is accurate and meet the requirements of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 A Development Agreement will be required as part of the annexation and zoning of this property. Prior to the annexation and zoning ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation rezone ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 within 12 months of Council approval to initiate this process. Please be advised a $303.00 fee will required to process the development agreement. The DA shall include, at minimum, the following: a. Until a future CUP is approved, a maximum of 3 buildings (2 residential buildings and 1 administrative building) shall be allowed to be constructed on the site. All future uses on this site will require a new CUP, unless waived by the Planning Director because the use is principally permitted. b. Treatment on this site (counseling, therapy, etc.) shall be limited to the residents on the site; ontinuina care of the residential patients and their families is allowed provided it is consistent with the Redmont Health Services business/treatment plan for residential care facilities c. At a minimum, amenities shall be constructed on the site as proposed on the site plan (i.e. walking path, garden area, rope course). d. The site/structures shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 29 for nursing or residential care facility. e. One access to this site, from W. Cherry Lane, is approved. f. All existing buildings on the site shall be removed prior to release of building permits for this development. g. Submit an application for private streets within the development. ~e Two twenty- five foot wide private streets shall be provided within the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. h. A 25-foot wide street buffer will be required along W. Cherry Lane, per UDC Table 11-2A-8. Landscaping shall be provided in said buffer in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C, Landscape Buffers along Streets. i. With the CZC application, include mitigation details and a plan approved by the City Arborist, for the existing trees on the site, consisting of 354 caliper inches, proposed to be removed, in compliance with UDC 11-3B-10. Contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, 888-3579 for more details. j. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance is required prior to issuance of a building permit for any and all of the proposed buildings within this development. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. k. The Ten Mile Creek shall be preserved and protected during construction on the site. 1. Set aside 48-feet of right-of--way measured from the centerline of Cherry lane for the future road widening. m. The development of this property shall substantially comply with the concept plan in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. Exhibit B _ I _ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 n. Any future buildings shall substantially comply with the elevations in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. o. Construct private streets to the east and west properties. This includes the pavement and adjacent sidewalks. Place signs at the east and west property lines stating that the roads will be extended in the future. Due to the length and the lack of a turnaround for the east leg, elli~s stripe the asphalt at 150-feet. The l~s s,~g shall be removed once the property to the east is developed and the private street is extended. Cross-access shall be provided to the properties to the west and east of the development. A copy of a recorded easement shall be submitted tot eh Planning Department prior to occupancy of the first building. p. All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. q. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. r. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. s. The applicant shall construct a' ^ f ^* -~°*'~•°^~~ 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along the northern boundary of the property, as proposed. t. The developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. u. Coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department reeardine emereencv access from the parkins lot to each of the buildings on the site. An emer~encv access lane shall be delineated within the parking area to facilitate emereencv vehicles to allow emer~encv personnel unobstructed access from the parkins area to the front of the future buildings v. portion of this development lies within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District The applicant will be required to submit a Floodplain Development Permit and secure approval before any construction can begin Permit approval may require development of Base Flood Elevations. mapping of the floodplain and / or floodwav boundaries and analysis of the effect of the development on the floodplaii Applicant should reference City Flood Damage Prevention Code and coordinate with the Flnnrinla;n Ariminiatratnr to verify requirements. 1.2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1.2.1 The site plan, prepared by The Land Group, dated May 28, 2008, is approved with the following modifications: • Per UDC 11-3C-6G, provide a minimum of 2 bicycle parking spaces on the site in compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-SC. • Per UDC 11-3C-SB3, the parking stalls adjacent to the buildings shall be provide substantial wheel restraints to prevent cars from encroaching beyond the stall area onto the sidewalk oY the sidewalk maybe widened to 7 feet to allow for overhang in this area. • Provide 77 parking stalls on the site as proposed. • Signs, and lc~s stri~g~ of the asphalt on the east leg at 150-foot mark, should be placed at the east and west property boundaries stating "road to be extended in the future". 1.2.2 The landscape plan, prepared by The Land Group, dated March 28, 2008, is approved with the following modifications: Exhibit B -2- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane, as depicted on the landscape plan. However, the landscape plan shows trees planted outside of the buffer. UDC 11-3B-7C3 requires all landscape buffers along streets be planted with trees and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. • Staff has reviewed the internal parking lot landscaping depicted on the landscape plan and found it substantially complies with the landscaping requirements in UDC 11-3B-8. • UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. • Construct a 6-foot vinyl fence along the western and eastern property boundaries. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the Applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Provide a copy of the plan to the Planning Department with the CZC submittal 1.2.3 The building elevations, prepared by BRS Architects, labeled Sheets 4.10, are approved. 1.2.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed building. 1.2.5 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. 1.2.6 No business signs are approved with this CUP application. All business signs require a separate sign permit in compliance with the sign ordinance (UDC 11-3D). 1.2.7 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the business has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 1.2.8 The staff shift change shall not occur between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am on the site. 1.2.9 The site shall comply with all of specific use standards in accordance with UDC 11-4-3-29, as applicable. 1.2.10 The owner and/or operator of the facility shall secure and maintain a license from the state of Idaho department of health and welfare, facility standards division. 1.2.11 The applicant shall submit an approved site plan from Sanitary Services Company (SSC) with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.2.12 The applicant shall submit a private street application with CZC submittal. 1.2.13 1.2.14 A copy of a recorded cross-access easement to the properties to the east and west to use the private streets as access shall be submitted with CZC submittal. Exhibit B -3- • • CTI'I' OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1.2.15 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the existing structures shall be removed from the site. 1.2.16 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the domestic water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable landscape areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 1.2.17 Coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department re~ardine emeraencv access from_ the na_rk;no lnt to each of the buildings on the site An emer~encv access lane shalt hP r1Pl;nPatPrl w;th;,, the parking area to facilitate emergency vehicles to allow emergency personnel unobstructed access from the parking area to the front of the future buildings Z. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in N Black Cat Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W Cherry Lane and N Black Cat Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install a looped 8 inch water main from N Black Cat Road to W Cherry Lane. The applicant is allowed to phase the water line connection as the other parcels develop granted all easements are dedicated to the City of Meridian and surety is collected. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description, which must include the area of the.easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2" x 11" map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. Exhibit B _ 4 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, alternate plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.14 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.15 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.16 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces is at least 1-foot above. 2.18 The applicants design engineer shall certify that all seepage beds out of the public right- of-way are installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification must be received by the City of Meridian Public Works Department prior to the project receiving final approval. Commercial Projects 2.19 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.20 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light Exhibit B _ g _ • ! CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 2.21 A portion of this development lies within the Meridian Flnndnla;n nvPrla~, T);etrirt 'Tr,P applicant will be reauired to submit a Floodnlain Development Permit and secure approval before any construction can beein. Permit approval may reauire development of Base Flood Elevations manning of the floodplain and / or floodwav hnundariec_ and analvc;c of the P~~t „ftt,P development on the floodplain. Applicant should reference c,';tv Flnnd na,,,aQP Prey nt;nn r~.~P and coordinate with the Floodnlain A min'strator to verify reauirements 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.3 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 3.4 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections. 3.5 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.6 The buildings on the site shall require a NFPA 13R or 13D sprinkler system and fire alarm system per NFPA 72. 3.7 .Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %Z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. Exhibit B -6- • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.8 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.9 Provide private streets for addressing the each proposed building. The private roadway shall be constructed a minimum of 24 feet in width, have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.10 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn azound on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. 3.11 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). 3.12 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.13 Buildings over 30' in height aze required to have access roads in accordance with The International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 3.14 The east/west private street shall have a sign er-bel~is and strinina located at 150-foot (measured approximately 50 feet from the eastern property line) stating road to be extended in the future. Said placement of sign er~ell~ds and strinin~ shall be Meridian Fire Department approval and comply with the 150-foot distance requirement. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The applicant shall provide private streets within the development for addressing each proposed building. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 No comments received from the Pazks Department. 6. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY 6.1 SSC did not provide comments on this application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 Dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Cherry Lane abutting the pazcel where it does not currently exist. 7.2 Construct a 5-foot concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41 feet from the centerline of Cherry Lane. 7.3 Construct a 25-foot driveway access to intersect Cherry Lane located approximately 160 feet east of the westernmost property line (measured property line to neaz edge). Exhibit B _ ~ _ • CTfY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.4 Pave the driveway its full width and at least 30 feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 7.5 Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access to Cherry Lane is prohibited. 7.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.3 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.4 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.5 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.6 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.7 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.8 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.9 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.10 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. 7.2.12 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. Exhibit B -8- • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.13 Private sewer and water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or right-of--way. 8. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH 8.1 After written approvals from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve the proposal for central sewage and central water. 8.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water. 8.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 8.4 Central District Health will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any food establishments. Exhibit B -9- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Legal Description and Exhibit Map f~"~ res r.elvn caoor, nvc May 28, 2008 Project No. 08055 Atmesation acid Rem Legal Dascrip>,ian 5.00 Acres ~ffi1T'rA" A tract ofland situatedm a portion ofthe Norffieast Oac of the Northea~ One Queries of Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada Coiatty, Idaho, described as follows Commenaulg at a found 1/2-inch st~i pin montmteatiag ilte Narih O~ Queroer Conger af~id Secfioa 9 and bw>tg on ~ centerline ofCheny Lase, thence following the northerly lies ofthe North~at One tinter of acid Section 9 and said centerline, South 84°37'38° East a distance of i,b4135 feet to a pout, which bears North 89637'38" West s distance of 1,00859 fcet frwn a fomrd S/8-inch st~i pin tenting We North Co>~ of aid Section 9 and beingthe POINT OF BEGIIVNING. Tta'aca following aid northerly line tad said Mina, South 89°37'38° East a distarlca of391.73 feet m a pains; Tirence leaving raid aorNlerly line mtti said centali~, South x°00'02 Fast a distance of 622.14 fat to a point on dre centerline ofa ditch; Thence following aid cnnterline, Nordl 70°41'(18" West a dista~e of 233.BS feet to a )~~ Thence foltawin8 aid centerlirm, North 7Z°16'O8° West a distance of 179.7b feet to a ~~ Thence leaving said catrterliaa, North 00°00.02 East a distance of 492.66 fat to the POINT OF BEGII~NIIQG. The above~i6ed 6aot of land contains 5.t)il acres, more or less, subject to any errisl;ng easements orrighis-of~vay. Prepared By: THE LAND GROLR', INC. 462 E. SHORE DRIVE, SUITE 100 EAGLE, IDAHO 83616 208-939-4041 206-9394445 (FAX) '_f LaasaapArebOntrrs . Sm P~ .CiQ/Er~im°~ ~Gc1JC®»n /,ZSymn e'', .Coamumrminn 140 Ricer diem Place, Twin Fdb, Id4~o Pte.739.4041 F X8.733.4045 . uw,atIletH~lb'r~3 C~\\0805;\Admin\L~Is\L 080;27 080;5 Paccd i.duc P6ge 1 orl F~-~ rr~e O I tJ d ~~ Exhibit C -1- ! • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C/L CHERRY LANE Seed in a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1!4 of Sec~ian 9, DINT QF BEGINNWG Township 3 N, Range 1 W, B.M., gp~g ~ ~A~NG Ada County, Idaho ~9~Y38"E 2649.94' 2008 1641.35' 391.73' ~? 616.86' ~ - - ~ 1/2-INCH STEEL PIN - -' 1/4 CORNER SEC 9 PO1NT OF C06aMENCMENT 5/8-fNCal STEEL FIN NE CORNER SEC. 9 '„~,~ 5075 W. CHERRY LANE "a CURRENT TAX DISTRICT: R-1 c~i PROPOSEf~ TAX DLST RICT: R-8 ~ cNp _ ,y 19,6, L I'. fa N,~41 DITCH ~®~ -v ~ 23 ~ ` 6S ® CALCIAATED PANT ~py LA/V0 o ~ ~ 5/8-WTI STEEL PIN ~yt p4.a~TER ~ ,/2-INS, sTEa PfN 12459 a w PaoPEaTr eanaoaar Lour ~,,p - 18GHi-OF-iYAY LWE ~9~~L ~~ y4~ lY ' - - CENTERLINE / SECTI~1 LINE S •ZS~ ~ ENL3INEERJSUR1/EYOR PROJEC7IT~ORM1AATIQN Sgle:1'=1~ ~ y~ /~/,u~~ ;+~,~auasa,. Ob-28-08 r+~~. THE LAND GROUP, INC. Redmont Health Senrites fi 08056 r Annexafion & Rezone ~ ~:~ ,~ City of Meridian Exhibit "B" ~ ,.. Exhibit C -2- • • CTTY OF MERmIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE REARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 D. Require Findings from the Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that the existing and proposed use of the property as a residential care facility is a conditional use in the R-8 district and is generally consistent with the future land use map designation of medium density residential for this property. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, T'he City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (iTDC 11-SB-3.E). The City Council finds that the annexation and zoning of this property to R-8 would be in the best interest of the City. 2. CUP Findings: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The existing site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. However, the R-8 zoning district requires CUP approval for Nursing/Residential Care Facilities in accordance with UDC 11-2A-2 and strict adherence to the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-29. See analysis in Section 10 foN mote information. Staff recommends the Council rely on Staffls analysis and any oral or written public testimony provided when determining if this site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. Exhibit D -1- CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council fords that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Medium Density Residential. The subject property is proposed for R-8 zoning and complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regazding the requirements for this use). 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the e~sting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council fords that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the Commission believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the azea. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council fords that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the azea. The Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council fords that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the Applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfaze. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is a concern; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the public. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glaze, or odors. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The Ciry Council fords that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use that should be brought to the Council's attention. The Ciry Exhibit D -2- • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. Exhibit D -3- • September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 CUP 08-015 APPLICANT The Land Group, Inc. ~~ ITEM NO. 5-H REQUEST Findings for Approval -- Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Assisted Living Facility consisting of 2 residential treatment buildings and 1 admin bldg in a proposed R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services -5075 West Cherry Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: COMMENTS See aiHcched Findings ~~~~ US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: ~ Date: --~j-t;} Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: ~C _ Materials presence at pubOc meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN (~E IDIAN~- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ~ ~'~ ~ ~' DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5 acres from Rl (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and Conditional Use Permit approval for a Treatment Facility Consisting of 2 Residential Treatment Buildings and 1 Administrative Building in a proposed R-8 zoning district for Redmont Health Services, by The Land Group Inc. Case No(s). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 For the City Council Hearing Date of: August 26, 2008 (Findings on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -1- 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations, Development Agreement, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Applicant's Annexation and Zoning request, as evidenced by having submitted the legal description and exhibit map, stamped and dated May 28, 2008, by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS, included in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference, is hereby conditionally approved. 2. A Development Agreement is required with approval of the subject Annexation & Zoning application and shall include the provisions noted in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. 3. The Applicant's Conditional Use Permit request as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Building Elevations included in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, is hereby conditionally approved. 4. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008 incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -2- conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-SB-6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -3- By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of 2008. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIltD VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) / °r~~a Mayor T de Weerd Attest: ,,•~~~~`\~y ®F M~/~,'//~'%~% ~ ~rF 9y o Jaycee olman, City Clem 9 ~ ~`'~ .,~~ „~ ~Q. `~`. Copy served upon Applicant, '~~~~i D~p~rtment, Public Works Deparhnent and City ii~~r-ni nm`` Attorney. BY~ Dated: ~- /~ ' ~~ City Cle s Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 -4- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: August 26, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council ~j' FROM: Bill Parsons, Associate City Planner E IDIAI'~1 (208) 884-5533 I®/~H SUBJECT: Redmont Health Services • AZ-08-008 Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres from Rl (Ada County) to R- 8 (Medium Density Residential) • CUP-08-015 Conditional Use Permit approval for a Treatment Facility Consisting of 2 Residential Treatment Buildings and 1 Administrative Building in a proposed R-8 zoning district 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicant, The Land Group, Inc., is requesting annexation and zoning (AZ) approval of 5 acres from R1 (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential). Concurrently, the applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to construct and operate a residential care facility consisting of two 9,000 square foot residential treatment buildings and one 6,000 square foot administrative building. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval to operate a nursing or residential care facility within an R-8 zoning district. The subject property is located at 5075 W. Cherry Lane, in Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 West. This property is within the City of Meridian's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SiJNIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ and CUP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. By City Ordinance, the Planning & Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council on a combined AZ and CUP application. Below, Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Conditional Use Permit applications. Staff recommends approval of AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 for Redmont Health Services, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 17, 2008, based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard these items on Julv 17 2008 At the public hearing the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subiect AZ and CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearine: i. In favor: Doug Russell (Applicant's Representative). Robin Hinkle ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Don Glower. Jeff Morrell iv. Written testimony: Don Clower submitted written comments for denial after the' P&Z meetins:. v. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons vi. Other staff commentine on application: Caleb Hood, Scott Steckline b. Key Issue(s) of Discussion by Commission: i. The differences between residential care facilities and out-patient care facilities ii. Sewer stub to Mr. Glower's property west of this site. iii. The need for private streets required by the Fire. Police and Plannnns: Departments Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 1 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 iv. Discussed the relocation of the trash enclosure from the location proposed on the submitted site. The Commission discussed the trash enclosure be placed within the stubbed driveway until future connectivity to east parcel was eztended through This location was discussed as a solution for meeting the 150-foot length for the Fire Department requirement without having to provide a temporary turnaround. A motion was not made by the Commission to relocate the trash enclosure c. Key Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: i. The Commission modified several DA provisions as follows• 1 provision 1 12(b ) modified to allow continuing care (out-patient) for the past residents of the proposed facility and strike out out-patient care is prohibited; 2) provision 1 12(01 modified to require striping instead of bollards as requested by the Fire Department at the 150-foot mark of the east leg of the proposed driveway/private street• 3) provision 1 12(s ) modified to reauire construction of a 5-foot detached sidewalk along the north boundary of the property instead of the 10-foot multi-use pathway. ii. Condition 1.2.1 Bullet 4 was modified to be consistent with DA provision 1 12(0 ) removing the bollard reauirement and adding striping at the 150-foot mark of the east lei., iii. Condition 1.2.13 was stricken as the Parks Department communicated to staff the multi-use pathway was proposed along the north side of Cherry Lane instead of the northern property boundary of the site. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. The City Council should determine if the proposed treatment facility including care of residents and follow-up care of past residents (out-patient) is appropriate in an R-8 zoning district. ii. The applicant should follow up with the Fire Department regarding the replacement of the bollards with the striping at the 150-foot mark of the east leg of the drive aisle and modify condition 3.14 accordingly. If the Fire Department still reauires the placement of the bollards it will impact the location of the trash enclosure and an appropriate location should be discussed and identified during the hearing. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 2 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ-08- 008 and CUP-08-015, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 26, 2008, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications). Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015, as presented during the hearing on August 26, 2008, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for denial and what the applicant could do to obtain your approval in the future). Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ-08- 008 and CUP-08-015 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 5075 W. Cherry Lane Section 9, Township 3 North, Range 1 West b. Owner: Thorval Howard Entrepreneurial Fund 1 LLC 519 W. Front Street Boise, ID 83642 c. Representative: Van Elg, The Land Group, Inc. 462 E. Shore Drive, Suite 100 Eagle, ID 83616 d. Present Zoning District: Rl (Ada County) e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential f. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning approval of approximately 5 acres from Rl Ada County to an R-8 zoning district and concurrently requesting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to construct and operate a residential care facility consisting of two residential treatment buildings and one administrative building. g. Description of Applicant's Justification for AZ and CUP Approval: "Redmont Health Services provides residential and outpatient drug and alcohol rehabilitation to adults and adolescents. The Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 3 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 facility under review will be a private campus consisting of multiple story buildings providing residential and outpatient counseling to families and individuals recovering from substance abuse or chemical dependency. Two buildings will be residential buildings and will house up to 24 patients. The third building is the administrative building. The facility is a 24 hour facility and will employ approximately 41-45 employees." See the applicant's narrative submitted with the AZ and CUP applications and Section 10, Analysis, below for more information. 5. PROCESS FACT5 a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, and UDC 11-SA-2D, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, and UDC 11-SA-2D, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: June 30, 2008 and July 14, 2008 (Commission); Ausrust 4 and August 18, 2008 (Gifu Councill. d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 20, 2008 (Commission); Ausust I. 2008 (City Councill e. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 18, 2008 (Commission); July 30, 2008 (Gifu Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Asingle-family residence and associated outbuildings are currently on the site and will be demolished to develop the site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This area is primarily single family homes and agricultural land and maintains a rural character. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) and Incline Village Subdivision; zoned R-4 2. East: Single Family Residence and vacant land; zoned Rl (Ada County) 3. South: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Single Family Residence; zoned RUT (Ada County) d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: N Black Cat Road. Location of water: N Black Cat Road and W Cherry Ln. Issues or concerns: Two water connections will need to be established. Z. Vegetation: The subject site has a large amount of trees (354 caliper inches) that are proposed to be mitigated for in accordance with UDC 11-3B-1OC5. See Analysis, Section 10 for more information. 3. Floodplain: NA 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: The Ten Mile Creek transverses along the southern property boundary. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 4 _ -~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 5. Hazards: No hazards are known to exist on the site. 6. Existing Zoning: Rl (Ada County) 7. Lot Size: 5 acres f. Conditional Use Information: 1. Non-residential square footage: 24,000 square feet (two 9,000 square foot resident building and 6,000 square foot administrative building) 2. Hours of Operation: 24 hour g. Off-Street Parking: 0.5 per dwelling unit (Residential Buildings) and Ipe~ S00 squaYe feet of gross floor area (Administrative Building 1. Parking spaces required: 36 (48 beds X 0.5 and 6,000 / 500) 2. Parking spaces provided: 77 h. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): A minimum 25-foot wide buffer is required to be constructed along W. Cherry Lane; landscaping within the buffers shall comply with the current street buffer landscaping standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: NA (buffers between land uses are not required between residential uses) 3. Other landscaping standards: See 11-3B-8, Parking Lot Landscaping, for internal parking lot landscaping requirements. i. Required dimensional standards for the R-8 zone, per UDC 11-2A-6: - Maximum building height: 35' - Minimum Lot Size: 5,000 square feet - Setbacks: Front: 15 feet Side: 5 feet Rear: 12 feet j. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to this site is proposed to/from W. Cherry Lane. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On June 27, 2008, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present included: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department and Meridian Public Works Department. Staff has included comments, conditions, and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics): Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 5 - • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. (Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1) • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACfID). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). • The subject site can be serviced by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer and water system. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1: Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The Comprehensive Plan Map envisions the adjacent properties in this area of Meridian to develop with residential land uses. For the proposed use to be compatible with future residential uses, Staff is proposing a development agreement on this site. Staff believes the proposed development can be harmonious with the existing and future residential developments in the area, if the conditions of approval are complied with. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 5: Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridor (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.). The applicant is required to install and maintain a 25 foot landscape buffer adjacent to W. Cherry Lane, an arterial roadway. • Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 3 (page 43) -Require all new parking lots to provide landscaping in internal islands. The site plan depicts internal parking lot landscaping on the site. Said landscaping should be in compliance with the standards listed in UDC I1-3B-8. • Chapter N, Goal I, Objective A, Action 6 (page 26) -Permit new residential, commercial, or industrial developments only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City. The subject property lies within the boundaries of the City of Meridian and can provide the necessary City services. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ 6 _ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Encourage compatible uses to minimise conflicts and maximize use of land. (Chapter VII, Goal IV) The surrounding area is primarily rural residences however just west of the subject site the Comprehensive plan depicts a neighborhood center which envisions neighborhood friendly services in the area. Staff believes that the proposed use should be compatible with existing uses in the area and provide a necessary service in the surrounding area. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9: Require new residential development to provide permanent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties. On the submitted landscape plan, the applicant is proposing a 6 foot vinyl fence along the western property boundary of the site. Prior to any building permits the proposed fencing and temporary fencing will need to be installed to contain debris. • Chapter VI Goal V, Objective A, Action 2: Insure that high-quality emergency care, primary, outpatient, home and log-term care and other types of health care are provided in the community. The UDC allows Residential Care Facilities in an R-8 zone with conditional use approval. Furthermore, staff believes this facility will be a high quality development, if the conditions of approval are complied with. • Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A, Action 11 -Improve and protect creeks (Five Mile, Eight Mile, South Slough ...etc.) throughout commercial, industrial, and residential areas. The Ten Mile Creek, which runs along the southern boundary of this site, should be protected during development of the site. Chapter V, Goal I, Objective A.1 -Preserve and conserve our waterways, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural resources. The Ten Mile Creek, a natural watertivay, runs along the southern boundary of this site. As a natural waterway, it will remain open and should be preserved. Staff believes that the proposed use is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and can be compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff recommends that the Commission rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists nursing or residential care facilities as conditional uses in the R-8 zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standards: There are several standards for nursing or residential care facilities listed in UDC 11-4-3.29. Analysis of these specific use standards are provided in Section 10 below. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ ~ _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Staff is generally supportive of the AZ and CUP request as proposed, with the following comments: AZ Application: The Applicant is requesting approval to annex and zone approximately 5 acres from the Rl zoning district in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district in the City. The property is currently designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for Medium Density Residential. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval for nursing or residential care facilities. The applicant is proposing to develop the site as a treatment facility (residential care facility) consisting of two 9,000 square foot residential treatment buildings and one 6,000 square foot administrative building. Future pad sites for two Alzheimer buildings are shown on the site plan; however, they are not proposed for construction with this CUP (they will require separate CUP approval in the future). The annexation path for this site is via Incline Village Subdivision located northwest of the subject site. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on May 28, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. UDC 11-SB-3D2 provides the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Because of the nature of the development, Staff believes that a DA is necessary to ensure that the site develops in a manor that is consistent with the approved plans and does not negatively impact adjacent properties. Staff has included a list of recommended DA provisions below. If the Commission or Council feels additional development agreement provisions are necessary, staffrecommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer being required. Residential Care Facilities: As mentioned above, the proposed use is a conditional use in the proposed R-8 district. Staff believes that the proposed use can be compatible with future single- family homes in this area. However, Staff has some concerns with some of the uses proposed with the subject application. The applicant states that there will be outpatient counseling. Counseling and care for the patients staying at the facility is consistent with a residential care facility. But offering outpatient counseling is more a professional service use than a residential care use and Staff believes is not appropriate in a residential district. This facility is proposed in an R-8 district and the uses should be related to living on the site. Staff requests that the applicant clarify at the public hearing how the outpatient counseling will function. Staff s initial reaction is to limit the treatment to the residents and relatives of residents. Therefore, a DA provision is included below restricting outpatient services on this site. Development Agreement: A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of annexation of this property. Prior to annexation approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption, and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433, within 12 months of City Council approval to initiate this process. Please be advised a $303.00 fee will required to process the development agreement. The DA shall include, at minimum, the following: a. Until a future CUP is approved, a maximum of 3 buildings (2 residential buildings and 1 administrative building) shall be allowed to be constructed on the site. All future uses on this site will require a new CUP, unless waived by the Planning Director because the use is principally permitted. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 _ g _ i •' CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 b. Treatment on this site (counseling, therapy, etc.) shall be limited to the residents on the site; outpatient services shall be prohibited. c. At a minimum, amenities shall be constructed on the site as proposed on the site plan (i.e. walking path, garden area, rope course). d. The site/structures shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4- 3-29 for nursing or residential caze facility. e. One access to this site, from W. Cherry Lane, is approved. f. All existing buildings on the site shall be removed prior to release of building permits for this development. g. Submit an application for private streets within the development. Two twenty-five foot wide private streets shall be provided within the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F~. h. A 25-foot wide street buffer will be required along W. Cherry Lane, per UDC Table 11-2A-8. Landscaping shall be provided in said buffer in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C, Landscape Buffers along Streets. i. With the CZC application, include mitigation details and a plan approved by the City Arborist, for the existing trees on the site, consisting of 354 caliper inches, proposed to be removed, in compliance with UDC 11-3B-10. Contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, 888-3579 for more details. j. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance is required prior to issuance of a building permit for any and all of the proposed buildings within this development. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. k. The Ten Mile Creek shall be preserved and protected during construction on the site. 1. Set aside 48-feet ofright-of--way measured from the centerline of Cherry lane for the fixture road widening. m. The development of this property shall substantially comply with the concept plan in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. n. Any fixture buildings shall substantially comply with the elevations in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. o. Construct private streets to the east and west properties. This includes the pavement and adjacent sidewalks. Place signs at the east and west property lines stating that the roads will be extended in the fixture. Due to the length and the lack of a turnaround for the east leg, place bollards in the asphalt at 150-feet. These bollards shall be removed once the property to the east is developed and the private street is extended. Cross-access shall be provided to the properties to the west and east of the development. A copy of a recorded easement shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to occupancy of the first building. p. All fixture uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fixmes, glare or odors. q. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. r. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. s. The applicant shall construct a 10-foot pathway along the northern boundary of the property, as proposed. t. UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 9 - 0' CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. In ACRD staff report, Cherry Lane is not scheduled for widening between 2019 and 2028. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to be in compliance with this requirement. CUP Application: The applicant is requesting CUP approval to construct and operate a drug and alcohol treatment facility consisting of two residential treatment buildings and one administrative building. Square footages of the three proposed buildings total 24,000 square feet. The Alzheimer buildings shown on the submitted concept plan are not part of this application and will be reviewed at a later date with future CUP approval. UDC 11-2A-2 requires CUP approval to operate a nursing or residential care facility within an R-8 zoning district. In addition, the proposed use shall comply with the specific use standards of the UDC regarding Nursing or Residential Care Facilities. Specific Use Standards for Nursing or Residential Care Facilities per UDC 11-4-3-29: A. General standards: 1. If the use results in more than ten (10) persons occupying a dwelling at any one time, the applicant or owner shall concurrently apply for a change of occupancy as required by the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. The applicant is proposing to house up to 24 patients per resident building on- site which requires a change of occupancy. 2. The owner and/or operator of the facility shall secure and maintain a license from the state of Idaho department of health and welfare, facility standards division. The applicant should comply with this standard. B. Additional standards for uses providing care to children and juveniles under the age of eighteen (18) years: The applicant states in the narrative services will be provided to adolescents. 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by a minimum six foot (6') nonscalable fence to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. Not applicable. 2. Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any required yard. The proposed ropes course should comply with this requirement. 3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts or uses adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used after dusk. The applicant is proposing a rope course at the rear of the proposed buildings. Currently there is a large berm that runs along the southern property line and the canal and should buffer the noise generated by the rope course. However, staff believes the applicant should comply with this standard of the UDC. C. Additional standards for uses providing care to patients who suffer from Alzheimer's disease, dementia or other similar disability that may cause disorientation: Abarrier with a minimum height of six feet (6'), along the perimeter of any portion of the site that is accessible to these patients shall be provided. The fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the building code in accord with title 10 of this code. (Ord. OS-1170, 8-30-2005, eff. 9-15-2005) The future Alzheimer's buildings will have to comply with this requirement with future CUP approval. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 10 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Dimensional Requirements of the R-8 zone per UDC Table 11-2A-6: On the submitted site plan the proposed buildings comply with the required setbacks and the R-8 dimensional standards. Building Elevations: Elevations for the proposed buildings were submitted with this application, prepared by BRS Architects, labeled as Sheets A4.1, and are included in Exhibit A. The UDC requires buildings to be constructed of high quality building materials such as stone, brick, wood or other native materials. As mentioned earlier, the applicant is proposing to develop the site in phases with a total of three buildings in the first phase. All three of the buildings are proposed to be constructed of the same building materials. The applicant is proposing a variation is siding materials that includes stucco, lap, shake and board and batten wood siding with a stone veneer accents. Roofing materials are to be 25 year architectural grade composition shingle. Staff believes the buildings will be constructed of quality materials and is supportive of the proposed elevations. Any future buildings constructed on the site shall also substantially comply with these elevations. Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit for nursing or residential care facilities. In addition, 1 per 500 square feet of gross floor area is required for the administrative building. Each of the proposed residential buildings (2 total) is expected to house 24 patients and the administrative building is approximately 6,000 square feet. Based on the parking requirements of the UDC (24 X 2 X 0.5) (6,000/500) the minimum parking for the site is 36 and 77 stalls are proposed. Staff believes this is enough parking to meet the needs of the first three buildings, but may not be enough for the future buildings in the future. Parking requirements will be further evaluated with additional development of this site. In addition, a bicycle rack is required to be installed on the site that is capable of holding a minimum of two bicycles and should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-5C. If the above changed is made, staff is supportive of the parking for the site. Access: The applicant is proposing to take access to/from W. Cherry Lane. Staff and ACRD are supportive of the proposed access point. For internal circulation, the applicant is proposing a common 25-foot drive aisle for access within the development. The Meridian Fire Department and the Meridian Police Department have conditioned the applicant submit a private street application for addressing the future buildings. Furthermore, staff believes the applicant should provide cross-access to the parcels to the west and east of the subject site for future connectivity when those parcels propose to annex and develop within the City. Staff has made this a provision of the development agreement. Staff is requiring the applicant stub the west/east drive aisles to the adjacent properties, and place signs at the property line stating that these roads will be extended in the future. Due to the Fire Department's concerns about length of the eastern leg, Staff is requiring the applicant place bollards at 150-feet length because there is not a turnaround. When the property to the east is developed the bollards shall be removed. Staff is also requiring a copy of the recorded cross-access agreement prior to occupancy of the first building. Site Plan: Staff has reviewed the site plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled as CUP-1, included in Exhibit A) submitted with this application. The following items should to be shown on a revised site plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application: • Per UDC 11-3C-6G, provide a minimum of 2 bicycle parking spaces on the site in compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-SC. • Per UDC 11-3C-SB3, the parking stalls adjacent to the buildings shall have substantial wheel restraints to prevent cars from encroaching beyond the stall area onto the sidewalk or the sidewalk maybe widened to 7 feet to allow for overhang in this area. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 11 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Signs, and bollards on the east leg, should be along the west and east property boundaries stating road to be extended in the future. • Provide 77 parking stalls, as proposed. Landscaping: Staff has reviewed the landscape plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled as L1.00, included in Exhibit A) submitted with this application. The following items should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance: Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane, as depicted on the landscape plan. However, the landscape plan shows trees planted outside of the buffer. UDC 11-3B-7C3 requires all landscape buffers along streets be planted with trees and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to comply with this requirement. Staff has reviewed the internal parking lot landscaping depicted on the landscape plan and found it substantially complies with the landscaping requirements in UDC 11-3B-8. UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. In ACHD staff report, Cherry Lane is not scheduled for widening between 2019 and 2028. The applicant should revise the landscape plan to be in compliance with this requirement. Construct a 6-foot vinyl fence along the western and eastern property boundaries. Meridian Pathways Master Plan: The City's pathway plan has identified this site as a potential to extend the pathways network. In the text section of the Pathway plan (page 4-13) a portion along the northern and southern boundaries of the subject site are identified as possible pathway locations. The reason for the two locations on the subject site is one location is a short-term route and the other is a long term route. The document states the short term route is an on-street route along W. Cherry Lane located along the northern boundary of the site and the long term route is along the south side of Ten Mile Creek and does not require the pathway to be located on the subject property. The applicant is proposing a 10-foot detached pathway within the required landscape buffer to comply with this requirement. Staff is generally supportive of the pathway location; however, the applicant should contact the Parks Department to determine the preferred location of the proposed pathway and ACRD to verify that they are okay with the pathway too. Mitigation: The landscape plan depicts 5 e~sting trees, consisting of 167 caliper inches, on the site that are proposed to be remain during the development of the property. All other trees that were not labeled to remain are proposed for removal. The applicant states the total caliper inches proposed for mitigation is 354 caliper inches. Staff has been informed by the applicant that the City's Arborist has met with the applicant on site and is currently working on a mitigation plan. Per UDC 11-3B-10, mitigation is required for all existing trees fl- inch caliper or greater removed form the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an amount of 100% replacement. Staff recommends that the applicant comply with the mitigation standards listed in UDC 11-3B-lOC. Amenities: As mentioned earlier, the applicant is providing amenities on the site for future Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 12 - i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 patrons to use. The amenities include areas for flower beds, a convenient and large common area, a pathway system and a rope course. Staff recommends that the Commission determine if the proposed amenities are appropriate for a development of this size. Hours of Operation: The proposed facility is requesting to operate as a 24 hour facility. Staff is recommending provisions be in place to allow for 24 hour care on the property. Staff recommends the shift changes for the staff not occur between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am to not disturb the residents of the current and future adjacent neighborhoods. If the applicant complies with this recommendation, staff is supportive of the applicant's request for 24 hour use. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): A CZC application is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed building on this site. The applicant should submit revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B of this staff report, with the CZC application. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle- point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is use, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. Existing Structures: The site currently contains an existing single family home with associated outbuildings which are slated for demolition to make way for the proposed treatment facility. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the existing home and outbuildings on this site shall be removed. Fencing: On the submitted landscape plan, fencing is being proposed along the western boundary of the site. No other fencing is being proposed with this application. However, staff is recommending a 6-foot vinyl fence be placed along the eastern boundary to buffer against future residential that has the potential develop in the area. The comprehensive plan designates the parcels to the east as Medium Density Residential and the use the applicant is proposing is more intense than a residential development. Prior to any building permits the proposed fencing and temporary fencing will be required to be installed to contain debris. Fencing should taper down to a 3 foot maximum within 20 feet of all rights-of--way. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be covered. The Ten Mile Creek is a natural waterway and should be preserved and protected with development of this property. Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 13 - CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Private Streets: The applicant is not proposing private streets within this development. However, for addressing purposes, the Fire Department and the Police Department are requesting private streets be provided within this development. The applicant shall submit a Private Street application with the CZC application rf not before). Per UDC 11-3F-4, all private streets shall be designed and constructed to the following standards: A. Design standards: 1. Easement: The private street shall be constructed on a perpetual ingress/egress easement or a single platted lot that provides access to all applicable properties. 2. Connection point: Where the point of connection of the private street is to a public street, the private street shall be approved by the Transportation Authority. 3. Emergency vehicle: The private street shall provide sufficient maneuvering area for emergency vehicles as determined and approved by the Meridian Fire Department. 4. Gates: Gates or other obstacles shall not be allowed. B. Construction standards: 1. For conversion of an existing facility to a private street at the direction of the Fire Marshall: a. All drive aisles shall be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed. b. If a curb exists next to the drive aisle, it shall be painted red. 2. For all other private streets: a. Roadway and storm drainage: The private street shall be constructed in accord with the roadway and storm drainage standards of the Transportation Authority or as approved by the City of Meridian based on plans submitted by a certified engineer. b. Street width: The private street shall be constructed within the easement and shall have a travel lane width of twenty-four (24) feet or twenty-six (26) feet as determined by the Fire Marshal relative to the height and size of the proposed structures that adjoin the private street. The Fire Department is requiring a travel lane of at least 24 feet; however, the UDC requires a 25- foot two way drive aisle width. The submitted site plan complies with this requirement c. Sidewalks: Afive-foot (5') attached sidewalk or four-foot (4') detached sidewalk shall be provided on one side of the street in commercial districts. This requirement may be waived if the applicant can demonstrate that an alternative pedestrian path exists. Five foot wide detached sidewalks are proposed in front of the structures adjacent to parking. These sidewalks shall be extended to the east and west property lines. d. Fire lanes: All drive aisles shall be posted as fire lanes with no parking allowed. In addition, if a curb exists next to the drive aisle, it shall be painted red. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of A~O8-008 and CUP-08-015 for Redmont Health Services, as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 17, 2008, based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning & Zonin>1 Commission heard these items on July 17 2008 At the public hearing Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 14 - • • CTTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subiect AZ and CUP request. The Meridian itv Council heard these items on AL~~st 26.2008. At the n»hli hearing the (''nuncil annrov .~ the iect AZ and CUP reauest 11. EI~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map 2. CUP Site Plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled C1.00) 3. Landscape Plan (prepared by The Land Group, dated 05/28/2008, labeled L1.00) 4. Building Elevations/FloorPlaps (prepared by BRS, labeled Sheet Al.l and A4.1) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Central District Health C. Legal Description and Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code Redmont Health Services AZ-08-008 and CUP-08-015 - 15 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map a25e I 5322 5200 ~ 1947 5150 ~ 5136 5321 5103 ~~ M -- i __ _ _: R-8 ~~ 4973 ~ 5075 ~~. U,r ~i ~~ u.' a t=/f 5287 5239 4997 I r 1435 I '4 ~~ .T- _ _ _ _ _ _ . 4831 1299 ~._ _ _ __ 1293 ---~ v v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1148 M u°~ ~ R 2 v ~ 1132 ~,~g1 5135 ~~,.~,, _ 11 j0 -_,.. o. o, ~°DO, ° ° ~ ~ o ~~. 1054,~,i ~ ~ 4 l ~ N h 5304 5150 1035 ( ~~ 5038 _ 4y ~ ~ , 5377 6p 855 999 a Exhibit A _ I _ • • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. CUP Site Plan WBPI '~I+~Yd M AUJ ~ I e ~ 9 t ~ R ®¢ ~ I •au~ '~I~S 4TH wows ~Id etlS ~~4~5 ~ ~ I a ~ , ,- .,~. ~.~ g a i v ~ ~ ~~ Ci i N °~ ~~~ A y ~ el ~-a g m i _°~ ~~ I ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ '~ r ~~ ( '~- -~ ~~ ~ (~ ~« ~_ J_ -_ .: ~ ~ _ ,,, ~ e~ . ------%, i ~~~~ ~~ ' a a '1 E ' ~ - ~ ~ ~~ w aim ~~~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ o ~ ` ~ i ~} ~ '~ ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . megaa___„m~ ~ '~ i 0.a ~eaed ~' ~ ~ -C ,~ __ I ~ i ~ J ~ ' ~~~ I~~ ~~I ~~ ~~ j ~ ~ ~ 'fjl + - - - - -- - _ s- ~- -9TH' ;;~ ~~ x (I~ ©j~ ~ add i ~„u ~~ ~~ i ~ (~ ~ ! g ~ .rwa I~I ~ / ~, i(1 ~ 1 ; i ~~ ~- . i ,1„ ,- >~a 1 a ~ ~ ~se~ °~ - ~ ~ ~~ ~ / ~ .~ ~. ~ rnii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m o ' ~ 111 V ® ~~ g ~~ ~ o t J s ~ ~ d9° ~ ~@ sa ~ ~ '9 ~e V m a ~ ~.- F~ E ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~~@~ ~ ~~~~~ Exhibit A _ 2 _ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 3. Landscape Plan wew „~,euu u quo a ~ a ' ' ue ew ~Id edeas a e I ~ ~ ®~ ~ ~WeS 411~H 3uow~ ~ul ..... p ~ p y~ ~ i I a a~ r ~J e ! u ~ ~t 1 ~ `~ C~~' 5 ~ o ~~~ ~ e ggi ~A i y Y ~ o ~~~ a~ e~ ~ ~~~~ o ~ ~ ~ r z ti F ~ 1 g ~ ~ t ~;flq~ BAi,f ~!~ ~1~'~ $ l~e~ ~~' ~ ~P w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~;1<~ ~~! 9i~ ~~ ~~i( iyt ~, ~ W W a $d~ggapp~~~~~Fgp~g~d"~ ~~~ d88~~a38Z}8 .,a, o. ~ / ~ -- r ~ - -m- - ~~~ ~a~~~ j e I I •I I e ~ (kl ~ ~~ t~ II) Po IU saga '~ ~~~~ s" N zU ~ ~~ s ~ 'V ~ ~ T- Exhibit A _ 3 _ • C~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 4. Elevations Exhibit A - 4 - Resident Buildings • CTfY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 ~ ~~ Exhibit A _ g _ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 ANNEXATION/ZONING 1.1.1 The annexation and zoning legal descriptions submitted with the application (stamped on May 28, 2008 by Aaron L. Ballard, PLS) is accurate and meet the requirements of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 A Development Agreement will be required as part of the annexation and zoning of this property. Prior to the annexation and zoning ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation rezone ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 within 12 months of Council approval to initiate this process. Please be advised a $303.00 fee will required to process the development agreement. The DA shall include, at minimum, the following: a. Until a future CUP is approved, a maximum of 3 buildings (2 residential buildings and 1 administrative building) shall be allowed to be constructed on the site. All future uses on this site will require a new CUP, unless waived by the Planning Director because the use is principally permitted. b. Treatment on this site (counseling, therapy, etc.) shall be limited to the residents on the site; continuing care of the residential patients and their families is allowed provided it is consistent with the Redmont Health Services business/treatment plan for residential care facilities. c. At a minimum, amenities shall be constructed on the site as proposed on the site plan (i.e. walking path, garden area, rope course). d. The site/structures shall comply with the Specific Use Standards listed in UDC 11-4-3- 29 for nursing or residential care facility. e. One access to this site, from W. Cherry Lane, is approved. f. All existing buildings on the site shall be removed prior to release of building permits for this development. g. Submit an application for private streets within the development. ~~ Two twenty- five foot wide private streets shall be provided within the site in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3F-4. h. A 25-foot wide street buffer will be required along W. Cherry Lane, per UDC Table 11-2A-8. Landscaping shall be provided in said buffer in accordance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3B-7C, Landscape Buffers along Streets. i. With the CZC application, include mitigation details and a plan approved by the Ciry Arborist, for the existing trees on the site, consisting of 354 caliper inches, proposed to be removed, in compliance with UDC 11-3B-10. Contact Elroy Huff, Ciry Arborist, 888-3579 for more details. j. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance is required prior to issuance of a building permit for any and all of the proposed buildings within this development. NOTE: A CZC application may include multiple structures within the development. k. The Ten Mile Creek shall be preserved and protected during construction on the site. 1. Set aside 48-feet of right-of--way measured from the centerline of Cherry lane for the future road widening. m. The development of this property shall substantially comply with the concept plan in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. Exhibit B - 1 - i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 n. Any future buildings shall substantially comply with the elevations in Exhibit A, as determined by the Planning Director. o. Construct private streets to the east and west properties. This includes the pavement and adjacent sidewalks. Place signs at the east and west property lines stating that the roads will be extended in the future. Due to the length and the lack of a turnaround for the east leg, p}ase~el~s striae the asphalt at 150-feet. The beK~~s striping shall be removed once the property to the east is developed and the private street is extended. Cross-access shall be provided to the properties to the west and east of the development. A copy of a recorded easement shall be submitted tot eh Planning Department prior to occupancy of the first building. p. All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfaze by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glaze or odors. q. All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. r. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. s. The applicant shall construct a ~9-fee~~ 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along the northern boundary of the property, as proposed. t. The developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standazds of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. u. Coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department reeazdin¢ emereencv access from the azkin~ lot to each of the buildings on the site. An emereenc access lane shall be delineated within the pazking azea to facilitate emergency vehicles to allow emergency ersonnel unobstructed access from the azking azea to the front of the future buildings. v. portion of this development lies within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. The applicant will be required to submit a Floodplain Development Permit and secure approval before any construction can begin. Permit approval may require development of Base Flood Elevations. mapping of the floodplain and / or floodwav boundaries. and alvsis of the effect of the development on the floodplain. Applicant should reference City Flood Damage Prevention Code and coordinate with the Floodplain Administrator to verify requirements. 1.2 CONDITIONAL USE PERNIIT 1.2.1 The site plan, prepared by The Land Group, dated May 28, 2008, is approved with the following modifications: • Per UDC 11-3C-6G, provide a minimum of 2 bicycle parking spaces on the site in compliance with the standards listed in UDC 11-3C-SC. • Per UDC 11-3C-SB3, the parking stalls adjacent to the buildings shall be provide substantial wheel restraints to prevent cars from encroaching beyond the stall azea onto the sidewalk or the sidewalk maybe widened to 7 feet to allow for overhang in this azea. • Provide 77 pazking stalls on the site as proposed. • Signs, and s stri~~ of the asphalt on the east leg at 150-foot mazk, should be placed at the east and west property boundaries stating "road to be extended in the future". 1.2.2 The landscape plan, prepazed by The Land Group, dated March 28, 2008, is approved with the following modifications: Exhibit B - 2 - CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 • Per UDC Table 11-2B-3, a 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along W. Cherry Lane, as depicted on the landscape plan. However, the landscape plan shows trees planted outside of the buffer. UDC 11-3B-7C3 requires all landscape buffers along streets be planted with trees and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. • Staff has reviewed the internal parking lot landscaping depicted on the landscape plan and found it substantially complies with the landscaping requirements in UDC 11-3B-8. • UDC 11-3B-7 states if the unimproved street right-of--way is ten feet or greater from the edge of pavement to the edge of property line, and the street widening project is not in the transportation authority 5 year funded plan, the developer shall maintain a ten foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the transportation authority and landscape the remainder with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. • Construct a 6-foot vinyl fence along the western and eastern property boundaries. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the Applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Ekoy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Provide a copy of the plan to the Planning Department with the CZC submittal. 1.2.3 The building elevations, prepared by BRS Architects, labeled Sheets 4.10, are approved. 1.2.4 The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application with revised plans that comply with the conditions of approval listed herein, prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed building. 1.2.5 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. 1.2.6 No business signs are approved with this CUP application. All business signs require a separate sign permit in compliance with the sign ordinance (UDC 11-3D). 1.2.7 The Applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the business has not begun within 18 months of approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 1.2.8 The staff shift change shall not occur between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am on the site. 1.2.9 The site shall comply with all of specific use standards in accordance with UDC 11-4-3-29, as applicable. 1.2.10 The owner and/or operator of the facility shall secure and maintain a license from the state of Idaho department of health and welfare, facility standards division. 1.2.11 The applicant shall submit an approved site plan from Sanitary Services Company (SSC) with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. 1.2.12 The applicant shall submit a private street application with CZC submittal. 1.2.13 1.2.14 A copy of a recorded cross-access easement to the properties to the east and west to use the private streets as access shall be submitted with CZC submittal. Exhibit B - 3 - • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 1.2.15 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the existing structures shall be removed from the site. 1.2.16 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the domestic water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable landscape areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 1.2.17 Coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department regarding emergency access from the parkins lot to each of the buildings on the site. An emergenc_vaccess lane shall be delineated within the parking area to facilitate emergency vehicles to allow eme_rQe_ _ncv personnel unobstructed access from the narking area to the front of the future buildings. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains in N Black Cat Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W Cherry Lane and N Black Cat Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install a looped 8 inch water main from N Black Cat Road to W Cherry Lane. The applicant is allowed to phase the water line connection as the other parcels develop granted all easements are dedicated to the City of Meridian and surety is collected. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat, but rather dedicated outside the plat process using the City of Meridian's standard forms. The easement shall be graphically depicted on the plat for reference purposes. Submit an executed easement (on the form available from Public Works), a legal description, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2" x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. 2.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.5 All existing structures that are required to be removed shall be prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. Exhibit B _ 4 _ • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, alternate plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 2.7 Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8 contact the City of Meridian Engineering Department at (208)898-5500 for inspections of disconnection of services. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho Department of Water Resources Contact Robert B. Whitney at (208)334-2190. 2.8 Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Contact Central District Health for abandonment procedures and inspections (208)375-5211. 2.9 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.10 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.11 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.12 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to the issuance of a plan approval letter. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.14 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.15 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.16 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.17 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces is at least 1-foot above. 2.18 The applicants design engineer shall certify that all seepage beds out of the public right- of-way are installed in accordance with the approved design plans. This certification must be received by the City of Meridian Public Works Department prior to the project receiving final approval. Commercial Projects 2.19 At the completion of the project, the applicant shall be responsible to submit record drawings per the City of Meridian AutoCAD standards. These record drawings must be received and approved prior to the issuance of a certification of occupancy for any structures within the project. 2.20 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light Exhibit B _ 5 _ C~ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 2.21 A portion of this development lies within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District The applicant will be required to submit a Floodplain Development Permit and secure approval before any construction can beein Permit approval may require development of Base Flood Elevations mapping of the floodplain and / or floodwav boundaries and nalvsis of the effect of the development on the floodplain Applicant should reference City Flood Da_ maee Prevention Code and coordinate with the Floodplair A in'strator to verify requirements 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.3 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 3.4 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections. 3.5 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.6 The buildings on the site shall require a NFPA 13R or 13D sprinkler system and fire alarm system per NFPA 72. 3.7 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. Exhibit B -6- • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.8 For all Fire Lanes provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.9 Provide private streets for addressing the each proposed building. The private roadway shall be constructed a minimum of 24 feet in width, have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.10 Any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turn around on streets greater than 150' in length with no outlet. 3.11 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). 3.12 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.13 Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with The International Fire Code Appendix D Section D105. 3.14 The east/west private street shall have a sign er~ella~s stri in located at 150-foot (measured approximately 50 feet from the eastern property line) stating road to be extended in the future. Said placement of sign er-belles and strinina shall be Meridian Fire Department approval and comply with the 150-foot distance requirement. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The applicant shall provide private streets within the development for addressing each proposed building. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 No comments received from the Parks Department. 6. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY 6.1 SSC did not provide comments on this application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 Dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Cherry Lane abutting the parcel where it does not currently exist. 7.2 Construct a 5-foot concrete sidewalk, a minimum of 41 feet from the centerline of Cherry Lane. 7.3 Construct a 25-foot driveway access to intersect Cherry Lane located approximately 160 feet east of the westernmost property line (measured property line to near edge). Exhibit B -7- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.4 Pave the driveway its full width and at least 30 feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 7.5 Other than the access specifically approved with this application, direct lot access to Cherry Lane is prohibited. 7.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.3 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.4 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.5 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.6 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.7 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.8 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.9 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACRD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.10 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.11 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. 7.2.12 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. Exhibit B _ g _ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 7.2.13 Private sewer and water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or right-of--way. 8. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH 8.1 After written approvals from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve the proposal for central sewage and central water. 8.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water. 8.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 8.4 Central District Health will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any food establishments. Exhibit B -9- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C. Legal Description and Exhibit Map i.•r TWH [.AND GHODP, ING lvlay 2a, 2~s Project ido. 08055 AanexaIIon artd Rewae Lega11)es~iption 5.06 Ataes SIT "A° A tract ofland situatal in a portimt of t1m Northeast One Quartet of the Norte One Qaaeter of Sccti~ 9. Township 3 Nottb, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada Coattty, Idaho, described as follows: Commepaing at a found 1J2-inch i pin nesting the NorttL O~ Quarter Cotter of e~id Section 9 and being an t1~ ofCheay Lase, theme following fltc ncrtherly tine of the Nort~ast Ope Qt~tea of said Section 9 and said c®tetliae, South 89°3T38° East a distance of 1,54135 fact to a poitlt, which bears North 89°37'38^ West a distance of I,008S9 feet from a found 5/8a~h ~1 gin mfg il~ Nortltw.st Coti~ of said Sedan 9 andbeingtlte POINT OF BEGWNING. Thenco following said rtorther'13' line and ~ ceatmliae, South 89°3?'38" Ease a disftmce of 391.73 feet to a paing 'Thence leaving 6afd northerly lip and said centesli>ze, South 00°x'02 East a diamnce of 622.14 feet to apomt on the centerline ofa ditch; Thence followingsaid centerline, North 70°41'68° West a distance of 233.b5 feet to a ~~ Thence following said cxtt~rlipe, North 72°lb'OB° West a distance of 179.7b feet to a P~ Thence leaving said csttterliHe, North 00°QD'42 East a d of 492.6b fcea to the POINT OF BEGIIVNINti. Tl~ above-descn'6ed fist[ of ]and captains 5.00 acres more or less, subject to any eaistmg easements c~rrights-of~vay. P'repazed By: THB LAND GROUP, IATC. 4b2 E. SHORE I)RN$ SU1TE 100 EAGLE, IDAHO 8361b Z08-939-4041 20&939-0445 (FAX) S.artdvsJnma •Sni Plas~g .CailEr~az~'Gu/j~seruL~gmme ¢"+'E t40 Rieec V3am r9ace, Twin Fulls, Idaho P2a&733.4041 P108.739.4045 C:\2006\06055\Adminll,cgals\L 060527 OBa55 Pum Fage t of 1 0 rZ 1 r ¢. a D ~. g Exhibit C _ I _ • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 C/L CHERRY LANE Situated in a portion of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, OIIdT OF BEGINNING Township 3 N, Range 1 W, B.M., BASIS ~' ~AInNG Ada County, Idaho _ ~'3T38"E 2649.94' Zoos i 1641.35' M 391.73' t/2-INCH STEEL PiN o - - t/4 CORNER SEC 9 POINT OF COMMENCMENT 5075 W. CfFERitY LANE CURRENT TAX DISTRICT: R-1 PROPCISED TAX DISTRICT: R-8 ~~ 6 DITCH °~ 616.86' 5/8-WCH STEEL PIN pE CORNER SEC. 9 fV N m ® ca.culaiEO r~ui ?3365. • s/s-~nrl srEa e~ w~y`oa~~~^~o ~ I/s-alc+l stm Pr>i ~ 12459 artoatarr sourooaRr u~E -- I$CHi-t)F-pGY LU+fE 99~~'1.. gam, p4~ t,. - - - CENIERLWE / SECTI~V UNE ~'s'•~. r~ ~ ENGINEEWSURVEYOR PROJECT INFORMATION Scats: 1' =1~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ THE LAND GROrrP, INC. os-za.o~ ~ ~ ~ , :,° Redmont Health Services ® - Annexation & Rezone ~ ,~,", ~,~~;,~ City of Meridian Exhibit "B" Exhibit C -2- U CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 D. Require Findings from the Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that the existing and proposed use of the property as a residential care facility is a conditional use in the R-8 district and is generally consistent with the future land use map designation of medium density residential for this property. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-SB-3.E). The City Council finds that the annexation and zoning of this property to R-8 would be in the best interest of the City. 2. CUP Findings: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The existing site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. However, the R-8 zoning district requires CUP approval for Nursing/Residential Care Facilities in accordance with UDC 11-2A-2 and strict adherence to the specific use standards in UDC 11-4-3-29. See analysis in Section 10 for more information. Staff recommends the Council rely on Staffs analysis and any oral or written public testimony provided when determining if this site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. Exhibit D -1- • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council fmds that the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designation for this property is Medium Density Residential. The subject property is proposed for R-8 zoning and complies with this designation. The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (See Sections 8 and 10 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use). 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council fmds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, the Commission believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council fmds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council fmds that the site will be adequately served by the previously mentioned . public facilities and services. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the Applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise is a concern; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated by the proposed new use of the property will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of the public. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The City Council finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use that should be brought to the Council's attention. The Ciry Exhibit D -2- • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF AUGUST 26, 2008 Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. Exhibit D _ 3 _ September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Dr. Dan Thieme C~ MI 08-001 September 9, 2008 ITEM No. 5-1 REQUEST Addendum to Development Agreement -Request for a Miscellaneous application to modify the DA to remove the requirement for cross-access between properties located at 125 W. Cherry 8~ 1645 W. 1 st for MitNeider -- 125 W. Cherry Ln. AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See attached ~~ Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. • ADA COUNTY REtB1RDER J. NAttARRO AMOUNT .00 BObSE IDAHO Wl~l~ 01:i RJR` ~~OsR~U~TOF III IIIIIIIIIIIRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Meridian City 10S 1 ~54~3 ADDENDUM TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian 2. Gerard W. Pope, Owner 3. Dan Thieme, Developer This addendum is made and entered into this ~~ day of 2008, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corpora 'on the State of Idaho, hereafter called CITY, and Gerard W. Pope, whose address is 2000 W. Emerald Falls Court, Meridian, Idaho 83646, hereinafter called OWNER, and Dan Thieme, whose address is 1560 N. Crestmont Drive, Suite A, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereinafter called DEVELOPER. RECITALS A. CITY and OWNER entered into that certain DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT recorded on January 17, 2008 as Instrument # 108006032 on the land described in Exhibit "A" ("Property'. B. CITY and OWNER & DEVELOPER now. desire to amend the Development Agreement in accordance with the terms in this Addendum, which terms have been approved by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and the Meridian City Council in accordance with Idaho Code Section 67-651 lA. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. OWNER and DEVELOPER shall be bound by the tenors of the Development Agreement, except as specifically amended to delete aay reference to cross access as follows: SECTION 5.Z Access to tLis site will be provided from West 1~` Street and West 2°d Street. ' 2. That Owner and Developer agree to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Property shall be subj ect to de-annexation of the Owner and Developer, or their assigns, heirs, or successor shall not meet the conditions of this addendum to the Development Agreement, and any new Ordinances of the City of Meridian as herein provided. ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (1VII 08-001 MTCI'LIEDER) PAGE 1 OF S • • 3. This addendum shall be binding upon and insure to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives,including City's corporate authorities and their successors in office. T1nis second addendum shall be binding on the Owner and Developer of the Properly, each subsequent owner aad any other person(s) acquiring an interest in the Properly. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the Property, or portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereon and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. City agrees, upon written request of Owner and Developer, to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this addendum if City, in its sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that Owner and Developer have fully performed its obligations under this Addendum. 4. If any provision of this addendum is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this addendum and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. S. This addendum sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition, and understandings between Owner and Developer and City relative to the subject matter herein, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions orunder-standing, either oral or written, express or implied, between Owner and Developer and City, other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this second addendum shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to City, to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of City. a~ Except as herein provided, no condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing development of the subject Property herein provided for can be modified or amended within the approval of the City Council after the City has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 6. This addendum shall be effective as of the date herein above written. ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI 08-001 MI1Ti,IEDER) PAGE 2 OF 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. ~ ~/~! C Attest: Jaycee L ~IOlman, City Clerk DEVELOPER: Dan Thieme CITY OF MERIDIAN sy: ~~ ~ Mayor T Weerd `~~~,,. ,, ~~~r~ '. ~~ 9~ r ~s~ • ~P~~~` ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI 08-001 MITfLIEDER) PAGE 3 OF S • STATE OF IDAHO ) . ss: County of Ada, ) On this `"c~ay of ~' 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally eared Gerard W. Pope known or identified to me to be the person who signed this agreement and acknowledged to me that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal ,g~~,~~ar in.this certificate first above written. r-~ No Public for o ~~~ Residing at• My Commission Expires: 3 -~ .~ -i v STATE OF IDAHO ) . ss: County of Ada, ) On this ~~`~day of ~ 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally a d Dan Thieme known or identified to me to be the person wha signed this agreement and acknowledged to me that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and yeah„~} this certificate first above written. so~~ •` ~o o~°°OTe~ ee~~0~~c_ Pf o ® ~~ e ~, b ~ O O ~ r/ ~~~ m ~~ Q.~~~ Notary or Idaho Residing at: ~ Sc ~--~_ My Commission Expires:. -a ~-~ O ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI 08-001 MTl1'LIEDER) PAGE 4 OF 5 • STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this day of ~P~t''tYl , 2008, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and Jaycee L. Holman, known or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I.have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. (SEAL) : ;~ ' ~ ~'~,~, • ~ ~ ~~ ~'~ ' ~, ; .~ •, ` C, ; 4HO. !a s Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: ~ Ca~~.~,~ ~ Commission expires: ,~-l t~ 11 ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI 08-001 MITTLIEDER) PAGE 5 OF S • • ~ ~ PRAP~Z9f A~BC`RIPTICN OF 12S WCBT C'NBRRY L EXHIBIT °A" Lots 1 and Z of Block 2 of 1aTILBON ADDiTI~1T TO 1+OSRiDSAN, according to the official plat tbe~5of. piled 3D Book 12 of Plate at 708, records of Ada Couaty, Idaho. BXCE8TIN0 TH~F1tOb1: Any lands oa the north k~undary of Dote i a-ad 2 which fall mithin the Cberiy Lane south right-o€-way. id®atified ae as~y P~PertY north of a line 40° from and parallel to the cehterlin® oP Cherry Lat~te. This exception ie intended to include iS~ of additional right-of-way, to t~a® original Z5' of right-Of-way south from the centerline of Cherry Lane. • • ~ •.~ , • BUBSCRI880 AND Si~OAN to before nEe this .2~ day of ,,,~ Z09 . Na POBL C os I Cammiesl.on Sxpires: ~a z ~ ~ I ~ ~ PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 0'P 1649 Td$8T FIRST 8TR8BT '• BXHIBST °A" Lota 3 acid 9 of 81ock 2 of 6~ILSON ADOITIQN TO MERIDIAN, azcording '~ to the official plat ther®oE, i~.led is Hook i2 of Plate at 7Q~8, records of Ada County. Idaho. .` ERCEPTINa TEQ~7,EFRC~I a Any lends on the north boemdary of Lots ,~ and IF which fall within tie Cherry Lan® south right-of-way. identified ae a~ay propert north of aline ~o~ from and patallei to the centerline og ChBrry ~'' ~~a. shin exception is intended to inolude iS~~of additional right-~of-way. to the cri~ginal 28' of right-ot-way south £rom the centerline of Chex~xy Lane, f` ,~ E. SUB$CRI~D ,AND SWORN to before ma this ~_ day of Y IC qr I Co~a~etieaion 8xpires: ~u~ z zoo4 ~rt~t~6~G'~" '~ P~'~ ~'~ Z September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-J REQUEST Change Order No. 1 for Well 14 Rehabilitation (construction) with McLeran Well Drilling for $3,775.00 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See aftached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: /~ ~l ~ \~~v~~ CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials- Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clly of Meridian. CRY OF AAERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO i~eRIDIAN, ID s3saa CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER i Order No.: 1 Protect Number. 073Zd ~: ~tzoos Eta Dees: . ~~CTO~ A1cL®ran Well DrllUng PROJECT: Wel114 Rehabllitetlon Tiro Contraedor ~ hen9by dt b rr~ ~ tolls ctuut~ 6om ti-e Contraot ~er~enla and Phuts. Dsealptlon; Additional swabbing hours required. Reese tsot' ChsatBe O~ Wee had originally ptanrteai for 8 hoots of cable col swabbing on the well. McI.eran had to swab on the screens, sp~ifically at our direction, far 30 hours. nbs: CHANOIE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANDE IN CONTRACT TIIIAES: Original Contrail Price: $106,790.00 ~~ Cantratd Comptef~n oah3: Oti CmfbaclCompletian Net ~ng~ form previous C.O.'s.: Net Days cfrenSe form pnrv[o~ C.O.~ No. Q m Q No. g to g $O.oO Contract Price Prior ~ th(s C.O.: Contract Completimi Date before this C.O.: $106.790.00 Net In O ~` tws C.O.: Net Dayat Intme~ (decrease) of this C.O.: $3.778.00 Contract Pace with ell Approved C.O."s: Contract Canpletion Dees with ati Approved C.O.~: $110.885.00 RECOMMENDED (CON3TRUCrtON MANAGER) ACCEPTED (CONTRACTOR) ~ /~ ~ 'lLr ~ B ~ ~ . y BY dC~ ~7 G~P~lei---~ Date: 0°? Deb ~: y _Z .-c~~+ APPROVED: (cmr Pu G couNaL APPROVAL sy: wens De~t+s: q _ ~,a ,,,~~, Dare: ~ - ~ - ~.~~,~`O~ ~+ •~:,, .~ -, APPROVE • ~L%e:~G _, ~. ~~ ,`'~ t3y: Mayan Tammy de ~_ Date: q- -vS' 8y: City Cierk. Jaycee Holman _ 8$~ ~: ~v ~ ,gyp ~lr ~ '''','~~~~~nrnnp a ~N~~~~~~,,`,,,, • Memo To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green Prom: Roxanne Holland, EIT, Staff Engineer CC: Clint Dalsby, P.E., Staff Engineer Date: September 2, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for September 9, 2008 Ciiy Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Chancae Order No. 1 for Well 14 Rehabilitation (Construction) Additional work is required for the completion of the Well 14 Rehabilitation. This change order consists of the following work and amounts to 3.5% of the original construction contract: Additional cable-tool swabbing hours required. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Change Order No.1 for the Weil 14 Rehabilitation (Construction) project with McLeran Well Drilling for $3,775.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 • CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, iD 83642 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER • Change Order Na.: 1 Project Number: 0732d Date: 9/2/2008 Effective Date: CONTRACTOR: McLeran Weil Drilling PROJECT: Well 14 Rehabilitation The Contractor Is hereby directed to make the following changes from the Contract Documents and Plans. Desclptlon: Additional swabbing hours required. Reason for Change Order: We had originally planned for 8 hours of cable-tool swabbing on this well. McLeran had to swab on the screens, specifically at our direction, for 30 hours. Attachment: CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Price: $106,790.00 Original Contract Completion Date: Original Contract Completion Days: Net changes form previous C.O.'s.: Net Days change form previous C.O.'s: No. Q to Q No. Q to 0 $0.00 Contract Price Prtor to this C.O.: Contract Completion Date before this C.O.: $106,790.00 Net Increase (decxease) of this C.O.: Net Days Increase (decrease} of this C.O.: $3,775.00 Contract Price with all Approved C.O: s: Contract Completion Date with all Approved C.O: s: $110,565.00 RECOMMENDED: (CONSTRUCTION MANAGER) ACCEPTED (CONTRACTOR) ,9 Date: C~ C' ~( L'~J Date: cJ _ Z `. p~' APPROVED: {ciTr PURCHASING AGENT) COUNCIL APPROVAL By: Keith Watts Date: Date: APPROVED: {CITY) ATTEST: By: Mayor Tammy de Weerd By: City Clerk, Jaycee Holman Date: Date: • • September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-K REQUEST Water Easement Agreement for The Cottages by Jeff Fullmer AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMQUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See attached ~+ppro~c- Date: Phone: Staff Inifials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER d. DAVID NAVARRO AI9pUNT .00 • EPUTY ~A~I 01:69. n nn pn q~{n ~p RE~RDED-RE4UEST OF 11I II~IIIIIIIaNIIIIIt1I1IiI~I 1111 Metldian CIS i 1~810E42~ WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this ~ day of ~ 2flO~between ~tR ~~ .the parties of the first art, and hereinafter called the Grantors,~nd the City of Merldfan, Ada County, Idaho, the party of P the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WI'fNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and descn'bed; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, 'TIdEREFORE, m consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right of way for an easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement of a water main over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is forthe purpose of construction and operation ofawater line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right of--way unto the said Grantee, h's succors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after construction, making repairs, Performing other maintenance or making subsequent co~mection to the water line, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and maintenances. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restornng anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area descn'b~ for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of- way and easement hereby granted shall become part oi:, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereoi; shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. Water Main Easement easmt wtr Imain.doc • • THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Granter that they are lawfiilly seized and ~ of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will wannnt and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. .. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this ,~ day of s;' 20 $ before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally peared known or identified to me to be the ~ -t 111t~{Yidq~c'~ that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such oeppera4ies t~idr~QUs executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official ~1 the day and year fist above written. ~~,A L. ~~ {SEAL) ~ O,r~ ~,~ NO ARY PUB IC FOR IDAHO ~ ~ Residing at ~'~- t~ ~~+~ Commission Expires: ~ /G - /y p~~1G ~ O ''y'am op ~~~ water Main Easement ~' ~ Pate i GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy de Attest by Jaffe Holman, Ciiy Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO, ) C~ `/J`,`'``~~~ttuuttey~~~,''//i ,'~ ," 8~i~ -.~.. ,..e .~_ ,,. . ss. County-of Ada - ) n 8' On this q~ day o Z0~ before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, perso appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and JAYCEE HOLMAN, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrumeirt, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. ,...... F~ . .• ~y0 T9 .~ . . (S ) ,,~ ~ ,~. ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ e . ~ ~ • ~ / • i~.~ ~~ ~ • •~ ~• ~ ~1~A. Water Main Easement NOTARY PUBLIC RID ~ ~ ~ ~ Residing at: Commission Expires• easmt wtr main.doc „_~ ~l .~ • t i •x~1~1~' ~:. ,' •~ ~~ ~I D~1~10 SURVEY GROUP - CIT3~ ~F ~+T.~VA,.'R•E~lSEME1VT An easement for ~ify of Mendi~n weter lines, locateal. us ~prti -arid 12 ~~ Cottage Hame A~dition ~~ ~terid~ •as same ~s fiigd fox flats at page 4~ ~da..Cotti~y re¢or~s, .and a ~ort~oti of the S~ 1/4 .Qf I4..5p .Eas1t Watercflw±er ~t s~~ isQ ~M~a~,~iaaR,~ ~~z P~a~ne :~20~) 8468570 F;~t ~:~1884-5.399 may is, ~oo~ .ots10,11, Book ~ o~ Section 7, ~' 3~T~, R 1~E, $.~,1V1e~xdtan, At~a:i/qumit~, Idaho, '~e~ng #~ P bf lamd 20.00 feet inwidth, -right +~f and :2~.~jacent to ibe following descn'1~ed eaaei~.ent line: . .. Commencu~ ~.t the aeut~aeast coiner tip ,the ~ 1/a jcente; ~1/a +c~rne) of•~ud .Section 7 - from,.yv~ucn the ~Toir~ %a comer of said section bears Noon ~4°~4'~~" -t. 1 - r4 ~ ~ Y .. i -. d ~G94 2~ feet, ~:ence a~lon~ Elie boun~;ary of sad ~TW l4 ~o ~°3~'~3" Fast, 61.1.64 feet to point ba the fast line of 6a~id Lot 12, the $egznnvgg~~pomt, of satd easement lime; ~ . ... : , . Thence `South„ ~89°37'41" AV'est;`89,27 feet; - - ' Thence No ~(~°46'19" West, 56 00 feet; Thence. Sa~th $9°31 ~27"~.: ~V'e~t, ~ 5 2S feet to ~ point on the .east bopncYary Af the . w. E, Calton Avenue nght of way, ~e ~n~d3ng ~+~~,t of said e~,sez~i~nt lie - $ic~~ne shortened Q~ ~ed«1 as ? to foix- a .continuos sixp o~lau~„ Said ease~:ent coveruig 3,210 SF; more or less. . 0 8Q122\80122-water doc ..~®~~ss1~~®~ L®~a.~ Survey®rs ~hl~l'~' ~B~ 6 1/4 7 E. FAIRVIEW AVE. E. CARLTON AVE. ~~ ryo PO NT / ~ ~' S 88'3; ~ ~ s~~~o~ 3,210 SF +/- ,~~~~ ~r9RY /~S~Bg,' 41°IIV 897 r I N C7 z ~~~ ' "c3 D I~ 0 . N1 ~~ r m . W U Z CEN 1/4 SCALE 1 °=50' owc.oATE 05/15/08 bkb MERIDIAN CITY WATER EASEMENT ^-IV~'/IVEER/IV~' Igo,,. No. so1z2 FULLMER SITE S©~Ul'~©~~'~ SHEET 1 OF 1 LOCATm IN THE SE 1 4 OF THE NW 1 4 OF SECTION 7 1028 N. ROSARIO SiRE~, SURE i00 MERIDUW. IDAHO 83642 801 --UVATEREASE.OWG T:4N.. R.1W„ B.M.. MERIQIAN, AOA COUNiY. IDAHO Piur-e (~) 838- Fax (2ce) e38-os4/1-~ - ~ ~ "l • • City of Meridian Public Works Dept. Memo To: Mayor De Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn CC: File Date: 9/4/2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for 919/08 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the 9!9/08 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Water Main Easement for The Cottages by Jeff Fullmer. Typical Water Main Easement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Water Main Easement for The Cottages by Jeff Fullmer and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. • Page 1 WATER MAIN EASEMENT • THIS INDENTURE, made this ~ day of 200$between ~~fT t'4~llhcl ,the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, d the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of--way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain, service and subsequently connect to said pipeline from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right- of-way for an easement for fire construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement of a water main over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a water line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after construction, making repairs, performing other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the water line, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of- way and easement hereby granted shall become park of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. Water Main Easement easmt wtr main.doc • • THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrattt and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. Ili WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties ofthe fast part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. Secretary STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this o~(/~b day of r. s>L , 20Q$ before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally ppeared ~ k A1rr >~- known or identified to me to be the n -'-' - * ~--~ ---`=-• '-- °''-- ~- IRdividaal~e~ that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such oerheratie~ 1f~j~/jd~ executed the same. iN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fist above written. ~CA L. ~ w~ (SEAL) ~~ OTA$ ~~ ~ ~ ~•.. pVHL1G r'~ ,~O ~~ O>p ~ NO ARY PUB~,IC FOR IDAHO Residing at ~'~- J Commission Expires: ~"~/G - / Z Water Main Easement easmt wtr main.doc • GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Attest by Jaycee Holman, City Clerk Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO, County-of Ada ss. • On this day of , 20_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and JAYCEE HOLMAN, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fast above written. (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO ' Residing at: Commission Expires: • Water Main Easement easmt wtr main.doc 1450 East Watertower St IDAHO Suite 150 SURVEY Meridian, Idaho 83642 GROUP Phone ~ZOS~ s46-ss~ro Fax ~2os~ se4-sa99 May 15, 2008 CITY OF MERIDIAN WATER EASEMENT FULLMEIt SITE An easement for City of Meridian waterlines, located in portions of Lots10, 11, and 12 of Cottage Home Addition to 1Vleridian, as same is filed for record in Book 1 of Plats at Page 42, Ada County records, and a portion of the 5E 1/4 of the NW'/a of Section 7, T.3N., R.lE., B:M„ Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being a strip of land 20.00 feet in width, right of and adjacent to the following described easement line: Commencing at the southeast corner of the N~V 1/0 (Center 1/a corner) of said .Section 7, from which the North 1/4 comer of said section bears North 00°34'23" East, 2694.24 feet; thence along the east boundary of said NW '/4 North 00°34'23" East, 611.64 feet to point on the East line of said Lot 12, the beginning Paint of said easement line; Thence South 89°37'41" West, 89.27 feet; Thence North 60°46'19" West, 56.00 feet; Thence South 89°31'27" West, 15.25 feet to a point on the east boundary of the E. Cazlton Avenue right-of--way, the Ending Point of said easement line. Sideline shortened or extended as required to form a continuous strip of laced. Said easement covering 3,210 SF, more or less. 80122\80122-waterease.doc P~®fessi®n®1 L®cael ~u~Pey®a~s ~xh;b~~- `g' t 6 1/4 7 E. FAIRVIEW AVE. E. CARLTON AVE. I i EN ING / . POINT ~o S 89'315.25' N ~sop• 3,210 SF +/ ,/~/ / N ¢6~9~Y ~1 S 8 ~ 41'W 897' BEGINNING I N POINT N I~ N O 0 I ~~ .~ ~I cc . W Z ;~ . g N ~ _ ~••~ ~. U a ~, /~ .{ ~ I ,~''s`~ ~ 9r ~ `~~° RY P CEN 1/4 SCALE 1 "=50' /~ DWG.DATE 05/15/08 bkb MERIDIAN CITY WATER EASEMENT ENGINEER/N~ PROD. N0. 80122 FULLMER SITE S0L1Jr~~NS,~ SHEET 1 OF 1 LOCATED !N THE SE 1 4 OF THE NW 1 4 OF SECTION 7 ~ 029 N. R~SARIO STREET, SUITE 100 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 80122-WATEREASE.DWG T.4N., R.1W., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO Phone (208) 938-0980 Fox (208) 938-0941 September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-L REQUEST License Agreement between Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and City of Meridian for the 8th Street Crossing of the Five Mile Drain AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See attached l Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubUc meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT 3D,00 10 BOISE IDAHO 06/06/08 09:31 AM 6 ` i DEPUTY Danielle Goulette ~II I~~~'(~I~If ~~~~If~f~l~'I'~~~~~~ f ~, RECORDED-REQUEST OF ~ 1~gg~~9~2~ Nampa Merdian Irrigation Dist LICENSE AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~ day of , 2008, by and among NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organiz d and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party of the fast part, hereinafter referred to as the "District", and CITY OF MERIDIAN, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho 83b42 party or parties of the second part, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Licensee", WITNESSETFI: WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of real property (burdened with the easement of the District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in the "Legal Description" and/or deed attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the District owns the irrigation ditch or canal lrnown as FIVE MII,E DRAIN (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal"), an integral part of the District's irrigation works and system, together with the easement therefor to convey irrigation and drainage water, operate, clean, maintain, and repair the ditch or canal, and access the ditch or canal for those purposes; and, WHEREAS, said ditch or canal and easement crosses and intersects Licensee's real property as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and, 1 WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to engage in construction or activity, or approve existing construction or activity, affecting said ditch or canal or the District's easement in its course across the bands of the Licensee in the manner and under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary that the District protect ditches and its right of way along its ditches; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Licensee shall have the right to modify the said ditch or canal or encroach upon the District`s easement along said ditch or canal in the manner generally described in the "Purpose of License" attached hereto as Exhibit C and by this reference made a part hereof. Any modification of said ditch or canal by the Licensee or encroachment upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal shall be performed and maintained in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit D, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Any different;e or discrepancy between the items listed in Exhibit C, "Purpose of License," and any plans or drawings referenced in or attached to Exhibit D shall be resolved in favor of Exhibit C. Licensee shall only be permitted or allowed to modify the ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement as described in Exhibit C Lven if any plans or drawings referenced or attached to Exhibit D provide or show otherwise. 2. This agreement pertains only to the Licensee's modification of said ditch or canal or encroachment to the District`s easement for the purposes and in the manner described herein. The Licensee shall not change the Iocation of the ditch or canal, bury the ditch or canal in pipe, or otherwise alter the ditch or canal in any manner not described in this agreement without first obtaining the written permission of the District. 3. Each facility ("facility" as used in this agreement means any object or thing of any nature installed in or on the District's easement by the Licensee or the Licensee's predecessor in interest) shall be constructed, instaIled, operated, maintained, and repaired at all times by the Licensee at the cost and expense of the Licensee. 4. Licensee agrees to construct, install, operate, maintain and repair each facility and conduct its activities within or affecting the District's easement so as not to constitute or cause: a. a hazard to any person or property; b. an interruption or interference with the flow of irrigation water in the ditch or canal or the delivery of irrigation water by the District; c. an increase in seepage or any other increase in the Ioss of water from the ditch or canal; d. the subsidence of soil within or adjacent to the easement; e. any other damage to the District's easement and irrigation works. 5. The Licensee agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the District from all claims for damages arising out of any of the Licensee's construction or activity which constitutes or ca.uses'any of the circumstances enumerated in the preceding pazagraph, 4.a. through 4.e., or any other damage to the easement and irrigation works which may be caused by the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repair, and any use or condition of any facility. 6. Licensee.agrees that the work performed and the materials used in such construction shall ~t all times be subject to inspection by the District and: the District's engineers, and that final acceptance of such work shall not be made until all such work and materials shall have been expressly approved by the District. Such approval by the District shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. The District reserves the right, at the District's option, to remove. any facility installed by the Licensee and to repair any alteration by the Licensee of said ditch or canal and the easement therefor which does not comply with. the terms of this agreement, and to remove any impediment to the flow of water in said ditch or canal and any unsafe condition or hazard caused by the Licensee, at any time, and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the costs which shall be reasonably expended by the District for such purposes. If the Licensee shall fail in any respect to properly maintain and repair such facility, then the District, at its option, and without impairing or in anywise affecting its other rights and remedies hereunder, shall have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and repairs and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the cost or expense which shall be reasonably expended or incurred by the District for such purposes. The District shall give reasonable notice to the Licensee prior to the District's performing such maintenance, repair or other work except that in cases of emergency the District shall attempt to give such notice as reasonable under the circumstances. Nothing in this pazagraph shall create or support any claim of any kind by Licensee or any third party against the District for failure to exercise the options stated in this paragraph, and Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any claims made LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 against the District arising out of or relating to the terms of this paragraph except for claims arising solely out of the negligence of the District. 8. Neither the terms of this agreement, the permission granted by the District to the Licensee, the Licensee's activity which is the subject of this agreement, nor the parties exercise of any rights or performance of any obligations of this agreement, shall be construed or asserted to extend the application of any statute, rule, regulation, directive or other requirement, or the jurisdiction of any federal, state, or other agency or official to the District's ownership, operation, and maintenance of its ditches, canals, drains, irrigation works and facilities which did not apply to the District's operations and activities prior to and without execution of this agreement. In the event the District is required to comply with any such requirements or is subject to the jurisdiction of any such agency as a result of execution of this agreement or the Licensee`s activity authorized hereunder, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from all costs- and liabilities associated with the application of such laws or the assertion of such jurisdiction or, at the option of the District, this agreement shall be of no force and effect and the Licensee shall cease all activity and remove any facility authorized by this agreement. 9. In addition to all other indemnification provisions herein, Licensee further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any injury, damages, claim, Iien, cost and/or expense (including reasonable attorney`s fees) incurred by, or a~eserted against, the District by reason of the negligent acts or omissions of Licensee or its agents, contractors or subcontractors in performing the construction and activities authorized by this agreement. 1d. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable for any damages which shall occur to any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement area of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance car repair of said ditch or canal. The Licensee further agrees to suspend its use of the said easement area when the`use of the easement area is required by the District for maintenance or repair under this or any other paragraph of this. agreement. 11. Licensee shall place no structures, pathways or landscaping of any kind above or within the District's easement area except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits hereto without the prior written consent of the District. Nor shall Licensee permit, authorize or grant any other person or entity to excavate, discharge, construct or place any structures, pathways or landscaping within the District easement without the prior written consent of the District. 12. Should either party incur costs or attorney fees in connection with efforts to enforce the provisions of this agreement, whether by institution of suit or not, the party rightfully enforcing or rightfully resisting enforcement of the provisions of this agreement, or the prevailing party in case suit is instituted, shall be entitled to reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorney fees from the other party. 13. The parties hereto understand and agree that the District has no right in any respect to impair the uses and purposes of the irrigation works and system of the District by this agreement, nor to grant any rights in its irrigation works and system incompatible with the uses to which such irrigation works and system are devoted and dedicated and that this contract shall be at all times construed according to such principles. . LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 14. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair the right of way of the District in the said ditch or canal and all uses of said ditch or canal by the Licensee and the license herein provided therefor shall remain inferior and subservient to the rights of she District to the use of said ditch or canal for the transmission and delivery of irrigation and drainage Rrater. I5. In the event of the failure, refusal or neglect of the Licensee to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this agreement, the license of the Licensee under the terms hereof maybe terminated by the District, and any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement in or over said ditch or canal, and the right of way therefor, which may impede or restirict the maintenance and operation of such ditch or canal by the District with its equipment for the maintenance of its said ditch or canal may be removed by the District. 16. The Licensee agrees to pay attorney fees or engineering fees charged by the attorney for the District or by the engineers for the District in connection with the preparation of this License Agreement or in connection with negotiations covering the terms and conditions of this License Agreement. Licensee also agrees to pay any fees incurred in connection with the recording of this Agreement. 17. Nothing in this agreement shall create or support a claim of estoppel, waiver, prescription or adverse possession by the Licensee or any third party against District. 18. This agreement is not intended for the benefit of any third party and is not enforceable by any third parry. 19. If any provision of this agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable, all remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 20.. The word "Licensee", if used in the neuter in this agreement, includes the masculine and feminine genders, the singular number includes the plural, and the plural number includes the singular. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained shall constitute covenants to run with, and running with, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure tFatlze~nefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. r~ y sa~ss`'s~~~"~ ~ ~ m ~5. `" ~.`°'° NAI~IPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATIO DISTRICT =~3:'' ~°'~`"" `a~~~~;~~ Its President ~,.~ ATTEST: - - ~~" ~~~ ~~ Its Secretary LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN j~.~ ~ ~f /~~1 ATTEST: j ,. ~~ ,,~ o STATE OF IDAHO ) _ ~~I' __ ss: ' ,~~ County of Canyon ) '~.~ "~ T is~ ~ ~ ~~~ On this ~~ day of ~„ ,~Q98; before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Monte Janicek and Daren R. Coon, known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of NAMPA & MERIDIAN'IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first abQ.~t~a~itten. STATE OF IDAHO County of Ada d it o ~•~ ~ o ~ g i ~ ~ ,~9 ~ u'~~ a~ )ss •`+dd°~.• ~ E CD It ~~ 9'`',~ ~Faaaaa~sAOn~~ Notary Public for Idaho Residing at C~r~ ,Idaho My Commission Expires: 7 p'1 ~,p k On this ~~ day of ~a , 2~0"0~8, before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and far said state, personally appeared Utr~xn~ ~ ,IV2t+~ and ~y C tt ~ trY11q,^known to me to be the ~ and tL_ respectively, of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, the political subdivi 'on and municipality tha executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that.such entity executed the same. and year in IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and aff xed my official seal, the day this certificat`~fr€~~~pe~ written. ,~'., . e ~ ~ ~~ s ® ~ ~ . a ~~ ,~ e g?~ ©~ ~g® to®®® ~ ~----~ Notary Public for (~ ~ -~ 6 Residing at('~ ! ~ 1~--~ 1 I . t ~ My Commission Expires: (~-1 t1 } LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 5 `~p.r . ~' 20G8~i 0. %3 G•-SQL ,~ r.; .. i f 1 I I i i ~~ - i. i -_ _ , Far V:ilue Received h~11LRF NO~'s'i3D(~$~= ~.'x*idowe='r •. :.:% - the rrsntor da ..S het-ebY ~-ut, b,.-r8$tn, srll snd ecr.QeY nn,.o CI?'~ 0: 2~R1Di~N t ~ "~~ ~ - the gras~,ce ,the foSlowia~ dcccribcd prrinises, ia_ 1, ~a _Couu{;} Idaho io u-it: ! ,~ 4 ~ _.. ~ - .. . .ld ~eiemencing at tE~e South. ~tl3rter carileX df SecL3Cn 1; t'ew~26~ip 3 North ltan~e Z Ws'st~ Hoist P+feri.•direr,--thcace~Nvtt$-1°23*-Ytr~st 19~9,c~0 .feet to a poir:t, the real point of beg~ci.rig; thence tYarth 1°~3- West 6CiB,3~ :cet La a point;'thence South $9°St' west 35~-OG 1'ect to a paint}' th~ce ~Sout~x 1,°2~.~ 'East 56~,~$ S'cet to a paizzt; tHs+nce North $9°$~'~' East 35~°Q:7'' f eet to who rC82 poisit d~ begirulisl6, Gnn•~G$iairtg five acres incz'o ax laete exelud~n~ Ramps-'Nter9.dian Tz-z'~.gatioxt I}istri.ct right--cif-'4t~Y. ~oY'y~ 1 ~~ ~ .I A ~ _~_ _ 2Q r~4VF; h.2~t'D TC1 HO! l5 fhe sEtld Pratgises, with then sppaiteR}pcesa unto' i'nc said C~i'dDfec ., it, hairs itnrT i~signz forever, ,,4nd the"said Grantor do B5 herei~r eavenaaE bo said ?tfs i4a sesi$ GrAtrt4e ;that hC i S the m+rY~er in fat siru.Plc of skid prernisas; {}~ ~qp azie ~ :rc+tn :sll inepmbranccs h„r! tf~at he 11 ,cnrrat7t a~lQ drtrend lh4 sgmo from eII Ixwfvl r7wirnl 5~3.1tAOCVCi: r. I3atpF1 • ~ ~~~~~~`~ ~ X357. St'".,t'~F ot~ Tn~iq,~p~x-lY ar• A1a ~i 52dts of il~AfiO, GCU2,TTY of ~- -~--y- flu stis, ~, r" T ,ter °£ ~~{-5~ 57, L r r.~obr ~y-4rfr shR Ehle `amreG trau Qd SnY ra102~:at baruYC mr, ,~ Totary pnLt$ in and ter acid Stslt, pcraan°1iy ~ thY z'rylNat e! 7 !~ r ~= i ~ a6 •/ e~, ealnutoi peat "7 'doe)<~m., firA~PY Iv0'L'EBOOI$, o ~c3dotvar, thL a'7 ~ dtY of ~/`~ 7 ~,,~ ~ ld.~~, Lc ~y aIIlcv, aad defy taoo~o-d in ~°Ox~ ~ .~ ~ f of r3ctds at pt~e . 7 knux•n to te° m b.. t6c ynsY..~ w!,o°e .u,~ja ~G un4ncriLs { lP cke ~eiLI~L iaitY{3{*~tIIi, Rnd OtkaaM~CQ~ei is -•. T.r~ ~~?~+-tyC ma~tha ~~i~ tsuLtd Cht rRma EX-t7¢1tla Strcvrdc- ~-:. xsulln_ _4Mt!ar~ ~~$:] , Idzhe 'r _' ~ `.UrrYri, ~•-=-JirLd -i76^C;-1 77 =~%~ as~,~~~~ lea ~ E G biak tat v ' FY~l i.r~ , .~ ..c Exhibit A ~ r • :." f ~~ ~ ~ ~t '.~ r f ~. _ ~ - ~. • . =- 1 f s j • • , .G~ L ~I. ^ .~r ~ :7 I 1 ' r. e T~~I ~. ~' a a B.M., Atla Co Idaho~Rugusf1 Exhibit B EXHIBIT C Purpose of License The purpose of this License Agreement is to permit and approve Licensee to: 1. construct and install vehicle storage building and building improvements approximately 10- 12feet within the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain, all within or near Licensee's real property described in Exhibit A, located northwest of the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Meridian Road in Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. No other construction or activity is permitted within or affecting the Five Mile Drain or the District's easement. EXHI)~IT D Special Conditions a. The construction described in Exhibit C shall be in performed in accordance with certain plans consisting of one sheet attached hereto as Exhibit D-1 and by this reference incorporated herein. Licensee's building will be built along the existing north fence line and the existing fence will be removed at the building line. b. Licensee shall notify the water superintendent of the District prior to and immediately after construction so that he or the District's engineer's may inspect and approve the construction. c. The Licensee recognizes and acknowledges that the license granted in this agreement by the District pertains only to the rights of the District as owner of an easement. The District has no right or power to create rights in the Licensee affecting the holder of title to the property subject to the District's easement. Any such rights affecting fee title must be acquired bythe Licensee from the holder of title to the property. Should Licensee fail to obtain such rights from the holder of title to the property or should the rights obtained prove legally ineffectual, Licensee shall hold harrless, indemnify and defend the District from any claim by any party arising out of or related to such failure of rights and at the option of the District this agreement shall be of no force and effect. d. Licensee represents that Licensee has, complied with all federal, state or other laws, rules, regulations, directives or other requirements in any form regarding environmental matters, and specifically those relating to pollution control and water quality, as may be applicable under the subject matter, terms or performance of this agreement broadly construed. Licensee recognizes its continuing duty to comply with all such requirements that now exist or that may be implemented or imposed in the future. By executing this agreement the District assumes no responsibility or liability for any impact upon or degradation of water quality or the environment resulting from the discharge or other activity by Licensee which is the subject of this agreement. e. Licensee hereby indemnifies, holds harmless and shall defend the District from any and all penalties, sanctions, directives, claims or any action taken or requirement imposed by any party or entity, public or private, with respect to environmental matters relating to the subject matter, terms or performance LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 6 of this agreement unless the District shall be solely responsible for the condition or activity which gives rise to any such penalty, sanction, directive, claim , action:or requirement. f. In the event the District is required by any governmental authority to acquire or comply with any permit or other operational requirements associated with Licensee's discharge and other activity which is the subject of this agreement, Licensee shall indemz-ify, hold harmless and defend the District from alI costs and liabilities associated with such permit and other requirements, including but not limited to aII costs associated with all permit acquisition, construction, monitoring, treatment, administrative, filing and other requirements. g. The parties. to this agreement recognize this license agreement is an accommodation to Licensee. The District by this agreement does not assume, create, or exercise legal or other authority, either express or implied, to regulate control, or prohibit the di scharge or contribution of pollutants or contaminants to the District's facilities or to any groundwater, waters of the State of Idaho or the United States, or any other destination. Such authority, to the extent that it exists, is possessed and exercised by governmental environmental agencies. h. Licensee shall not excavate, discharge, place any structures, nor plant any trees, shrubs or Iandscaping within the District's easement, nor perform any construction or activity within the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits thereto without the prior written consent of the District. i. Licensee acknowledges and confirms that the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain includes a sufficient area of land to convey irrigation.and drainage water, to operate, clean, maintain and repair the Five Mile Drain, and to access the Five Mite Drain for said purposes and is a minimum of 100 feet, 50 feet to either side of the centerline. j. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this Agreement. Time is of the essence. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 7 In A £ ~ I~ o~~•~o~a c3 m x€ a ~ ~ ~I~ ^d is pas=~~~ > e°;~ i-t /. ooa~~g;a ~ c~'I1j ..% ~a~ m~ ~1 m~°g lllZ ~ ~ t c~~ °p m -x~m ~C) r' mam ~ m ~4m ~ ~~~ -,t O? 2p ;Z~~2 ~~~~~~ S ~' ~-t?y ~i~ f~ OpTo gq poC~ '~" L. ~~ pa {a0. _~ \.. ~ ~, ~ I `~- L ~ t r "~~ ;g€~ o g g~~ >a ~ ~ - ~ 9 ~ ~ r ~~ ~ `\ ~8~~ Z Zsnm$y IC ~• "~~~ s ~~~c ~~~~~ m ~~~i~ I~ ~r- t pZ ~ OAO O-•~ ~~S 111"` ~S~ P n ~ ~. O N ~~ ~ ~ m 8 C x ~~ ~ a ~r~~~~~"fig ~= ~ fir; ~R a ~~ :~~~y ~?~ s~ ~.~~~$ ~~~" ~ ~ " } ~ >~ , ~ _ - r s~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ r ~~ ~~~ ~a"~~a Q "~~~ ~8~ x I ~~ ~ .. ~~~ay~~ ~ 'gad ~z s° ~ ~ a "o ~ _ 9 E ~ p " ~ o ~'$'~iY _ CfTY OF MERIDfAN CIVIL SliP.VEY CONSIILTA\^fS, LNC. `~ lo~e„' 1~,^-, I ER D(VISfON -PHASE 2 CDNSUL:INC S'NGINEEPS AND LAND SURRYR'OPs 1uo G w~TGlMfl Sf. smre rae -aw Exhibit ~-7 t 1 AQA COUNTY RECORDER J. DA~IQ NAVARRO AMOUNT 33.00 11 BOISE IQAHQ 05/21J08 09:12 AM QEPUTY Bonnie0berbillig 'I~I1~(~11(~111~1~1~I~~IIi11lA1I~~1I' RECORQEQ-REQUEST OF II 1 II 11111 1111 1 ! 1 111119911 ii Nampa Meridian Irrigation Qisi 100059613 LICENSE AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1.~ day of 2008, by and among NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "District", and CITY OF MERIDIAN, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho 83642 party or parties of the second part, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Licensee", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of zeal property/right-of--way for a potable water system (burdened with the easement of the District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in the "Legal Description" attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the District owns the irrigation ditch or canal known as FIVE MILE DRAIN (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal"}; an integral part of the District's irrigation works and system, together with the easement therefor to convey irrigation and drainage water, operate, clean, maintain, and repair the ditch or canal, and access the ditch or canal for those purposes; and, WHEREAS, said ditch or canal and easement crosses and intersects Licensee's real property as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference made a part, hereof; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to engage in construction or activity, or approve existing construction or activity, affecting said ditch or canal oz the District's easement in its course across the lands of the Licensee in the manner and under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary that the District protect ditches and its right of way along its ditches; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in wnsideration.ofthe premises and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Licensee shall have the right to modify the said ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement along said ditch or .canal in the manner generally described in the "Purpose of License" attached hereto as Exhibit C and by this reference made a part hereof. Any modification of said ditch or canal by the Licensee or encroachment upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal shall be performed and maintained in accordance with the "Special Coiiditions" stated in Exhibit D, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Any difference or discrepancy between the items listed in Exhibit C, "Purpose of License," and any plans or drawings referenced in or attached to Exhibit D shall be resolved in favor of Exhibit C. Licensee shall only be permitted or allowed to modify the ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement as described in Exhibit C even if any plans or drawings referenced or attached to Exhibit D provide or show otherwise. ~o LICENSE AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered.into this o1 ~ day of , 2008, by and among NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organiz d and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "District", and CITY OF MERIDIAN, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho 83642 party or parties of the second part, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Licensee", VYITIVES.SETI3: WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of real property/right-of-way for a potable water system (burdened with the easement of the District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in the "Legal Description" attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the District owns the irrigation ditch or canal known as FIVE MILE DRAIN (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal"), an integral part of the District's imgation works and system, together with the easement therefor to convey irrigation and drainage water, operate, clean, maintain, and repair the ditch or canal,. and access the ditch or canal for those purposes; and, WHEREAS, said ditch or canal and easement crosses and intersects Licensee's real property as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to engage in construction or activity, or approve existing construction or activity, affecting said ditch or canal or the District's easement in its course across the lands of the Licensee in the manner and under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary that the District protect ditches and its right of way along its ditches; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration •of the prenuses and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Licensee shall have the right to modify the said ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal in the manner, generally described in the "Purpose of License" attached hereto as Exhibit C and by this reference made a part hereof. Any modification of said ditch or canal by the Licensee or encroachment upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal shall be performed and maintained in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit D, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Any difference or discrepancy between the items listed in Exhibit C, "Purpose of License," and any plans or drawings referenced in or attached to Exhibit D shall be resolved in favor of Exhibit C. Licensee shall only be permitted or allowed to modify the ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement as described in Exhibit C even if any plans or drawings referenced or attached to Exhibit D provide or show otherwise. 2. This agreement pertains only to the Licensee's modif~ca.tion of said ditch or canal or encroachment to the District's easement for the purposes and in the manner described herein. The Licensee shall not change the location of the ditch or canal, bury the ditch or canal in pipe, or otherwise alter the ditch or canal in any manner not described in this agreement without first obtaining the written permission of the District. 3. Each facility ("facility". as used in this agreement means any object or thing of any nature installed in or on the District's easement by the Licensee or the Licensee's predecessor in interest) shall be constructed, installed, operated, maintained, and repaired at all times by the Licensee at the cost and expense of the Licensee. 4. Licensee agrees to construct, install, operate, maintain and repair each facility and conduct its activities within or affecting the District's easement so as not to constitute or cause: a. a hazard to any person or property; b. an interruption or interference with the flow of irrigation water in the ditch or canal or the delivery of irrigation water by the District; c. an increase in seepage or any other increase in the loss of water from the ditch or canal; d. the subsidence of soil within or adjacent to the easement; e. any other damage to the District's easement and imgation works. 5. The Licensee agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the District from all claims for damages arising out of any of the Licensee's construction or activity which constitutes or causes any of the circumstances enumerated in the preceding paragraph, 4.a. through 4.e., or any other damage to the easement and irrigation works which maybe caused by the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repair, and any use or condition of any facility. 6. Licensee agrees that the work performed and the materials used in such construction shall at all times be subject to inspection by the District and.the District's engineers, and that final acceptance of such work shall not be made until all such work and materials shall have been expressly approved by the District. Such approval by the District shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. The District reserves the right; at the District's option, to remove any facility installed by the Licensee and to repair any alteration by the Licensee of said ditch or canal and the easement therefor which does not comply with the terms of this agreement, and to remove any impediment to the flow of water in said ditch or canal and any unsafe condition or hazard caused by the Licensee, at any time, and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the costs which shall be reasonably expended by the District for such purposes. If the Licensee shall fail in any respect to properly maintain and repair such facility, then the District, at its option, and without impairing or in anywise affecting its other rights and remedies hereunder, shall have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and repairs and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the cost or expense which shall be reasonably expended or incurred by the District for such purposes. The District shall give reasonable notice to the Licensee prior to the District's performing such maintenance, repair or other work except that in cases of emergency the District shall attempt to give such notice as reasonable under the circumstances. Nothing in this paragraph shall create or support any claim of any kind by Licensee or any third party against the District for failure to exercise the options stated in this paragraph, and Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any claims made LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 against the District arising out of or relating to the terms of this paragraph except for claims arising solely out of the negligence of the District. 8. Neither the terms of this agreement, the permission granted by the District to the Licensee, the Licensee's activity which is the subject of this agreement, nor the parties exercise of any rights or performance of any obligations of this agreement, shall be construed or asserted to extend the application of any statute, rule, regulation, directive or other requirement, or the jurisdiction of any federal, state, or other agency or official to the District's ownership, operation, and maintenance of its ditches, canals, drains, irrigation works and facilities which did not apply toy the District's operations and activities prior to and without execution of this agreement. In the event the District is required to comply with any such requirements or is subject to the jurisdiction of any such agency as a result of execution of this agreement or the Licensee's activity authorized hereunder, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from aIl costs and liabilities associated with the application of such laws or the assertion of such jurisdiction or, at the option of the District, this agreement shall be of no force and effect and the Licensee shall cease all activity and remove any facility authorized by this agreement. 9. In addition to all other indemnification provisions herein, Licensee further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any injury, damages, claim, lien, costand/or expense (including reasonable attorney's fees) incurred by, or asserted against, the District by reason of the negligent acts or omissions of Licensee or its agents, contractors or subcontractors in performing the construction and activities authorized by this agreement. 10. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable for any damages which shall occur to any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement area of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance or repair of said ditch or canal. The Licensee further agrees to suspend its use of the said easement area when the use of the easement area is required by the District for maintenance or repair under this or any other paragraph of this agreement. , 11. Licensee shall place no structures, pathways or landscaping of any kind above or within the District`s easement area except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits hereto without the prior written consent of the District. Nor shall Licensee permit, aut}iorize or grant any other person or entity to excavate, discharge, construct or place any structures, pathways or landscaping within the District easement without the prior written consent of the District. 12. Should either party incur costs or attorney fees in connection with efforts to enforce the provisions of this agreement, whether by institution of suit or not, the party rightfully enforcing or rightfully resisting enforcement of the provisions of this agreement, or the prevailing party in case suit is instituted, shall be entitled to reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorney fees from the other party. 13. The parties hereto understand and agree that the District has no right in any respect to impair the uses and purposes of the irrigation works and system of the District by this agreement, nor to grant any rights in its irrigation works and system incompatible with the uses to which such imgation works and system are devoted and dedicated and that this contract shall be at all times construed according to such principles. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 14. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair the right of way of the District in the said ditch or canal and all uses of said ditch or canal by the Licensee and the license herein provided therefor shall remain inferior and subservient to the rights of the District to the use of said ditch or canal for the transmission and delivery of irrigation and drainage water. 15. In the event of the failure, refusal or neglect of the Licensee to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this agreement,. the license of the Licensee under the terms hereof may be terminated by the District, and any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement in or over said ditch or canal, and the right of way therefor, which may impede or restrict the maintenance and operation of such ditch or canal by the District with its equipment for the maintenance of its said ditch or canal may be removed by the District. . 16. The Licensee agrees to pay attorney fees or engineering fees.charged by the attorney for the District or by the engineers for the District in connection with the preparation of this License Agreement or in connection with negotiations covering the terms and conditions of this License Agreement. Licensee also agrees to pay any fees incurred in connection with the recording of this Agreement. 17. Nothing in this agreement shall create or support a claim of estoppel, waiver, prescription or adverse possession by the Licensee or any third party against District. 18. This agreement is not intended for the benefit of any third party and is not enforceable by any third party. 19. If any provision of this agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable, all remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 20. The word "Licensee", if used in the neuter in this agreement, includes the masculine and feminine genders, the singular number includes the plural, and the plural number includes the singular. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained shall constitute covenants to run with, and running with, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the benefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. .r.~ ~`' =~~~ ~~~ ~~ .j ~~ u~,. ATTEST: "~~ -,, d ~~ a J.~~; ~ ~~~~ Its Secretary ~, NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT /I ~' °~ _- s~ ~ v :. ~~ BY Ixs resident LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN ,~~,~^ \`t~~~~i~utit~u~r~ i~ ATTEST: ~~.~`` ~ ''l~w~i 'b o ~ '-- y -~ ~~ STATE OF IDAHO ) "%~~-~~T ~~-t , ~° „~,~: l ,~ County of Canyon SS: ~~~~~`,//,,/r'Y`;1ti~Y~~\\,`, On this a~ _ day of 2008, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Monte nicek and Daren R. Coon, known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first al~~v~a,ten. STATE OF IDAHO County of Ada ,e 4 ~ • ~ ~•~ B ~' ~ ~~~ ® ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ d v~'°® ,~ e °°~~asaaa~~o~'~~ Notary Public for Idaho Residing at (~.~ ,Idaho My Commission Expires: Z o ~ a• ~ ~. On this ~3+~ da of Y , 2008, b fore me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said state, personally ap eared ~ nd known to me to be the -~ and ~ ,respectively, oft e CITY OF MERIDIAN, the political subdivi ion and municipality that xecuted the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that such entity executed the same. and year in this IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day certificate~sa~k~tten. ~ - _ ,~' ~~ ~ ~ °-~~ ~~~~~n 1 a a ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ i ~ e z i ~ ~ i i t~ '~ tg3, , a ~,~ '. ; ' ~ Residing at --~.~~.~ My Commission Expu•es: LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 5 f ., ~"r `_ -..~ r , ~' _. - ~r . i- _' -y 6 ~~ ~~..~ .~: x Exhibit 3 fireh~leD~i~ioNEIN,SWil4, S.I,T.~N,R.IW,BM.,~daCamfy, baho~ugust1994~ r~ 3. 2008r10.23A ~~ t 1 i r ~~ ~~ :~ .;.` .` ~. o.d6d4P, 2 t'Y~~1-tit?..tt~: ~~i.lC.~.J.J - For Palue ReceivQd. Fii=,PLRY I~iO~:~Dt~+i;' ~•:9vidow$rr., 1 Oita grantor _ du es hereby grant, bargain, sell ,aad eorvey Ilnto ~YT~'C OF' p~RI:D7.AN ~ _ -- t 1 _:_ ~ ~ .~__ ~.._...._ .__ _ .M_ .. _ ..__. ~~-" the grantee ,the j:oltowisig d~scn'b48 pre~iaes, m- -tea' -Count} idatta £o vrit: z _~ • COmmal2cin~ at tba Sduth. Quarter carnet ~f Sec~~i~ ].; lownrsbip 3 1 Wa'st 3aise rieri-dia~' "t:henc~' Nort~~ •3. °23 T -l~le9t ~,g~gh~7Q~eet to a point, the real point of begiririxl~; thence tYorth 1 °23 ~ West a4E#.3$ #'aet, to o, point; 'thence Seuth 89 5~ wes~ 35$.{30 i'eot to a point; 'Ghextce•South ~°23.t 'Feel; 66~.3~ feet tc c paint; th®MCa North $9°5~`'~ast ~5~.d~''feet to thv rc~l paint aS begirusin~„ Gonta~rg five acres ;sere or lass +~xclud~.t~ Nampa~Mer~.dian Trz'iBation pistrict ri~h'~-•of,~raY. ~~~~.~U~ i ~ TF~~~s~;~ .~~ r' 1'O FI.4VE; s1N19 Tt~ II07,D !ha aA3d nrazUi~e9, with thais ~Ppartega&ces uritA' td+r said Gi~a~ •. • J,t;, hairs Arui ~aigris Saxaver. And the said Grunto7C do BS ht2eln~ eovrs~ant ip ,mod ?ti•. ik~ maid Grwntdb ;that hn i 8 Lhg o~vner in foe sirnpld oi: &1id .Pr~s3; that ' ^s+e fre+c .:rwm =tfl Intttmbratgccs P .~ .. .~.. ... ,, ;uui tint H~ 11 +«srran! and tioLend ilia samofroxttslllawtulclaim3~txoeves• A$1 b'TA,rx OF II}AIdO, CCtj2+tTX t7F ~ ~ on tNi. ~, ..._ day of t t..laby eorEi't`d' ~ 4hie i 'r/n~t ,t~rar #d t~,r seEerB;at _ , • buCut'C mr, a nolaey PaLl~c in ~adlvr ea[d Stale, pctaen.ltr t$r •ugri#sC e! ~ ~+°'!'* ltpydarlel ah ~ ~ ~ tntnntor ,peat ~7 ~ elo~Se ~1H-, S1e,NR]' 1yQTESOQI+I~ P widower, thla ~ ,s~ ~ diy of ~, + 18~~~ In mY attlN, and Auty sa#on1+d is ~ of Drtxiy st Fsg# ., Y~A 1 '~ known to idu w 6v !ha ans•~.~ wlsoac a~,ita itl ~ ~a~~ ' • ~'~ ~ uubneriba+{ td -he ~ItStin inxttutntdL, and petmewle$Rrd ~ -' Twc.tlatete ltfeotda:' me tka ho rovtti E>tw aamn. /~ '~~ ~ •• ~ N,,~Ty ppbfia x'eee S~r ~esr<-lnz at Meridian , IdAilo Mal! te= -~'`~ ~ t<.,,u~,. ~slvoe Msrch 5i 1~~E3 ;v~u~Ql.~4~_~ ' }'' p~ ~ Exhibit A . _.. l .~ i. ':~ ~ __ _ ~~'- - t~ ~'~ ~,'s .: ti ~ ~ - ~~ ;. a r P' ~ `~ i 9 ~''' _! a .k ~' .~ ~. t~ t EXHIBIT C Purpose of License The purpose of this License Agreement is to permit and approve Licensee to: flush/discharge water from the Licensee's well into an existing 24"pipe that discharges into the Five Mile Drain, all within or near Licensee's real property/right-of-way described in Exhibit A, located northwest of the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Meridian Road in Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. No other construction or activity is permitted~within or affecting the Five Mile Drain or the District's easement. EXHIBIT D Special Conditions a. The construction described in Exhibit C shall be in performed in accordance with certain plans consisting of two sheets attached hereto as Exhibit D-1 and by this reference incorporated herein. Licensee shall flush/discharge water into the Five Mile Drain only on rare occasions (approximately one to two times per year). Licensee shall notify the District's Superintendent and obtain the District's permission prior to any flush/discharge into the Five Mile Drain. The quantity discharged shall be 1,500 to 2,000 gpm and shall be for approximately 10-30 minutes. . b. Licensee shall notify the water superintendent of the District prior to and immediately after construction so that he or the District's engineer's may inspect and approve the construction. c. The Licensee recognizes and acknowledges that the license granted in this agreement by the District pertains only to the rights of the District as owner of an easement. The District has no right or power to create rights in the Licensee affecting the holder of title to the property subject to the District's easement. Any such tights affecting fee title must be acquired by the Licensee from the holder of title to the property. Should Licensee fail to obtain such rights from the holder of title to the property or should the rights obtained prove legally ineffectual, Licensee shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the District from any claim by any party arising out of or related to such failure of rights and at the option of the District this agreement shall be of no-force and effect. d. Licensee shall be responsible and shall ensure that any drains which discharge into the Five Mile Drain clo not cause any exosion or subsidence of soil within the ditches or drains. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable for any damages. which shall occur to the drain pipes or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement area of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance or repair of said ditch or canal. ~ • e. Licensee represents that Licensee has complied with all federal, state or other laws, rules, regulations, directives or other requirements in any form regarding environmental matters, and specifically those relating to pollution control and water quality, as may be applicable under the subject matter, terms LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 6 or performance of this agreement broadly construed. Licensee recognizes its continuing duty to comply with alI such requirements that now exist or that may be implemented or imposed in the future. By executing this agreement the District assumes no responsibility or liability for any impact upon or degradation of water quality or the environment resulting from the discharge or other activity by Licensee which is the subj ect of this agreement. f. Licensee hereby indemnifies, holds harmless and shall defend the District from any and all penalties, sanctions, directives, claims or any action taken or requirement imposed by any party or entity, public or private, with respect to environmental matters relating to the subject matter, terms or performance of this agreement unless the District shall be solely responsible for the condition or activity which. gives rise . to any such penalty, sanction, directive, claim ,action or requirement. g. In the event the District is required by any governmental authority to acquire or comply with any permit or other operational requirements associated with Licensee's dischazge and other activity which is the subject of this agreement, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from all costs and liabilities associated with such permit and other requirements, including but not limited to all costs associated with all permit acquisition, construction,. monitoring, treatment, administrative, filing and other requirements. h. The parties to this agreement recognize this license agreement is an accommodation to Licensee. The District by this agreement does not assume, create, or exercise legal or other authority, either express or implied, to regulate control, or prohibit the discharge or contribution of pollutants ox contaminants to the District's facilities or to any groundwater, waters of the State of Idaho or the United States, or any other destination. Such authority, to the extent that it exists, is possessed and exercised by governmental environmental agencies. i. Licensee shall not excavate, discharge, place any structures, nor plant any trees, shrubs or landscaping within the District's easement, nor perform any construction or activity within the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits thereto without the prior written consent of the District. j. Licensee acknowledges and confirms that the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain includes a sufficient azea of land to convey irrigation and drainage water, to operate, clean, maintain and repair the Five Mile Drain, and to access the Five Mile Drain for said purposes and is a minimum of 100 feet, 50 feet to either side of the centerline. k. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this Agreement. Time is of the essence. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 7 - .' N . O' Y ..Q . ~ 'R ~ ~0; . n ~ ,¢o ~ cZi ~ n : d='Q', : ~ m yr 'Q•_'' 9 I.yjO ~ .~fD` n ~k ~ Or^; 0 a 2 y f ~ C $~ .~~~ ~~~ ~g 2 ~. 8 H 1 '~ ~~~ ~~ m ~~~ (1 ~~~ ~~~ ~~ a ~~ ~~~~ ~ II~~ I .I~ s= ~~ r ~~~ ~Ng~§~ ~~~~ e w ~$g ~6-~ ~~$_~ 8~ „~ 3 ~~ ~ > 8 c f D .l g ~8 ~ ~~ ~~~~=~ ~ffi ~~ ~ N ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~9 ~~ ~~~° a ga 5~~ € ~~ ~ ~' ~e~ ~$ b p~~_g~ ~s 4 Pt'9 . u ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN CIVII, SURVEY CONSULTANTS, uvc. ~ 3 CDNSSILTING ENGtNEER4 AND LAND 9URVEyDRS =~~ WATER DIVISION -PHASE 2 °° DETAILS ~"~~'~ ~'" .m ~3~ Exhis~i~ D-1, page 1 $g~ Fi~ t ~ .~ September 5, 2008 • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-M REQUEST Fourth Amendment to Lease Agreement with William A. Hon for 660 East Watertower Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See attached ~p~~~ Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • • FOURTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE This Fourth Amendment to Lease, made and entered into this day of September, 2008 by and between Abort Investments as successor in interest to William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership, (hereinafter "Lessor") and the City of Meridian, (hereinafter "Lessee'. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee entered into a lease dated December 19, 2000 under the terms of which Lessee leased general office space as defined in the Lease at 660 E. Watertawer Lane, Meridian, Idaho. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee amended said Lease on May 8, 2003 to expand the Premises and on February 28, 2007 to extend the Lease to July 31, 2008. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lesee have agreed to extend the term of said Lease per the terms stated herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: TERM: The term of the Lease sha11 be extended from August 1, 2008 to October 31, 2008. RENT: The monthly rent shall remain at $18,825.00 from August 1, 2008 to October 31, 2008. The Lease shall be considered month to month beginning November 1, 2008 and the holdover rate of one and one half times the current rate sha11 go into effect. OPERATING EXPENSES: Lessee shall pay as Additional Rent, Lessee's pro-rata share of operating expenses. Beginwing April 1, 2008 and for the term of this Lease Amendment, the monthly payment shall be $1,286.05. Lessee acknowledges that it accepts the Premises and the Building in their "as is" condition and Lessee hereby affirms that on the date hereof no breach or default by either party has occurred, and that the Lease, and all of its terms conditions, covenants, agreements and provisions, except as hereby modified, are in full force and effect with no defenses or offsets thereto, and Lessee hereby releases Lessor of and fiom all liabilities, claims, controversies, causes of action and other matters of every nature which, thmugh the date hereof, have or might have arisen out of or in any way in connection with the Lease and/or the Premises. • Lessee represents and warrants that Lessee has had no dealing with any other broker in connection with the negotiation and execution of this Amendment, and Lessee agrees to indemnify Lessor and hold Lessor harmless from any claimed by any broker or agent other than the party named above with respect to this Amendment. Except as modified herein, all of the terms, covenants and conditions of the Lease shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with their terms. LESSOR: Abart In tments rporation By. Arthur J. Fen~ari, Its: ~TYeQSLU^Q/^ ~ (~ Its: Dated -(- 3d- ~ ~ Dates: 9- ~9 -~~ LESSEE: GYty of Merid~tan .~' By: ~~ Tammy d eerd Tara Green Page 1 of 1 From: Ted Baird Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:35 PM To: Tara Green Cc: Bill Nary; Keith Watts; Pam Zachgo Subject: FOURTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE for CITY OF MERIDIAN at 660 Watertower Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Attachments: FOURTH AMENDMENT TO LEASE for CITY OF MERIDIAN 8 28 08 (2).doc Tara: Please place ,this item on the City Council Consent Agenda for next week. Pam: We like to have the signature of the Landlord prior to sending this to our City Council, but I am sending this on without it to avoid further delay. If you can secure the signature of Mr. Ferrari before next Tuesday, please send an electronic copy to the recipients of this email. Details: This lease amendment extends the lease at the current rate through the end of October, 2008. After that date, we will be on a month-to-month holdover status at 1.5 times the current monthly rate. This amendment also clar~es and resolves a potential dispute regarding the amount owed under the terms of the lease for our share of operating expenses, retroactive to April 1, 2008. Thank you, everyone. 9/5/2008 / • ~E IDIZ IAN;.-- J September 22, 2008 Pam Zachgo Nova Management Company 14614 North Kierland Blvd Suite 340 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 i MayorTammy de Weerd City Council Members: Keith Bird Joe Borton Charles Rountree David Zaremba Re: Fouth Amendment to Lease Agreement 660 East Watertower Dear Ms. Zachgo, Enclosed you will find 2 originals of the Fourth Amendment to the Lease Agreement with William A. Hon at 660 East Watertower Lane that was approved by City Council on September 9, 2008. Please return a copy to our office once you have obtained the signatures. Please feel free to contact our office with any questions at 208-888-4433. Sincerely, Tara Green Deputy City Clerk enc. City Clerl~s Office ~ 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 208-888-4433 ~ Fax 208-888-4218 ~ www.meridiancity.org ~ ~ ~aoa~~~eo~ Coan , onc. ~u ~~- ,.. September 30, 2008 Tara Green Deputy City Clerk City of Meridian Clerk's Office 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ~~~ ~ ~;id;y aJ~~I9~1;.riaian City Clerk ®f~~;e RE: Fourth Amendment to Lease Agreement at 660 East Watertower Dear Ms. Green: I am enclosing one (1) fully executed original of the Fourth Amendment to the Lease between Abart Investments as successor in interest to William A Hon. Please feel free to contact our office at 480-556-6682 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Nova Management Company Pam Zachgo, RPA Sr. Property Manager Designated Broker ~ A Ferrari Family Enterprise 14614 N. gierland Blvd., Suite 340 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 Ph: 480.556NOVA(6682) •Fas: 480.998.5201 September 5, 2008 r MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-IV REQUEST Deed of Conservation Easement for Five MiVe Creek Restoration Project with Arthur Berry 8~ Kobe, LLC AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT:. CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See aFtached ~~~~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Mat®rials presented at pubec meetings shall become properly of tt~e City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECQRDER d. DAVID NAVARRO ABIOUI~iT .00 TO BOISE HlAHO 12t o~nmltOppB Q9:18 AIB n p n I' RE~DED-REQtiEST OF ~~~ II~IIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIII~II ~~,~~~ mid an Ctiy 1081351 ~9 DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEiVIENT To all future owners of the following described property, SEC ? T3N R1E OF THE USGS MERIDIAN QUAD SE 1/4, SE'/a , 500' feet west of ]Locust Grove at Franklin Road, 700 feet along 5 Mile Creek, within the floodway boundaries as identified on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps 1600100232 and 1600100251 revised. February 19, 2003, located in Ada County, Idaho. THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT is made this a'~day of 20 (,~ ~", by Arthur Berry and Kobe, LLC (Grantor), having an ad at 1124 Santa Maria Dr. Boise Idaho 83712, in favor of City of Meridian (Holder), having an address at 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83624. WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of real property (Property) more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated hereon. WHEREAS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clem Waxer Act (CWA) 404 permit number NWW-2008-206-BOl a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. The final approved permit will authorize certain activities that affect waters of the United States. WHEREAS, the Permit requires that the City of Meridian replace and protect the wetlands as designed in the attached Exhibit C (Designed Wetlands), located on the Property, by keeping the Designed Wetlands in a natural condtion. WHEREAS, Grantor, in consideration of the consent granted by the Permit, agrees to convey to Holder a conservation easement placing certain limitations and affirmative obligations on the Property for the protection of the Designed Wetlands and in order that the Designed Wetlands shall remain substantially in its natural condition. WHEREAS, Holder, as a governmental body [see types of Holders in I.C. § 55- 2101] under the laws of the State of Idaho, desires to accept the conservation easement, including covenants and agreements, affecting the Designed Wetlands. WHEREAS, the State of Idaho has recognized the importance and validity of conservation easements by its enactment of the Uniform Conservation Easement Act, Idaho Code Sections 5-2101 through 2109, under which this conservation easement is created. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 1 NOW THEREFORE, for the foregoing consideration, and in further consideration of the restrictions, rights, and agreements herein, Grantor conveys to Holder a conservation easement on, over, under, and across the Designed Wetlands, together with reasonable access from the Property, in perpetuity, consisting of and subject to the rights, conditions, and restrictions, enumerated below and those interests of record as of the date of this conservation easement. Holder accepts the conservation easement and agrees to all attendant terms and conditions. L PURPOSES/RIGHTS OF HOLDER It is the purpose of this conservation easement to assure that the Designed Wetlands will be retained forever as designed and to prevent any use of the Designed Wetlands that will impair or interfere with the Designed Wetlands. To carry out this purpose, the following rights are conveyed to the Holder. A. To preserve and protect the Designed Wetlands, including the topography, soil, hydrology, vegetation, and wildlife; B. To enter upon the Property at reasonable times to enforce the rights herein granted and to observe, study, and make scientific observation of the Designed Wetlands, upon prior notice to the Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, in a manner that will not unreasonably interfere with the use and quiet enjoyment of the Property by Grantor, its heirs, successors or assigns at the time of entry; and C. To enjoin any activity on, or use of, the Designed Wetlands that is inconsistent with the purpose of this conservation easement and to enforce the restoration of such areas or features of the Designed Wetlands that may be damaged by any inconsistent activity or use. II. RESTRICTION'S This Deed of Conservation Easement prole'bits and limits the following activity in, on, or about the Designed Wetlands: A. Changing, disturbing, altering, or impairing the natural riparian ecosystem and other natural, ecological, or wildlife features or values in and on the Designed Wetlands, except as otherwise provided or allowed herein. B. Construction or placing buildings, roads, signs, billboards, or other advertising, utilities, or other structures on or above the Designed Wetlands. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 2 C. Dumping or placing of soil or other substances or material as iandfill, or dumping or placing trash, waste, or other unsightly or offensive materials. D. Removal or destruction of the live trees, shrubs, or other vegetation, except for the removal of noxious or exotic invasive plant species, except as expressly authorized in the Uses and Practices section (Section III) of this Deed of Conservation Easement. E. Excavation, dredging, or removal of loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock, or other material substance in such a manner as to affect the Designed Wetlands. F. No agricultural, industrial, or commercial activity .shall be undertaken with respect to the Designed Wetlands. G. Using herbicides or pesticides upon the Designed Wetlands without prior consent of Holder or designated third party. H. Any other use of, or activity on, the Designed Wetlands or the Property that is or may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant, the preservation of the Designed Wetlands substantially in its natural condition, or the protection of its environment is prohibited. III. USES AND PRACTICES CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT The following uses and practices upon the Designed Wetlands, though not exhaustive, are consistent with and shall be permitted by this conservation easement, except for the requirement of prior approval by the Holder or its successors where such requirement is expressly provided herein: A. Landscaping to prevent severe erosion or damage to the Property, provided that such landscaping is consistent with preserving the natural condition of the Designed Wetlands. B. Pruning trees and shrubs to prevent health and safety hazards, including, but not limited to, fire hazards, site obstructions, and road obstructions. Pruning/removing trees and shrubs that establish more density than shown on approved design plans. C. All other acts or uses not prohibited by this conservation easement, which are consistent with the purposes of this grant. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 3 IV. ENFORCEMENT A. Grantor intends that enforcement of the terms and provisions of this conservation easement shall be at the discretion of Holder, and that Holder's failure to exercise its right under this conservation easement in the event of any breach of this conservation easement by the Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver of Holder's enforcement rights under this conservation easement in the event of any subsequent breach. B. If Grantor or its successors-in-interest violate the terms of this conservation easement, Holder shall have all remedies available at law and equity, including without limitation the right to seek an injunction with respect to such activity and to cause restoration to that portion of the Designed Wetlands affected by such activity to the condition that existed prior to the undertaking of the prohibited activity. C. Holder will pay all costs associated with its obligation to preserve and protect in perpetuity the natural, ecological, and open space of the Designed Wetlands (including costs associated with monitoring compliance with the terms of this conservation easement). D. The Corps, pursuant to its authority under 4Q4(s) of the Clean Water Act, may bring an enforcement action against Holder, its heirs, successors, or assigns, if there is a violation of this conservation easement. V. ASSIGNMENT Holder may assign its interest in this conservation easement without the prior consent of Grantor to any "qualified organization" under Idaho Code Section 55-2101, but shall give Grantor 30 days prior written notice. As a condition of such transfer, the transferee shall agree to all of the restrictions, rights, and provisions, herein and to continue to carry out the purpose of this conservation easement. VI. GRANTOR'S TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY A. This conservation easement shall run with and burden title to the Property in perpetuity for the benefit of the Holder or its assigns and successors, and sha11 bind Grantor's heirs, successors, or assigns. B. Grantor shall insert the terms and restrictions of the conservation easement in any subsequent deed or other legal instrument by which Grantor divests itself of any interest in the Property. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 4 C. If Holder, its heirs, successors, or assigns acquire fee title to the Property from Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, it is agreed that the easement will not merge into the dominant estate. Rather, the restrictions, responsibilities, and rights of the Grantor will pass to the Holder upon taking title to the Property. This instrument will become a conservation deed restriction on the Property, subject to all rights, restrictions, and purposes described herein. VII. REVOKE, RELEASE, ALTER, AMEND This conservation easement may be amended, altered, released, or revoked only by written agreement between the parties, their heirs, assigns, or successors. Such an agreement shall be filed in the public records of Ada County, Idaho. VIII. PROCEEDS This conservation easement constitutes a real property interest immediately vested in Holder. In the event that all or a portion of the Property is sold, exchanged or involuntarily converted following extinguishments or the exercise of eminent domain, Holder shall be entitled to the fair market value of this conservation easement. The parties stipulate that the fair market value of this conservation easement shall be determined by multiplying the fair market value of the Property unencumbered by this conservation easement (minus any increase in value after the date of this grant attributable to improvements) by the ratio of the value of this conservation easement at the time of this grant to the value of the Property (without deduction for the value of this conservation easement) at the time of the grant. Holder shall use its share of the proceeds in a manner consistent with the purposes of this conservation easement. IX. TAXES AND OTHER ASSESSMENTS Grantor, or its successors-in interest, shall pay all real property taxes and other assessments levied by competent authority on the Property. X. WA-ItItANTY T1nis Deed of Conservation Easement is made with general warranty of title. XI. SEVERABII,I1'Y If any part of this conservation easement is found to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder shall continue in fiill force and effect. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 5 X1I. NOTICE All notices, consents, approval, or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly given if sent by United States first class mail, addressed to the appropriate party or successor-in-interest. Notice shall be deemed received within 7 days after mailing of the specific notice, consent, or approval. XIII. RECORDING The Holder shall record this instrument in a timely fashion in the official records of Ada County, Idaho, and may re-record it at any time as may be required to preserve Holder's rights in this conservation easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this conservation easement, covenants, re}~ictions, and agreement, as of the date specified below. ~.~S-I- and Date HOLDER Signature and ~~ "' ~ '(7 Date ```.```~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~`'•~~. .~ ~ ~'' ~. ,, C ~ dC- = > ~~~ r i :.,~ ~ 1 p DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 6 Acknowledgements STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada) d The foregoing co anon - day of (~ ho p oduced his driver's license as idea ' cation ~~..••',~ pI~~9~S WHEREOF, I and ve~r~4~_~&r~' fin. ,~ - ~pTAR,i. ~~~ Z pUBL1G .~'•.9 MB OF: 9;,0~. ~ STATE OF IDAHO ) County of Ada ) ent was acknowledged before me this ~'~~=~-~ 20,p~, by is ~(~] personally known to me or [ ]has my hand and seal the day Residing at My commission expires .~ The foregoing conservation easement was acknowledged before me this ~Y ~..of ~ Y'P IM, ~~/ 20 1~, by Q Lee ~ is~ personally known to me or [ ]has produced this dri 's license as identification. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and yeaz first above written. ~. - -. a• •-~- --. ~'' ~' + ~` ~ otary Public for Idaho ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Residing at ~ :'~ ; p ,~. My commission expires + 0-'~ 1 ~ ~ ~`. t~ • a;' . .: t~ DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 7 EXHIBIT A r .i. ,~;' 3y. ~ ~.+w.. .- - -.. ~ sue. ".~"'-r t" +,_ ~~ ~ ...r.3?~ ~_~~~~... T_ .. ..• i . w r_ 9r vt . - . d 1 UJ r; 1, ...; .. ~ t ,.nr, _ _ t 3/1;.1cJJ ~ {s. ~ ~ - ._ ~`_~ ~. _w aim ~~ _ ,.: ? ~~~^ =-~;-..~~.:....._ ter,,.;..-:' _ ~. _...- _ _ _.. _... --._ _. ~ ~_ , _..,,.,,,_ ,,t,..,~ . ,~ i u t° i ~ - - a ~~ w ~1 }~ f f f t l ~ ~~-. ~, h l 4~ 4 t 7' h J ~ ~ "~. ~ t x S t 1 ~~ ~ r ~~ ~; , s~ y , f ~~. ~ ~ ', ~` ~~ - fir. ~, ~ ..yy yy y~ ~ ,r r Y Q~ ~ f w sc~ . r ~+~ry _'' V77 ~'` 9 fit: ~ S ~, ~. r '-.,~ W .~ ~~ ~.r r'~~ k'" t 1~ -~ /' ., - - - ~ ~~ v ~'~~ 1 ~ 'e w:. r ~ ~. ~. a ~ z ~. ~ ',~ C'" a C -~ ~ ~ r ~ .a©r A. i ~ ,k_- ~~ 2 -L Y M-y ,~ ~~'~ t ~~ ~' _ ' 1 +il.. ~_ Sa'd' ~ {.X ~ y y,f4-'ln ~ ..t - L ~ ~' _-' Y' ``~r''SS`` - iE l Y ~ ~ r * - •'./...r~~ _ r.w.. ,. ~.r.;r~ V - .._ is s ti. ~+ ,~~:y ,. ~ 4~~~a. ~ ~~L~ ~.tf 1; `~~ A~ ~ ~6'~~1 ~ ~g.~'~/t4~1F 3,.~.,-~' ~71~7R ~~`'..r ,.•... d~~~I 1'- .fit. y ~di :~"^r ~?''k . ~'` ~. f ~ -~- - ~ }~.x~ Y _ ~ '1 f k" 7'.-'* •~ ~ ~.. ,_4 - ~3~ ~ ¢ ~, t .ter - ~ ~ rr ~ ~,sf~r`-{,- -. ~ F. ,,,~ t ' .~ '' `~` ~.R~[ .h~~ ~} '_~? , 4 1 ~ ? '~wy t I . ;`]G ~- ~~, 1 EXfIIBIT B REPLY TO AT'fENT101d OF DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WALLA WALLA DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS BOISE REGIJLATORY OFFICE 10095 WEST EMERALD STREET BOISE, IDAHO83704-9754 April 24, 2008 Regulatory Division SUBJECT: NWW-2008-206-BO1 Mr. Kyle Radek City of Meridian Public Works Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 200 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Mr. Radek: Your~proposed discharge of about 100 cubic yards of native dirt fill material into Five Mile Creek and adjacent wetlands to restore 7001inear feet of stream channel to a proper fimctioning chatmel is authorized under the terms and conditions of Department of the Army Nationwide Permit (NWP) 27 (33 CFR 330, Appendix A). This authorization requires your project is constructed as shown on the enclosed drawings and complies with the terms and conditions of the enclosed nationwide pemut and the special conditions listed below. Your project is located in Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, near Meridian, in Ada. County, Idaho. a. Permittee shall install a water filled bladder or sand bag cofferdam immediately downstream of the Franklin Road box culvert and route stream. flow around the project site so work can be accomplished in the dry. b. Permittee shall remove all excess dredged material not used for project construction and dispose of the dredged material at an upland site and in a manner such thax it cannot re- enter the waterway. c. Permitteeis responsible for all work done by any contractor. Permittee shall ensure any contractor who performs the work is informed of and follows all the terms and conditions of this authorization (including any special conditions listed above). d. Permittee shall notify the Boise Regulatory Office at 208-345-2154 seven days before construction is scheduled to begin. Please carefully review these conditions. If you cannot meet these conditions, this NWP verification is not valid. If you change the project description in your permit application, this -3- of Water Resources, 2735 Airport Way, Boise, Idaho 83705; and Mr. Jack Gantz, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, 14.45 North Orchazd, Boise, Idaho 83706. Sincerely, Greg artiuez Regulatory Proj ect Manager Enclosure: i f r' ~ j"~ UNTI"ED STATES :`t ~A. ~•~~"~ ~ ~~: rfn: ~_ DEP.A.liTMENT OF THE Il~TI'ERIOR ' 7.s n~uw~ sERZES tZ'oPOGR~xzc~ • GEOLOGICAL SURVEY .r ~$rZ. t .fir 2.6 Mi. Tq u.e. 20 a as' 3sooaa FEET R, t E, 115°2?'30" EAecs q.s Mi. • ~ ~ 651~•E ~ ~s mf. ro tr.s. 2 s~rTt y= _.,~, _ ~ ~ 3. • .,.,.,,,.tea , ... _ - 5 • Flume p{1NAL ~ . .,~, ~ ~ ~ ° l1z VJ , • BM ~ r= •~• 2G24 i i _ _ __ . :j '1.__ '~ a~ .° •.Yi Q~IE~.la ` 3-+16` NN ~ '. •~' l . ix~t~4.;.~3Hg7^iq''Z507~r_ 14 ~• 1 ~ Hag 'a~~ '• C~~` .~ l •••L,~s •~li••B~ • ,,,~.~ ~ • •^ V ° / SERB nC~ ~. L ~~ 6UtW i n ' / 9M Z627 • r t ,rte : ~ Flume ~ -~ ggg'' ~ ~' etery , ~~e~ t gry `, ; ~ ~ a t iT ' `.! ~ r ~' ~ aeoea '_ o qo ~ a spe o~ f ~t ti .•Q~ g • V•i'NV.TiL•it•~• .tW.u.s+am_v , :~. ar,+s ivttass ~ma L \\`esnrsvszsm Q ~E'0' ~ • T..U.tL't• M.tY.pyO OJM1'@..4 'R G 2 .t!ir-ci S Ltllff•ti. •~ 30 • ,:' ~ ~ ~o e ° LATERAL. •-~'°~~~..'•: ~ ~~O•• ~•~ ~. , • • +\ r° : ` • ° ti.... r • . a ROAR ~~. •e ~ e •^• ^ •~ • ^ ^ ' ••m ~i~' r t\ t • ,+ i•~ r ~] a~ v~ 8 s s 1 ~~` • ~ r '" LS9 ~ y~ ~ ~ \ ~ \' ~ ~` 'y ~ ~ t w • G19 '~ 1 l •~ Five Mile Creek Stream Restoration Project sv 9/13/07 The Five Mile Creek Stream Restoration Project is located in Meridian, Idaho, about 500 feet west of the intersection of Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road. The legal description for this site is T3N R1E - SEll4 NWl/4 SE1I4 of Section 7 . This restoration work includes both sides of the creek for approximately 680 linear feet. It will include earthwork to re-shape the stream channel, and an assortment of re- vegetation activities to populate the site with native grasses, herbaceous hydrophytic plants, shrubs and trees. The primary puzpose for initiating this restoration work is to re-create the proper functioning condition in this reach of stream. To do this, some sinuosity will be re- introduced to the stream channel. This will help decrease some of the erosive energy of the water and will in turn, decrease the potential for bank erosion aad the amount of suspended sediment that is carried downstream. In addition, the 2-3 year floodplain will be re-creaxed to help slow down these small flood events. This will allow the soils to better absorb the flood flows and will increase groundwater recharge. The riparian corridor aad adjacent uplands will be re-vegetated with native species of herbaceous and woody plants. This vegetation will improve the wildlife habitat and will act as a buffer and filter that will contribute to water quality improvement and will impmve the aesthetics of the site. This restoration site is in a high visibility location. Public education of riparian functions and values will be an important additional benefit. The City of Meridian plans to build a public use pathway along the stream, providing good opportunity for use, enjoyment and learning-about riparian ecosystems. Both sides of the creek are owned by Doug Tamura. Mr. Tamura is enthusiastic about the stream restoration work and is cooperating~to help see that the project is completed as planned. He is considering placing an easement on the property. As is currently planned, the City of Meridian will hold that easement in perpetuity, and will be responsible for the operation and maintenance within the easement boundaries. This project is proceeding through the cooperation and collaborative planning efforts of the Ada County Soil and Water Conservation District, the USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service, the City of Meridian, landowner Doug Tamura, CH2M Hill consultants {Connecting Idaho Program), Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, The Army Corps of Engineers and the Idaho Department of Water Resources, The cooperative effort of these entities is paramount to the successful completion of this project. }k,~~ d..~~ svl alllo7 Five Mile Creek Restoration Plan Tamara Reach PLANTING PLAN This planting plan provides guidance for installing the hydrophytic, herbaceous and woody plant materials that are planned and needed for the re-vegetation of the Five Mile Creek Restoration, known as the Tamura Reach. 'The species and quantities of these plants aze designed to provide a reasonable density of plant coverage that will prevent soil erosion, provide proper functioning condition, provide wildlife habitat and provide a natural `visual balance' to the restoration site. These are mostly native species and are selected for their functionality and adaptability to the site, as well as their ease of availability. In addition to these `new' plant materials, there are native hydrophytic plants on the site that will be harvested and set aside .during earthmoving activities, for use when the planting operations begin. Identification of the onsite sedges and rushes thht need to be harvested and saved, will be shown and discussed during a site showing, before construction begins. Following, is a list of the existing vegetation that currently dominates the site: Soft Rush (Common Rush) Reed canarygrass Torry's Rush Wildrye Baltic Rush Timothy Nebraska Sedge Orchazdgrass Fax Sedge Redtop Green Sedge Iris spp Woolyfiuit Sedge Willow-weed Owlfiuit Sedge Bidens Hardstem Bulrush Verbena Pale or Cloaked Bulrush Russian Alive Whiplash Willow Coyote Willow Attached, as part of this planting plan, aze job sheets and technical note publications that present more detailed guidance on harvesting and planting methodologies. I~ ° ~ Grass seeding will occur for the entire length of the stream reach ( 700') and will extend approximately 50 feet on each side of the creek channel. Some seed distribution may need to occur on machinery disturbed sites that could occur beyond 50 feet from the stream edge. See the attached CPA - 025 jab sheet labeled `Grass' and Practice Standard 327, Conservation Cover. Planting the rooted plugs of the herbaceous hydrophytic plants will occur for the entire length of the stream reach ( 700'). See the attached CPA - 028 job sheet labeled `Hydrophytic' and Practice Standard 390, Riparian Herbaceous Cover. The Creeping Spikerush and Common Threesquare Bulrush will be planted in shallow standing water dr saturated mud, on 18 inch spacing, on the `water side' of the straw logs. These two species will be planted in alternate groupings, that extend for about 40 to 50 feet along the edge of the water. This is to help create some diversity of appearance and simulate some natural randomness in the growth patterns. The Nebraska Sedge will be planted on 18 inch spacing on the `land side' of the straw logs. They can be planted next to the straw log or within, 8 inches of the straw log, in saturated or moist soil. The Baltic Rush will be planted in anon-linear fashion, about 18 inches in-land from the Nebraska Sedge, on 18 inch spacings. The `point bar' features will be entirely planted with Baltic Rush on 18 inch spacing, in a non-linear fashion. Willow cuttings will be places in 2 distinct zones. Geyer Willow will be planted at the transition zone where the outside edge of the floodplain meets the toe of the upland zone. These cuttings will be planted in clusters of 3 cuttings, spaced 5-6 feet apart, at approxmately 25 sites. These sites will be about 35 - 50 feet .apart, and will be delineated on theground bypin-flag placements. Booth Willow will be planted in the flat floodplain area, closer towards the water channel. These cuttings will be planted in clusters of 3, spaced 4-5 feet apart, at approximately 34 sites. The sites will be delineated on the ground bypin-flag placement. - See the attached CPA - 028 job sheet labeled `Willows', Practice Standard 612 and Riparian /Wetland Project Information Series ATo.4. None of the willows will be planted on the east side of the channel for this project. Shrubs planted in the dry upland areas will have the specific planting sites delineated on the ground by pin-flag placement. See the attached CPA - 028 job sheet labeled `Upland Shrubs and Practice Standard 6I2, Tree and Shrub Establishment. Questions concerning this vegetation and planting plan should be directed to _ Skip Vetten 888-1890 ext. 112 or Rob Sampson at 378-5727. t Yyil Y}': 4 ~$~C AA ~~ pp}} ~r. 1 f `/~ ~ ~ ~ i~ TVA ~M'~~I r a' 18nC8 tvltert~ . required ~~„ . ____. L~ _.._.._- ---. ._.- + tap Of :~ ~ . tinr*;~: .~ 5toCK pitsntirsg$ bank lulf width {~~~ k ~~ - chcrrtn~l ~~ qq 13L_t''1N VIEW batt~m~ ~~Ce where 1~4N~iC []t~At.~^.~ c 'P~Quir@d •- ~dnrmont stack plontings ~ p~~~r7tt ~ -• Z: t ~ >Pt r b!e txmk full wrdth E~FW SECTIt~N ~} ~~~ at,~l:l~,~>~~ SwtV+Pl~r Dio. floc ia{a end '~l! 1 L~ , dal brad- Ab w~a+as w~( sides ;nCh .~. ~~ 5 ~ r~rt at ~~""_~ ~" ~~ Of•~ ~~rrdtrtef _ r De~~vm#a ~` ' ~'9t~r tttt~ ° Alt ,Gt~tc~l banches bttttt) ~~ 4~ 1~0'° ~3O QrS ~ ~• ~~+ 7~~ be tri-YtPI'rFtd art ca~rord (~~ L~J r~ dUSrurge. ~(~ ~~ + ! ~ - ..- '~•~• tap~rrd dt t7tinirrtuen of twp IatP.rAl burl;; sho,I he obove th ~ y ~•~ ettid e prQfttirtr~ depth .~ I~LANT DETAIL (NC}ta:~ nrrtwirtr~ not to score} j d+ ® U n li ~ U ~.1~t~5f{?F;A1~ ~-11~tA~ALat --.-,. r ~ " ~~L CDAiS$jiV,A73QN St£R91C~ °Rw" U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRlc,'ULTURE II}-CPA-028 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE October 2006 TREE-SHRUB-R~ARIAN PLANTING- SPECYFICATIOPT ~HYDROPHYTIC" COOPERATOR Meridian Public Works / D. Tamura PRACTICE CODE .390 -Riparian Herbaceous Cover FIELD OFFICE Meridian USDA -MRCS SOIL : _M~ unit -5 Aeric Haplaquepts SLOPE: 1 % ASPECT: North PPT ZONE: 11 inches TYPE OF PLANTING: Hydrophytic Herbaceous PURPOSE: Riparian Restoration PLANNIlJG ALL PLANTINGS MUST BE 1N' ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARDS. ATTACH DESIGN SKETCH OR MAP OF PLANNED PLANTING. 1. AREA PLANNED: FIELD Nb. n/a WIDTH: 37 ft LENGTH: 700 ft. ACRES: 0.6 2. PLANNED COMPOSTTION: PLANTING SHOULD NOT BE LINEAR AS IN WIIIIOBREAKS SPECIES * ROW SPA~II~TG PLANT SPACING ACRES # ESTIMATED NO. NEIDID Balixc Rush - Juncos balticus 18 inches 18 inches 2330 Nebraska S - Carex nebrasaensis Z 8 inches 18 inches 950 ' S ikerush - Eleocharis alustris I8 inches 18 inches 475 Three S American Bulrush- S ' 1$ inches 18 inches 475 ~.viv~u~rt~ vnvrnu~ v 1 V r~tc~,tiv 1 M ~ l Kf'l 1' VK li~YLAC:~Mh:NTS 3. PRESENT GROUND COVER Aa assortme~ plants. Minor amounts of woody species are present and and facultative herl 4. PLANTING SITE PREPARATAION- TILLAGEJRIPPING/CHENIICAI/SCALPING/OTHER Some scalping of existing vegetation will occur, aadwill be set aside for use during planting operations. Final shaping and ~gradulg will provide adequate planting conditionsFualess severe compaction occurs. S. PLANTING (OPERATION -APPROXIMATE DATE PLANNED: Apn1 of 2008 PLANTING METHOD - TREE PLANTIIt/AUGEIthIAND/ETC: Ihbble too auger or shovel 6. IRRIGATION KIND None NONE: X PRE-PLANTING: - POST-PLANTING: 7. WEED AND PEST CONTROL fKII~TD/RATFJVVIiEN); Foliar application of yphosa~ or 2,4,-D herbicide will be necessary. A `wick' type applicator could be used on tall vegetation such as Reed Canarygrass or Iris spp.. Avoid herbicide c8ntact on desirable species. Always follow instructions on herbicide labels. 8. ESTABLTSHMEN'T PROTECTION (DESCRIBE): Livestock grazing is prolnbited. Excessive trampling by foot or vehicle traffic will be avoided until plants are well established. • 9. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Conduct regular :outing to determine the need for follow up weed control, and to assess the need for replacement of plants due to mortality flosses Regular control of Reed Caaarygrass and Iris spp. may be necessary for 1 or 2 veers durine the establishment period efhvdremhvtir. ntante PLANNER Skip Vetten USDA - NRCS DATE 10/2/07 I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PLAN AND AGREE TO INSTALL AS DESIGNED. COOPERATOR DATE p ooQ n U U.S. DEPARTMOrNT OF AGRIC 'URE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE e TREE-SHRUB-RIPARIAN PLANTIIVG-- SPECIFICATION COOPERATOR Meridian Public Works / D. Tamura FIELD OFFICE Meridian USDA - NRCS SLOPE: 0 - 2% . ASPECT: All TYPE OF PLANTING: Willow cuttings II7-CPA-028 October 2006 ~`WUZOwS~ PRACTICE CODE 612 -See Info. Series No. 4 SOII, : Map emit - 5 Aeric Haply is PPT 7.C}NE: 11 inches PURPOSE: ' arian restoration of flo lain PLANNING ALL PLANTIAJGS MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WTl`H STANDARDS. ATTACH DESIGN SKETCH OR MAP OF PLANNED PLANTING, 1. AREA PLANNED: FIELD NO. WIDTH: 37 ft LENGTH: '~00 fit. ACRES: 0.6 2. PLANNED COMPOSITION: PLANTING SHOULD NOT BE LINEAR AS IN WINDBREAKS SP>rCIES * ROW SPACING PLANT SPACING ACRES '~ ESTIMATED NO. NEEDED Ge er wfllow - Sa13x eriana 45 est side =15 clusters of 3 each = 4S cu ' side =none . Booth willow - Salix boothii 72 est side = 24 chrstels of 3 each = 72 cuitia ) side ~ none CONSIDER ORDERING 10 PERCENT EXTRA FOR REPLACENIENTS 3. PRESENT GROUND COVER: An assortment of native and introduced obligate and facultative herbaceous and woody plants. 4. PLANTING SITE PREPARATAION - TILLAGFIRIPPING/CHIIVII'CAIJSCALPING/OTHER Consixuction and eartbmoving activities wr71 cause substantiial sorb disturbance on most of the site Final shaping and grading 5. PLANTING OPERATION -APPROXIMATE DATE PLANNED: April of 2008 PLANTING METHOD - TREE PLANTER/AUGER/IiAND/ETC: Auger or `stinger' type digging tool. 6. IRRIGATION KIND None NONE: X PRE-PLANTING: POST PLANTING: 7. WEED AND PEST CONTROL (KIND/RATEJ'R~; Foliar application of glyphosate or 2,4; D herbicides will be necessary next to the cuttings. Spot treatment for broadleaf or grassy weed competition will be as needed _ during 1 or 2 growing seasons during plant establishment. 8. ESTABLISHMENT PROTECTION (DESCRIBE): Livestock grazing is not allowed. Competition flora surrounding vegetation wfll be conlroIIed by mechanical or chemicsll mesas for 1 or 2 s~owina seasons durinE plant establishment. 9. MANAGEMENT RECOMIvffi~ATIONS: Conduct regular s weed contra and to assess the need for replacement of plants due to to determine the need for follow-n y losses. PLANNER. Skip Vetter USDA - NRCS DATE 10/2/07 I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PLAN AND AGREE TO INSTALL AS DESIGNID. COOPERATOR DATE ,,,~ r,..~.,,R.~1.M ~ ~i ~: :4:Y.,t~ ;,. :i - .r~si` <. .... a s= t ~:S :ff U.S. DEPARTMENT OF t_ _:ICULTURE . NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE ID-CPA 02S October 2006 SEEDINGd PLANTING PLAN - SPECIFICATION "GRASS" COOPERATOR • Meridian Public Works / D. Tamura PRACTICE CODE 327 -Conservation Cover FIELD OFFICE Meridian -USDA MRCS FIELD NO. nIa SOIL: Map unit - S SLOPE: 0 - 30% ASPECT; All - PPT ZONE; 11 inch PLANNIl~IG ALL SEEDINGS MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARDS. l . SEEDBED PREPARATION - TTLLAGE/pACKING/OT`HER: So me compaction of tbe seed likely during earthmo ' activities. Light disking or other so>7 loosening efforts ma be necessar ing area is y befor broadcast seeding takes place. e 2. SEEDING OPERATION Broadcast APPROXIMATE DATE PLANNED: DRIL Dert O ~} Apri12008 L: n/.a SPACING: DEPTH: ---.- CARRIER: BROADCAST: RAKFJl3ARROW/MUI.CH/ETC.: Haad applied with whirl bird t d y ype sprea e COVER CROP (PRIOR TO SEEDING); n/a r NURSE CROP (R.ATES/KIl~TD): n/a FERTILIZER {1tATES/KIIJD): n!a IRR.TGATION: None 3. WEED AND PEST CONTROL (KIl~/RATENVHHN): Broadleaf weed control is nery after >~ seedlings reach appropriate size, as listed on herbicide IabeL Some addmonal herbicide spot treatments of noxious, r~atisy and broadleaf weeds is hlcely for 2 or more growing seasons, espac~ally on Reed C-~__Ary-grass and Iais spp 4. FSTABLISI~vIENT PROTECTION (DESCRIBE): Livestock grazing is not allowed. Same grazing browsing by wildlife is rely. Docks, geese, songbirds, rodents and perhaps deer are common residents. Plant damage by these specres is likely to be mm~mal. S. MANAGEMENT RECOMiViEATDATIONS: Protection from motorized and mechanized vehicles is needed. Protection from excessive foot traffic and trampling is needed. Neither disturbance is expected to be a srgmficant problem during plant establishment. 6. SPECIES AND PURE LIVE 5EED (PLS) SEEDING RATES (BULK RATES WII.I. BE HIGAER): ---- sees ibs. PLS' (,.oV3r t~1111'1'd 0 2 ~ ~llt1~C@ ~'1~!"c~S ni 1~I1'1'Ci C~I,gp Blg ~tlE - P~oa 0 Z ~' ~a 0 2 12 Sour Straam~k Wf~at~ AOr riparil~rl 0 2 ~ ed RsdtOp - s albs 0 2 10 9 - aed fps Fralt~is 0 ~ ~n Q °°~ ~ U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRIC .'CJRE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE TREE-SHRUB-RIPARL~N PLANTING -- SPECIFICATION COOPERATOR Meridian Public Works ! D. Tamura FIELD OFFICE Meridian - USDA -MRCS SLOPE: 1- 20% ASPECT: West & East TYPE OF PLANTIl3G: Upland shrubs ID-CPA-028 October 2006 "UPLAND SHRUBS" PRACTICE CODE 612 Tree & Shrub Establishment SOII.: Malt - 50 Elijah Sdt Loam PPT ZONE: 11 inches PURPOSE: Riparian Restoration -Uplands PLANNING ALL.PLANTINGS MUST BE IN ACCO1tDANCE WITH STANDARDS. ATTACH DESIGN SKETCH OR MAP OF PLANNED PLANTING. 1. AREA PLANNED: FIELD NO. n/a WIDTH: 100' LENGTH: 700 $. ACRES: 1.6 2. PLANNED COMPOSITION: PLANTIATG SHOULD NOT BE LINEAR AS IN WII~I7BREAKS SPECIES '° ~~ ROW SPACING PLANT SPACING ACRES * ESTIMATED NO. ° NEEDID GoldenCurrent -Rites aureum 21 Skuakbrush Sumac - Rhos trilobata 21 Chokec - Praaus "ana 21 S - Philade has lewisii 21 1~TOTlE: All of these shrub 'es will be Tented in random clusters as marled b in in tho field. ~' CONSIDER ORDERING 10 PERCENT EXTRA FOR REPLACEMIIQTS 3. PRESENT GROUND COVER: An assortment of perennial a:nd annual weedy broadleafs and grassy species. 4. PLANTING SITE PREPARATAION - TILLAGEJRIPPING/CHEbIICALSCALPING/OTHER Constmction and eard~moving activities will cause substantial soil distiubance. Final shaping and grading of soil, Quill provide adequate nlantine conditions. If severe comvactioa occurs, some soil Loosening activities may be necessarv. V L l • i-v.° v 5. PLANTING OPERATION- APPROXIlviATE DATE PLANNED:. April of 2008 PLANTING METHOD -TREE PLANTER/AUGE~HATID/ETC: Dibble tool, auger, or shovel 6. IRRIGATION KIND None. Unless a volunteer work force provides hand applied bucket watering. NONE: None PRE PLANTING: POST-PLAIJTING: 7. WEED AND PEST CONTROL (KIl~D/R•AT~JWHEN): Weed control is necessary. Control of adjacent grassy and broadleaf vegetation is necessary for 2 as more years, to prevent excessive com~tiiion during shrub establishment. 8. ESTABLISAAlENT PROTECTION (DESCRIBE): Livestock grazing is not aAowed. Some browsing by wildlife is h7cely. Ducks, geese, songbirds, rodents and perhaps deer are common residents. Protection from heavy use by deer maybe needed. 9. MANAGIIKENT RECOA~IIvIENDATIONS: from comtseting vegetation can cause excessive I HAVE REVIEWED THIS PLAN AND AGREE TO INSTALL AS DESIGNED. COOPERATOR DATE NOTE: On the Easf~ide of the creek. Plant one cluster of three shrubs ~ every 70 feet. Ori theWest• side of the creek. Plant one cluster of three shrubs -every 40 - 50 feet. PL~~IVNER Skip Vetter USDA -MRCS DATE 10/2/07 m m ~C Q ~C ~ e ~~ 0 La m ~ my ~ ~ ~'a Y ~~`o ~~a~~~ g9~~~z ~o~ ~~~ ~~~ ~2 U 5 o 0 fD ~t N O apD t0 sf N pO m~® m O m m O N N N N N N N lY N ~~~ ~~~ i I ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~. ~ . ~- _ ~~ . ~ ~ ~~~' ~~.~ .~ ~: ~-. ..~ g ~~ o .~ ~~~~ ~~ ..~ '• 7 ~f ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ b~$~g ~~3188~ 3t3i ~~ r~n~c~r~s~an,~u - rAe~A, coxsxxvaaox sx~nax ~: ~ ~ ~~. v `~/^, (`~P `~ ^1 9 Rl O G m n r ~~ ~. ~ ~s 4~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~°~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~._~ _ ~, . tf t`i ~' LC~G C .~ i?~~"~11.5 7Y~1~~. 5~C~1C~N . ~ ~:~:ri ~, ;~ ~:. ~': ,; :; ~; ~ .`~' '. ~ e^ ~~ ~: ,.,,~ - ,~ F s,~eeaa . ~~~ 'e1V, .. X340.: _ ~i~. IK" ~ ~~ 3 _~,~ Ve ~ ` ~!1 ~~~ f~l C1~'AWI~i 1~'i' ~'~ 5~.~ `.~. ~~~ u ern ply, .. _;~9.; r f~. ~~..~ -; ~ r ~ GOAL LOG ~7Pd.S e„~ 5 .P »cB 5~5as Pith !~ LAC i~StO ~ fN~'A IA;ACJi ~..- J.Pif~S ~ ~"• _ ALAI. B7 ~-• . ld. - RTATURRL RESOURCES tANYATION SERVICE °"° :.; `~'' I .. ~L1~N Vl~llU ~ ?~''~~~I ~~t/~ l~~L~ C~~K .. ~ ~' ~«~ ~~ .; ~a~r __.--~ vo .~ ~.~ - ~(~}7~ ~: i ~ ~ _ ~`7?t `~ ~.~ Y`h~~i ~ ~ - i t -k i h '- ~ ~ ~ _ e yam' key ja~ ~ ~w~ ~Y_ ~~, ~ y Y ~' 1 ~~ ~ y. ~ _ ~~ T 4 ~ v° '~ ~~ ~ d~ ft,2r ~ r S r y t a'. µ'y •}-. C K `~ ~ fm is 7 .. ~) s~ _- _~ _ -a ~~~ ~~ ~,'~'~ ^ z .. iM~i~ ~'.f ~ ~~y.??~`~ l r`y 5 ,` n a ,.yccs ,~ .Y '~v~. T y. ..r `?? '_~ <~; S, ~ 'F i 3Y ~~i r ¢i T 7'. b~•~ ~~ t -~ vt ~ ~(~r "'~ ~/.i~Y r19L n91if• ililll y{Z~,7IMV 7 LL~ }~ A Gds Cd5t01~i~P1 ~ fAA~ZA R~LN WiY~7 CAI, ~ 1 - NATgRkL ~26SRURCEg WNSSRYATIOAI SSRYtCF< f ~1"UV ~1f~YY LJ~ ~ l~l.V ~IVL IViI~~ ~~ f ~Pj 'Y ~ ~ It ~. l si C: ~W 0 +ry~ ry/ ~jrk1~ ~ ~sr7 `pI I yr rn Nr'l~ ~~ rW~ ~~ ~! 1\~ ~ 1 V W .Y~° fs ~' t ~~ v+ 3 g ~° q. ~` ~ ~~ 'M ra Y ?` ~ * S n ~ _ P ~~' .s' ~ ; q i ~ }},y~ ~_a' ~ ~F ~ ~ J.Y°h'k ~' Y +'.t~'dL T ~~ ~ ' x .~~ ~~ f S r,~u { ,r~+~ ~ r' r , ~~~ ~ ~ '~ ' ~ uii~ . ~ .x ~ q'a x ~ ~ _i yY1 ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ [~ A~~~~~ s+~.~u,,~f > ~x~if^ `.ate t*k`'` n ;c'~rY ~~.~`~~ e. ~ ~ Y ~ ~( _ s'fl~"r''!'E 4'~~ ~~b~C ~ ~T~ t"5'"tK "Y'~ya ~D.d, " J7i` pAY^"~.~~ i ~ ~ .~ S'^ 46~ K +x 2z' ~~, ,. ~*.,"^5,.~~ ~ ~ ,W k ~ ~ ~Y ~h~ ~'"'a~''`c a~ 5~^3 .. ~3RLr~3.zMz' ?a?,w...~,.s-RI'ze2'°'~*. ~R++W i i Sirot 4 ,: t - b r ( ~ n cv `:.~ o ... .X .:, ~a ~,A 5~ ~, ~ r USAA -NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERViC$ 4 ,~ _t ,,,,e R~~ikf~+YJN a'-'-~ - '! ..~,` Rr ~ Pst' . _ T'~- Y ~~.' ~~~ ~ ~-,:. ~ ~.t: t~rarnr~v - r~.~nr~+at p,,. ~.rroPS 9 ~,~„ :.usna - xa~r, x~souxc~s coxa~xvax~ox s~xvraa °~'~° ---- STATE OF IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1445 Alorth Orchard • Boise, Idaho 83706 • (208} 373-11550 April 11, 2008 Kyle Radek, P.E. City of Meridian Public Works Department 660 E Watertower, Suite 200 Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Reference No. 2008-206-BOl Stream Channel Restoration on Five Mile Creek Deaz Mr. Radek: C.L 'Butch° Otter, Governor ToN Hardesty, DlreLtor _ u `.r ~ :: ,,~~Ry~ it•~4^~ ~ECElVED APR ].. 6 Z0~ Regulatory ®it~is8®te ~~IS~ The Department of Environmental Quality (Department} has considered water quality certification for construction related to the referenced project. We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments and conditions. General If dewatering is required during construction, a short term activity exemption must be obtained from this office. Please contact Cn~ig Shepard at 373-0557 for further information if necessary. Fills Material may not be placed in excess of the minimum needed for erosion protection. All temporary fills shall ~ removed in their entirety on or before the completion of construction. Fill material shall be free of organic and easily suspendable fine material. The fill material to be placed shall include clean earth fill, sand, and stone only. Whenever practicable, discharges of dredged or fill material shall be conducted during low flow periods. Structural fill or bank protection shall consist of materials that are placed and maintained . to withstand predictable high flows in the watercourse. Dischazges of dredged or fill material in excess of that necessary to complete the project shall not be permitted. Kyle Radek, P.E. City of Meridian Public Works Department Page 2 Erosion Control Disturbance of the existing channel bottom and native vegetation shall be kept to a minimum. Areas disturbed by a project which are suitable for vegetation shall be seeded or revegetated to prevent subsequent soil erosion. Sediment that is the result of this activity must be mitigated to prevent violations of the turbidity standard as stipulated under Section 58A1.02 of the Idaho Water Quality Standards and Wastewater Treatment Requirements. Any violation of this standard must be reported to this office immediately. , Permanent erosion and sediment control measures shall be installed at the earliest practicable time consistent with good construction practices and shall be maintained as necessary throughout the operation of the project. One of the first construction activities shall be the placement of permanent and temporary erosion and sediment control measures around the perimeter of the project or initial work areas to protect the project water resources. Constresction ~dcGivities Work in open water is to. be kept at a minimum and only when necessary. Equipment shall not enter the stream channel to complete the work. Fording of the channel is not permitted. Temporary bridges or other structures shall be built if crossings are necessary. Equipment and machinery must be removed from the area of waterway prior to refueling, repair and/or maintenance. Equipment and machinery shall be steam cleaned of oils and grease prior to entering a waterway. Measures shall be taken to prevent spilled fuels, lubricants, or other toxic materials from entering the watercourse. To the extent reasonable and cost-effective, the activity submitted for certification shall be designed to minimise subsequent maintenance. If construction is completed and mitigation implemented in accordance with the information provided in the application and the comments and conditions above, the Department certifies under Clean Water Act Section 401 that the construction of the project will comply with applicable requirements of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the federal -Clean Water Act (PL92-500), as amended, and will not violate Idaho Water Quality Standards (IDAPA 58.01.02). This certification shall remain in effect until June 30, 2009, at which time construction must be completed. Kyle Radek, P.E. City of Meridian Public Works 1.7eparlment Page 3 Water quality certification provided herein shall be revoked for failure of the permittee to comply with the conditions of dais certification or the terms and conditions of the referenced permit. Revocation shall become effective upon written notice to the pennittee, and all activities permitted under the referenced permit shall immediately cease until. the permittee obtains another water quality certification from the Department. This Section 401 Water Quality Certification and associated conditions may be appealed by submitting a request in writing within 35 days for a hearing, pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 52, Idaho Code and the Rules of Administrative Procedure before the Board of Environmental Quality, IDAPA 58.01.23. The request for a hearing must be filed with the hearing coordinator at the following address: Hearing Coordinator Department of Environmental Quality 1410 N. Hilton Boise, ID 83706 Please contact me at (208) 373-0599 if you have any questions or further information to present. Sincerely, f~.~t/~ ck M. tz, .E. T hnicalI eer oise Regional Office JMG:vee c: Greg Martinez, COE, Boise Source File #20, Reading File .~ _. _~ Compliance Certification Department of the Army Permit Number: NWW-2008-2p6-BO1 Name of Permittee: City of Meridian Date of Issuance: Apri124, 2008 Sign and return this Compliance Certification when you complete the project authorized by this permit and any required mitigation. Return this certification to: Corps of Engineers Boise Regulatory Office 10095 W. Emerald Street Boise, Idaho 83704-9754 Please note your permitted'activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a representative of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If you fail to comply with this permit, the permit is subject to suspension, modification, or revocation. I hereby certify the work authorized by my permit is completed according to the required terms and conditions and complies with the required mitigation. Signature of Permittee `a' ~ ~R .~: ~ r '~ . ~~~ts< .. ' ~ ~ ~ r s . ; i ~~' i., ;+.r. rS .r.., a ~'~ ~Y s ,~. ~•>r h~v«t e .o . ~~ ~W'h. ~ b'~f ~~ ~' S~ ~.+~~~ $ ~ A licant: of Meridian Fr7e Number: 2~8-206-BOl Date. March 21, 2008 Attached is: See Section Below A~1iZ7AL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Leiter of Permission A PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Pemrit or Letter of Perxrdssion B PERMIT DENIAL C R • APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PP;ELIMEJARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERR~ATION E A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the pemut ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit daannent and return it to the district engineer for final authozization. If you received a Letter of Percussion (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is suii~orized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional detemunations (JD) associated with the pernrit OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of cxrtain term and conditions therein, yon array request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district eagu-eer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within ti0 days of the date of this notice, or you wrll forfeit your right tin appeal the peraut in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer wr~l evaluate your objections and may. {a) modify the permit to addre~ all of your concerns, (b} modifythe permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modifythe pemoit having deter®ned that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your obections, the district engineer wr71 send you a proffered pernoit for your reconsideration, as indicted in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may acxx~t or appeal the percut ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permmt, you any sign the permit docrnnent and returns it to the district engineer far final authorization. If you received a Letter of Pemrission {LAP}, you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in ifs entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional dderrrrinations associates wiflr the permit APPEAL: If you choose to dceline the proffered permit {Standard ar LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Admimstrn~ive Appeal Praxes by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division en ' eer. This foam must be received b the division en ' ~ within 60 of t3~e date of flue notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a pemut ands the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Praxes by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. 'IYris form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JIJRI'SDICTIONAL DETERMII~TATION: You may accept or appeal the approved~JD or provide new information. ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Far7ure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved ]Din its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, You may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Er-gi2reers Adve Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division eer within! 60 da of the date of this notice. E: PR:ELIM~IARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIOA: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the prelurrinary JD. The PreliminaryJD is not appealable. If you wish, you mayrequest as approved JD (which araybe appcled~ by contacting the Carps district for fittther instruction: Also u ~. vide new information for further ccau;ideration b the to reevaluate the JD. .. -•- REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Descn`be your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statemeirts. You may attach additional infom~ation to this form to clarify where your reasons or obj ectians are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is Iiautai to a review of the eve record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conferences or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review offices has determined is needed to clarify the administrative r~ord. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information _m clarify the location of information that is ah?eadv in the admmis[rative record. . If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal Pm~ ~ If you ~Y ~~ questions regarding the appeal P you you may contact: District Engineer ATTN: A. Bradley Daly Regulatory Division Walla Walla District 201 North 3'~ Avenue Walla Walla, Washington 99362-1876 Telephone (509) 527-7150 may also contact+ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division Attn: David Gesl, Appeal Review Officer P.O. Box 2870 Portland, Oregon 97208-2870 Telephone (503) 808-3825 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers getsonnel, and any govemme~t consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a I S day notice of any site investigation, and wr71-have the oppordmity to participate in all site investiaations. of appellant or agent 1 Date: I Telephone number 3~ Print•Form Page 1 of 7 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 23-Apr-2008 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Walla Walla District, NWW-2008-00206-B01-JD1 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State : ID -Idaho County/parish/barough: Ada Cify: Meridian Lat: 43.609391188143526 Long: -118.37965931744428 Universal Transverse Merutor. [ ] Name of nearest waterbody: Five Mlle Creek Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW): Boise River Name of watershed ar Hydrologic Unit Cade (HUC): 17050114 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites {e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etcZ} are associated with the action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR S17'E EVALUATION: Office Determination Date: Field Detemtination Date{s): ~ 19-Mar-2008 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION There t) "navigable wafers of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RNA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review area. Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. Waters are preserrtly used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain: B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There [~,~ tars of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review 1. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area: water Name water Type(s) Present City of Meridian-Site 1 Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs hops://ozm.usace.army.miUorm2/f?p=106:34:14118I7347981124::N0:: 4/23/2008 Jd Print Form b. Identify (estimate} size of waters of the U.S. in the review area: Area: t.inear. - c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction: based on: [ ] OI-IWM Elevation: (if known) 2. Non-regulated waten3/wetlands:3 # ~ M Page 2 of 7 Po#errtially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. SECTION Ill: GWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT' TO TNWs 1.TNW Not Applicable. 2. Wetland Adjacent to TNW Not Applicable. B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT VETLANDS (IF ANY): 1. Characteristics of non TNWs that flow directly or indtrecliy into TNW (i) General Area Conditions: Watershed size: [ j Drainage area: [ ] Average annual rainfall: inches Average annual snowfall: inches (iI) Physical Characteristics (a) Relationship with TNW: Tributary flows din~ctly into TNW. Tributary flows through [ ]tributaries before entering TNW. :Number of Mbutaries Project waters are [ ]river miles from TNW. Project waters are [ ]river miles from RPW. Project Waters are [.] aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Project waters are [ ] aerial(straight) miles from RPW. Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: identify flow route to TNW:S Stream Order. if known: Tributary Name httTfs:/Iorm.usace.armv.miUorm2/f?v=106:34:141 1817347981124::N0:: 4/23/2408 • J$ Print Form ~ Page 3 of 7 2 ~ City of Meridian-Site 1 (b) General Tributary Characteristics: Tributary is: Tributary Name Natural Artificial Explain Manipulated F~cplain Five Mite Creek is a highly. altered stream. Most of its reach has be City of over the last 100 years, with major alterations occurring around 19 Meridian-Site 1 - - - X BOR altered the stream and made k part of an irrigation system for That alteration re-routed the creek in many locations and enlarged carry irrigation. Tributary roperties with respect to top of bank (t>astintate Tributary Name width (it) Depth (ft) Side S City of Meridian-Site 1 10 5 2:1 Primary tributary substrate cenneeseitien~ Tributary Name Slk Sands Concrete Cabby Gravel Muek Bedrock Vegetatf City of Meridian-Site 1 X X - - X - - - Tributary /conditiens_ sfaiE~ility_ neessranr_a_ ne-nmofrv ne~nrilenf-• Tributary Name Condltionl3tabUity RunlRlfflelPaol Complexes C~ometry City of The stream is relatively stable. It normally The stream is highly altered and routinely Relativ ~ Meridian-Sit®1 does not experience high flow events which cleaned out. The stream has no pool or riffle wig would cause bank erosion. complex (c) Flow: Tributary Name Provides for Everts Per Year Flow Regime Dt, City of Meridian- Site 1 Intermittent but not seasonal flow 20 (or greater) the middle to lower reaches of the stream is perennial. The upper mach of the stream is ephemeral. - Surtace Flow Is: Tributary Name Surface Flow CharacteHsttcs City of Meridian-Site 1 Confined well defined channel due to alterations and routine cleaning of the channel Subsurface Flow• THbu~ry Name Subsurface Flaw Explain Findings Dyre (or oth City of Meridian-Site 1 Unknown - - Tributary has: . . Tr)butarry Name Bad & Banks . OHwM Dlsco~nuous OHwM~ City of Meridian-Site 1 X X - Tributaries with OHWMg - (as indicated above) Changes Aestructian Matted4Absent Sedime~rt Tributary Name OHwM Clear Litter M Soil Vegetation Shehring wrack Line Veo~etatton Soma Leaf Litter Scow hops://orm.usace.army.miUorm2/f?p=106:34:1411817347981124::N0:: 4/23/2Q08 Jd Print Forna City of Meridian-Site X X - 1 Page 4 of 7 X I - I - I - I - i - I - I - ff factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction: High. Tide Une indicated 6y: Not Appiicable. Mean Hlgh Water Mark indicated by: Not Applicable. (iIi} Chemical Characteristics: Chsirar_i~t~ri~ trihutarv (e_e__ water celer is clear_ discolored_ oily film: water aualltv:aeneral watershed charaaterlstlCs Tributary Name Explain iderNffy specific poi City of Meridian- Site 1 during the winter months when.the streaam is carrying base flow, the water is clear. From April through October when irrigation water is added the water is turbid. sediment, nuMenl (ivl gieioaical CharacterisHcs_ Channel suonorts: Tributary Name Ripar~n Corridor CharacbHstics VYetland Fringe Characteristlcs City of Meridian- Site 1 _ X stream has narrow wetland fringe from the middle rest down to the confluence with Ten Mlle Creek. 2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) Physical Characteristics: (a) Genera( Wetland Characteristics: Properties: Not Applic~bfe. (b) Genera( Flow Relationship with Non TNW: Flow is: Not Applicable. SurFace flow is: Not Applicable. Subsurface flow: Not Applicable. (c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW: Not Appiicable. (d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW: Not Applicable. (ii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is dear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.}, Not Applicable. httvs://orm.usace.army.miUorm2/f?p=1 fl6:34:1411817347981124::N0:: 4/23/2008 J~d Print Form ~ Page 5 of 7 (iii) Biological Gharacteristics. Wetland supports: Not Applicable. 3. Characteristics of ail wetlands adjacent to the tributary (ff any): All wetiands being considered in the cumulative analysis: Nat Applicable. Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Not Applicable. C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they signiftcantiy affect the chemical, physical, and biological Integrity of a TNW. For each of the following st#uattons, a significant n®xus exists tf the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent w®tlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating signFflcant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water In the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and ail its adjacent wetlands. It Is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNYV). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinattve of significant nexus. Significant Nexus: Not Applicable D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURiSDICTIQNAL FINDINGS. T!'-0E SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE: 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands: Not Applicable. 2 RPWs that flow directly or Indirectly into TNWs~ Wetland Name Florov Explain Five Mile Creek is a stream channel that exibitss seasonal flow in the upper part of the drains! City of perennial flow in the middle and lower reches of the drainage. At the project site flow is parer Meridian-Site PERENNIAL. stream has a watershed of 9425 square miles and receives about 10 inches of annual perch 1 calculated 100 year flood event is a flow of 8800 cfs and k has calculated 2 year flown of 161 normal flows rarely exceed 12 cfs. Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters In the review area: Wetland.Name TYp® Size (Unea City of Meridian-Site 1 Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) that flaw dtrec~ly or indirectly into TNWs 213.38 Total: 213.36 3. Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TMNs:s Not Applicabie. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area: Not Applicable. 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Not Applicable. https://orm.usace.army.mil/orm2/fIp=106:34:1411817347981124::N0:: 4/23/2008 Jd Print Form. Page 6 of 7 Provide acn3age estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: Not Applicable. 5. Wetlands adjacenrt to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directiy or indir®ctly into TNWs: Not Applicable. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review ar®a: Not Applicable. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or.indirectly into TNWs: Not Applicable. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review azea: Not Applicable. T. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters:g Not Appiic~ble. E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMAAERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS:? ~ Not Applicable. identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: Not Applicable. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the~review area: Not Applicable. F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS. INCLUDING WETLANDS tF potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of F~gineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements: Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce: Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the naview area would have been regulated based soley on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR): Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (F~cplain): Other (Expiainj: Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review azea, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (te., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment: Not Applicable. Provide acreage estimates for non Jurisdictional waters in the review azea, that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. hops://orm.usace.army.miUorm2/f1p=106:34:1411817347981124::N0:: 4/23/2008 ~` J~ Print Form Not Applicable. Page 7 of 7 ~-Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections In Section 111 below. 2-For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typicaly flows year-round or has continuous flow at least ~seasonallyZ (e.g., typically 3 months). 3-Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. 4-Note that the Instructiona( Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the acid West.' s-Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW. s A natural or man-made discorrtinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stnsam temporarily flows underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there Is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbodyLs flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. ~-Ibid. e-S~ Footnote #3. s -To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the instructional Guidebook. ~ o-Prior to asserting or dec(Ining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the CorpsJEPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. hops://orm.usace.army.miUorm2/f?p=106:34:1411817347981124::NC?:: 4/23/2008 x NATItJP~[WIDE PERMIT 27 Aquatic Habitat Restoration, Establishment, and Enhancement Activities. Activities in water of the United States associated with the restoration, enhancement, and establishment of tidal and non tidal wetlands and riparian areas and the restoration end enhancement of non-tidal streams and other non-tidal open waters, provided those activities result in net increases in aquatic resource functions and services. To the extent that a Corps permit is required, activities authorized by this NWP include, but are not limited to: the removal of accumulated sediments; the installation, removal, and maintenance of small water control structures, dikes, and berms; the installation of current deflectors; the enhancement, restoration, or establishment of riffle and pool stream structure; the placearent of in-stream habitat structures; nralifidartions of the stream bed and/or banks to restore of establish stream meanders; the backfilling of artificial channels and drainage ditchu~; the removal of existing drainage struclarres; the construction of small nesting islands; the construction of open water areas; the construction of oyster habitat over unvege~ated bottom is tidal waters; shellfish seeding; activities needed to reestablish vegetation, includmg plowing or discing for seed bed preparation and the planting of appropriate wetland spe<:ies; mechanized land clearing to reamve non-native ffivasive, exotic, dsr nuisance vegetation; and other related activities. Only native pleat species should be planted at the site. This NWP authorizes the relocation of non-tidal waters, including non-tidal wetlands and streaars, on the project site provided there are net increases in aquatic ru~ource functions and services. Except for the relocation of non tidal waters on the project site, this NWP does not authorize the conversion of a stream or natural wetlands to another aquatic habitat type (e.g., stream to wetland or vice versa) or uplands. This NWP does not authorize stream channelization. This NWP does not authorize the relocaltion of tidal waters or the conversion of tidal waters, including tidal wetlands, to other aquatic uses, such as the conversion of tidal wetlands into opeaa crater ia~goundments. Reversion. For enhancement, restoration, and establishment activities conducted: (1) In aceordance with the farms and conditions of a binding wetland umhancerneat, n~toratidn, or establishment agreement between the landowner and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS~ the Farm Service Agency (F'SA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (N1VlFS~ the National Ocean Service (NOS), or their designated state coopemting agencies; (2) as voluntary wetland restoration, whaacement, and establishment actions documented by the NRCS or USDA Technical Service Provider pursuant to MRCS Field Office Technical Guide standards; or (3) on reclaimed surface coalmine lands, in accordance with a Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act permit issued by the OSM or the applicable state agency, this NWP also authorizes any future disxhazge of dredged or fill material associated with the reversion of the area to its documented prior condition and use (i.e, prior to the restoration, enhancement, or establishment activities). The reversion must odxur within five years a13er expiration of a limited term wetland resforatidm of establishme~ agreement or permit, and is authorized in these circumsnmees even if the discharge ocxtrr:s after this NWP expiru~. The five-ycer reversion ]unit does ndrt apply to agreements without time limits reached between the laadownu~ and the FWS, NRCS, FSA, NMFS, NOS, or an appropriate state cooperating agency. This NWP also authorizes discharges of dredged or fill material in wags of the United States for the reversion of wetlands that were restored, enhandx;d, or established on prior-dnnverted cropland brat has not been abandoned or on uplands, in accordance with a binding agreement between the landowner and NRCS, FSA, FWS, or their designated state cooperating agencies (even though the restoration, enhancement, or establishment activity did not require a section 404 permit). The prior condition will be docuumented iYr the original agreement or permit, and the determination of return to prim conditions will be made by the Federal agency or appropriate state agency executing the agra~reat of permit Before conducting any reversion activity the permittee or the appropriate Federal or state agency must notify the district engineer and include the doaunentation of the prior condition. Once an area has reverted to its prior physical condition, it will lx subject bo whatever the Corps Regulatory requirements are applicable to that type of land at the tmme. The requirement that the activity result in a net increase in aquatic resource fnctions and services does not amply m reversion activities meeting the above conditions. Except for the activities described above, this NWP does not authorize any tirtiue discharge of dredged or fill material associated with the reversion of the area to its prior condition. In such uses a separate permit would be required for any reversion. Reportiscg: For those activities that do not require pre~onstruction notification, the permittee must submit to the district engineer a copy oi~ (1) The binding wetland enhanc~nent, restoration, or establishment agreement, or a project description, including project plans and lodsrtion amp; (2) the NRCS or USDA Technical Service Provider documentation for the voluntary wetland restoration, u tllisnc~nent, or establishment action; t>r (3) tare SMCRA permit issued by OSM or the applid~ble state agency. These doctunents must be submstted to the district engineer at least 30 days print to commencing activities in waters of the United States authorized by this NWP. Noti,~ieation. The permittee must submit apre-construction notification to the di~rict engineer prior to ~nencing the activity (see general condition 27}, except for the following activities: (1) Activities conducted on non Federal pnbfic lands and private lands, in accordance with the terms and conditions of a binding wetland enhancement, restoration, or establishment agreumrdsnt between the landowner and the U.S. FWS, MRCS, FSA, NMFS, NOS, or their designated state cooperating agencies; (2) Voluntary wetland restoration, enhancement, and establishment actions documented by the NRCS or USDA Technical Service Provider pursuant to MRCS Field Office Technical Guide standards; or (3) The reclamation of surface coal mine lands, in accordance with an SMCRA permit issued by the OSM or the applicable state agency. However, the perarittee must submit a copy of the appropriate documentation. (Sections 10 and 404) w. Note: This NWP can be used to authorize compensaxory mitigation projects, includmg mitigation banks and in-lien fee programs. However, this NWP does not authorize the reversion of an area used for a compeatsatory mitigation project to its prior condition, since corripen~.tory mitigation is generally intended to be permanent Regional Conditions Noti5c~laion under General Condition 27 shall include dte following. a Description of t12epre-project site conditions, photographs, general wefland functions and services the site provides and benefits anticipated from project constmction. b. For projects which involve creation of stream meanders, riffie and pool connplexes or pool stream structures, provide evidence the structure is designed by an expert in river dynamics such as a hydrologist, fluvial morphologist or wetland ~P~ c. For projects which involve discharges in high value wetlands (forested wetlands, pcetlands, vernal pools, kettles, or wetlands identified in Idaho Department of Fish a~I Game Wetland Conservation Stirategyt as Class I, Class II, Reference and Habitat sites}, provide a monitoring plan which includes ammual reporting, and identify any necessazy maintenance required, to ensure a net increase in aquatic resource functions. and cervices. Water t2uality Cetrtification -CONDXTIONSTH'ATABEIVECESSARYTOASSURECOMPLIANCEWITH g'ATER QUALl'TYSTANDARDS Activities on Impaired YPaters Prior to commencfng work, the permittee must notify the appropriate Regional IDEQ Office of all activities that occecr on waters not meeting state water quality standards ("impaired waters"), regardless of whether the Corps requires apre- construction notification. This notification must be in writing and must contain a project description, location, name of affected water body, start and completion dates, a description of planned Best management practices (e.g. methods that will be used to control turbidity), and pernaittee contact information. The most current EPA-approved IDEQ Integrated Report at the time of the proposed activity must be used for determining whether the affected water Is considered an Impaired water. A copy of the cwrerst, EPA-approved final 2002 Integrated Report can be viewed at: ~ttpt//www deg Idaho govJwater/d~a re~oace water/monitoring/2002 cfm. This URL also has a link to IDEQ's map-based Integrated Report which presents Information from the Integrated Report in a searchable, map-based format. Activities on impaired waters with a total maximum daily load (TMDL) must be implemented by the permittee in a manner that is consistent with the TMDL. IDEA believes that if the permittee fully complies with the conditions of this certification (most notably the best management practices and bank stabilization conditions), then the project will likely comply with the TMDL. The permittee is advised to contact the appropriate regional o,~ce to determine f theirprafect will be in compliance with the TMDL. A list of EPA-approved TMDLs is available online at: hits •//www deq adaho govhvater/data reoorts/surface water/tmdls/sba troll master list c a~ Best Management Practices Best management practices (BMPs) must be designers implemented, and maintained by the permittee to fully protect and maintain the Beneficial uses of waters of the state. Furthermore, the permittee-must monitor and evaluate BMP effectiveness during project construction to determine Ifwater quality standards are Being met. If there are Indications that water quality standards are not being met (such as a plume of suspended material), then the BMPs must be modified as necessary to ensure compliance with water quality standards. Approved BMPs for speclf is activities (such as mining, forestry, stream channel alteration) are codified in IDAPA t Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) Wetland Conservation ~g'~~'~'b~ devel~pedt°`~ 9eab, rttord~mn Idalm, ~' wood alum ee~, Sauueeseem kfeho Easr-Csme-rdeh° end sp~+e R~ , nee °na western snaRe alum end vtbumles, erw Lae Uppm soaks alrm end ed/ecent weffends. Refer f0 fite Internet ffite et hi7p:/lwww2.state,id.us/fishgame/Info/CDC/wet/ands.htm~'°°°'~'~e~ofDF°"d'°"'°l~n°n& The Conservation Strategies are authored vy Jancovsky-Jones. 58.01.02.350. In addition, IDEQ has a catalog of stormwater best management practices that is avoidable on line at: httn:llwww.deo.idahogovhvater/data reports/storm water/catalo lindex.cfm 7~iis catalog presents avariety ofBMPs that can be used to control erosion and sediment during and after construction. Other sources of information are also available and may he use far selecting appropriate BMPs. Y1'ood Preservatives Any use of treated wood materials in the aquatic environment must be conducted in accordance with IDEQ Policy # PM97-1, "Pater Quality and YYood Preservatives Policy Memoranda. ° This is available on-lime at: http /lwww deg idaho~gov/rules/policies/pm97 1 cfm. Hazardous and 1lelete~ious Materials Hazardous and deleterious materials (eg. oil, gasoline, chemicals, trash, wed sawdust) must not be scored, disposed of, or accumulated adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of waters of the state unless adequate measures and controls are provided to ensure that those materials wild not enter waters of the state. Bank Stabilization Any projects iaavolving bank stabilization must incorporate, wherever practtcable. bioengineering techniques (using root wads and vegetation) in the bank stabilization design. General Cont3ifaons Note: To qualify for NwP authorization, the prospective pemrittee must comply with the following general conditions, as appropriate, in addition to any regional or case-specifie conditaons imposed by the aivIaian engincer or district engineer. Yrospecdve permittees should contact the appropriate Corps district office~to determine if regional conditions have been imposed on ~ N~VP. Prospective should also contact the appropriate Corps district office m determine the slaws of Glean Water Act Section 401 water quality cetification and/or Coastal Zone Management Act cenwatcecy for as NWP. 1 Navigation. (a) No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. (b) Any safety lights and signals prescrrbexi by the U.S. Coast Guard, through regu]ations or otherwise, must be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in navigable waters of the United States. (c) The pernrittee understands and agrees that, if fuhrre operations by the United States require the removal, relootion, or other alteration, of the stnnctvre or work herein authorized, or ii; in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said strucdue or work shall cause umasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relors<te, or alter the strucha-dl work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or aheration. 2 Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of thou species of aquatic life indigenous to the vvaterbody, inchrding those species that normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's PAY Purpose is to impound water. Culverts placed in strains must be installed to maintain low flow conditions. 3 Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning arses during spawning seasons mast be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical deslructiam (eg., through excavation, fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity) of en important spawning area are not autha~rized. 4 Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding eras for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 5 Shell, fLsh Beds. No activity may oxur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, uale~ the activity is dircetly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48. 6 Suitable Material No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, ebc.). Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic polhrtams in toxic amounts (see Section 307 of the Clan Water Act). 7 mater Supply Intakes. No activity may ocxtrr in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structure or adjacent bank stabilization. 8 Adverse Effects From Impoundments If tine activity crates an impoundmcant of water, adverse effects to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be mm~ized to the maximum extent practioble. 9 Management of ll'ater Flows To the maxirmnn extent ptacfiioble, the pre-construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including strain channelization and storm watez management activities, except as provided below: The activity must be const<ucbed to vvithst~d expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of normal or high flows, unless; the primary purpose of the activity is to impotmd water or manage high flows. The activity may altea the pre-construction course, condition, opacity, and location of open waters if it benefits the aquatic environment (e.g., stream restoration or relootion activities). I 0 Fills Withisi 100-Yam- FZoodplains. The activity roust ~PIY with applicable FBMA-approved state or local flo~plain management requirements. 11 Equipment Heavy egtripment working in wetlands or mudflata must be placed on mats, or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. l2 Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate sor7 erosion acct sediment conrtrols must be used sad maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water ark or high tide line, >mist be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low flow or no-flow. 13 Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in them entirety and the affected areas retained to pre- constrvction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate. 14 Proper Mainten¢nce. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 15 mild and Scenic Rivers No activity may occur in a componeffi of the National Wild end Sonic River System, or in a river officially designates by Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct management responsibility for such river, has detemrinexl in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. hmfommation on Wild and Scenic Rivers maybe obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency in the area {e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service}. 16 Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing sad hunting rights. 17 Esdangered Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is lilcel'y to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such de~gnation, as ideiified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which "immay affect" a listed species or critical habitat, unle,~ Section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. (b) Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the ESA. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c) Nan federal pemrittees shall notify the district engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is looted in designated critical habitat, sari shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the regiiirernents of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that might affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat, the pre-construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened species: that may be affected by the proposed work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. The district engineer will determiune whether the proposed activity "r>may affect" or will have "no effect" to listed species and designated critical habitat and will notify the son Federal applicant of the Corps' deteYmmmination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-conslriiction notification. In cases where the non-Federal applic~t has identified lifted species or e~itucal habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, and has so notified the Corps, the applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification the proposed activities wiII have "no effect" on listed species or criticxil habitat, or until Section 7 consultation has been completed. (d) As a result of forni$t or informal consultation with the FWS or NIviFS the district engineer may. add species-specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWPs. (e) Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take" of a threatened or endangered species as defined wader the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (eg., as ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the U.S. FWS or the NIVlFS, beth let3mal acid uon-lethal "takes" of protects species are in violation of the ESA. Information oa the locsition of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices of the U.S. FWS and NMFS or their world wide Web pages at hap:/fwww.fwsgovl and http://www.noaagov/fislierdes.himd respectively. 18 Historic Properties (a) th cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may affect properties listed, or eligble for listing, in the National Register of Historic Phuxs, the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section l Ob of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied. (b} Federal pemuttee$ should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Federal must provide the district engineer with the appropriate doaimeatation bo demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c) Non-federal peimittees must submit apre-construction notification to the d~ustrict engineer if the authorized activity may have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed, determined to be eligible for listing'on, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including previously uaide~ified properties. For such activities, thepre-c~nslruction notification must state which historic properties maybe affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic puropertiea Assistance regarding information on the location of or potential for the presence of historic resources can be sought from die State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(8}). The district engineer shall make a reasonable ~d good faith effort to carry out appropriate idei>rifir~tion efforts, which may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the information submitted and these efforts, the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed activity has the potential to cause an effect on the historic properties. Where the non Federal applic~at has identified historic properties which the activity may have the potential to cause effect and so notified the Corps, the non-Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer either that the activity has no potential to cause effects or that consultation under Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed. (d) 'lbe district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification whether NHPA Section 105 consultation is required. Section I05 consultation is not required when the Corps determines that the activity does not have the potential to cause efferxs on historic properties (see 35 CFR 8003(a)). If NHPA section 106 consultation is required and w171 occur, the district engineer will notify the non Federal applicant that be or she cannot begin work until Section 106 consultation is completed. (e) Prospective pemrittees should be aware that action 110k of the NAPA (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(k)) preve~ the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of Section 105 of the NHPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the pemrit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, a8er consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Fresearvation (ACHP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circ~unstances justify granting the assistance, the Corps is required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, explaining the degree of damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This doc~nmentetion must include aay views obtained from the applicant, SFIPOP!'HPO, appropriate Indian tubes if the undertaking ocaus on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those tubes, and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on historic properties. 19 Designated Critical Resource Waters Critical resource waters include, NOAA-designated marine sanctuaries, National Bstuarine Research Reserves, state nairual heritage sites, and outstanding nationak resource waters or other waters officially designated by a state as having particular environmemal or ecological significance and identified by the district engineer after notice and op~rdinity for public comment. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opporhinity for comment. {a) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs 7,12,14,16,17, 21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 49, and 50 for any activity within, or directly affecting, crilica<1 resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. (b) For NWPs 3, 8,10, 13,15,18,19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, and 38, notification is required in accordance with general condition 27, for an}+ activity proposed in the designated critieal resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the cxitical resource waters writ be no more than minimal. 20 Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary m ensure that adverse effects on the aquatic enviro~ent are minimal: (a} The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and permanent, to waters of tare United Std to the maximum extent practiable at the project site (i.e, oa site). (b) Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or wag) will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the adver~ effects to the aquatic enviromneat are minimal. (c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetla~ losses that exceed 110 acre and requirepre-construction notifiation, unless the district engineer determnes in writing that some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate and provides a project specific waiver of this r~uiremeat For wetland losses of 110 acre or less that require pre-construction notification, the district engineer may determine oa a Eby-cam basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic enviroffirent. Since the 111ce1fi-ood of sucxess is greater and the impacts to potentially valuable uplands are reduced, wetland restoration should be the first compensatory mitigation option considea~ed. (d) For losses of strama or other open waters Matrequirepre-construction notification, the district engineer may require compensatory mitigation, such as stream restoration, to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. (e) Compensatory mitigation will not be u~d to incr~ase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage limits of the NWPs. For example, if an NWP has as acreage limit of z acre, it cannot be used to authorize any project resulting in the loss of greater than'zacre ofwaters of the United States, even if cowry mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However, compensatory mitigation can and should be used, as nay, to ensure that a project already meeting the established acreage limits also satisfies the adnimal impact requirement associated with the NWPs. (f) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or near streams or other open waters will normally include a requirement for the establishment, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g, conservation aseno~eats) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, riparian areas may he the only compensatory mitigation required. Riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the required riparian area will addre~ documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally, the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may require slightly wider riparian areas to address doannented water quality or habitat loss concerns. Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the district engineer will determine the appropriate cximpeasatory aritigation (eg., riparian eras and/or wetlands .compensation) based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In where riparian areas are determined to be the most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the requirercent to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses. (g) Permitxees may propose the use of mitigation beaks, in-lieal fee arrangemerrts or separate activit}~specific compensatory mitigation. In all cases, the mitigation provisions wi11 specify the party responsible far accomplishing and/or complying with the mitigation plan. (h) Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely affected, sash as the conversion of a forested or scrub-shrub wetland to a herbacceus wetland is a permanently maintained utr7rt' y line right-of-way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse effects of the project to the minimal level. 21 Water Quat`isy. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously certified compliance of as NWP with f.;WA Section 401, individua1401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tifbe nosy require additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in more than minimal degradation of water quality. 22 Coastal Zone Mmagemenl. In coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal zone managemem consistency concurrence, an individual state coastal zone management consistency arncurrence must be obtained, or a presumption of conern-reace must occur (see 33 C)?R 330.4(d)). The district engineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity is consistent with state coastal zone management requirements. 23 ,Regional crud Case-B,~Crrse Conditions. The activity must fly with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the stage, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone 1Vlaaagement Act consistency determination. 24 Use of Multiple Nationwide Permi&s. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the Irighest specified acreage limit. }?ar example, if a road crossing over tidal vvabers is constructed under NWP 14, with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acrage Ions of waters of the United States for the total project corrupt exceed 13-acre. 25 Transfer of Nationwide Permit Yerffications If the permittee ~Ils the propesiy associated with a nationwide permit verification, the permittee may transfer the natiomvide permit verification to the new owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A cePY of the natiomvide permit verification must be attached to the letter, sad the letter must contain the following statement sad signature: "When the strucdrres or work authorized by this natiomvide pemrit are s[fil in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this nationwide pern>it, including arty special conditions, vct71 comsaue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this nationoide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the traasferee sign sad date below." (Transferee) (Date} 26 Compliance Certiflcatiora Each perrnittee who received as NWP verification from the Corps must submit a signed certification regarding the Meted work and say required mitigation. The cerlificatioa form must be forwarded by the Corps with the NWP verification letter and will include: (a) A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with the NWP authorization, including any general or specific conditions; (b) A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the gemrit conditions; sad (c) The signature of the pen>rittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation. 27 Pre-Constrruxion Noti,~ication. (a) Tinting. Where required by the temps of the NWP, the prospcekive permittee must notify the district engineer by suba~ing a pre-construction notification (PCN) as early as possrble. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt sad, as a general rule, will request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the prospective does not provide all of the requested information, thea•the district engineer will notify the prospective that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process wr71 not c~arnnence uatr~ all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The prospective pexnoittee shall not begin the activity. {1) Urrtr7 notified in writing by the district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with say special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer, or (2) If 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the complete PCN sad the prospective pertmttee has not received written notice from the district or division engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pia~suant to general condition 1? that listed species or critical habitat might be affected or in the vicinity of the project, or to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that the activity may have the potential to cause effects m historic properties, the permattee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that is "ao effect" on listed species or "ao potential to caarse effects" oa historic properties, or that any consultation required under Section 7 of tine Endangered Species Act {see 33 CFR 330.4{ fl) ~d/or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation (see 33 CFR 330.4(8)) is completed. Also, work c~not begin under NWPs 21, 49, or 50 u~ the permittee has received written approval from the Corps. if the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of ~ NWP, the permittee cannot begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. If the district or division engineer notifies the permitbee ~ writing that as individual pemut-is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until as individual permit has been obtained. Subsequently, the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP maybe nmdified, suspended, or revoked only is axordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 3305(d){2). tb} Contents ofPre-Condon Not~icatian: 'the PCN must be in writing and include the following information: (1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the proposed project; (3) A description of the proposed Project; the project's Purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) use or intended to be used m authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. The description should be sufficie~ly detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse effects of the project wi11 be minimal and to determine the seed for compensatory mitigation. Sketches should be provided when nec+to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the project and when provided result in a quicker decision.); {4} The PCN must include a delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the Uffited States on the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. The permittee may. ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States, but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is large or contains many waters of the United States. Furthermore, the 45 day period will not start unto the delineation has been submitted to or carnpleted by the Corps, where appropriate; {r} If the proposed activity wi71 result in the loss of greater than ' io acre of wetlands and a PCN is required, the prospective penmittee must submit a statement descnbing how the mitigation requirement vnv be satisfied. As as alternative, the Prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed nritigation plan. (6) If any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is looted in designated eritic~l habitat, for nonFederal applicants the PCN must inchide the name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the prop<sed work or utilize the designated critical habitat that maybe affected by the proposed work. Federal applicsints must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; and • (7) For as activity that may affect a historic property listed on, detemoin~ to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Places, for non Federal applicants the PCN must state which historic property nnay lie affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity rung indicatting the location of the historic property. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating cxnnpliaace with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. (c) Form of:Pre-Construc7ion Noti,~icatton: The standard 'individual pemrit application form (Form ENG 4345) ~y be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must include all of the information required in paragraphs (bpi) through ('7) of this general condition. A letter cxnitaining the regtmal information may also be used. (d) Agency Coordination: {1) The district engineer will consider any meats from Federal and state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terri>s and conditions of the NWFs and the need for mitigation to r~uce the project's adverse environmental effects to aminimal level (2) For all NWP.48 activities requiringpre-construction notification and for other NWP activities requiringpre- construcMionnotification to the district eagine~ that result in the loss of greater than' x-acre of waters of the United States, the district engineer will urimediately provide (eg., via thcsinmle transmission, overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a cePY of the PCN to the appropriate Federal or state offices (U.S. FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tnbal Historic Preservation Office (TFlPO~ and, if appropriate, the NMFS). With the exception of NWP 37, these agencies will then have 10 calendar days from the date the material is traosmiri~ed to telephone or fax the district engineer notice that they i~d m provide siingtaative, site-specific comments If so contacted by an agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days before ~g a decision on thepre-construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but wi71 provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The district engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre-construction notification that die resource agencies' concerns were considered. For NWP 37, tare emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation activity may procced im<nealiately in c~sea where there is as unacceptable hazard to life or a signific~at loss of property or economic hardship wi71 occur. The district engineer will consider nay comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (3} Jn cases of where the prospective perniittee is not a Federal agency, the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of any E~ential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by Section 305(bx4)(B) of the MagnusanStcvens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (4) Applies are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of pre-constivcdon notifications to expedite agency coordinatia~n. (S~ For NWP 48 activities that require relrorting, the district engineer will provide a copy of each report within 10 calendar days of receipt to the appropriate regional office of the NMFS. (e) District Engineer's Decision: In reviewing the PCN far fire promised activity, the district engineer wi71 determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result m more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest ffthe proposed activity requires a PCN and wi71 result in a loss of greater than i 10 acre of wetlands, the prospective permittce should submit a mitigation propo~l with the PCN. Applicants may also propose compensatory mitigation for projects with smaller impacts. The district engineer wi71 consider anY ProPo~ ~~~Y mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects to the aquatic envirornneat of the proposed work are minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal maybe either conceptual or detailed. If the district engineer determines that the activity connpties with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are murimal, after considering mitigation, the district engineer will notify the pernmittee and include any conditions the district engineer deems ne~ary. The district engineer must approve any compensatory mitigation proposal before the permittee commences work. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plea with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposal compen~tory mitigation plan. The district engineer must review the plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and detormiae whether the proposed mitigation.would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. If the net adverse effects of the project on the aquatic environment {after consideration of the compensatory nooitigation pro~sal) are determined by the district engineer to be mrrininmal, the district engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant The response will state that the project cart proceed under the terms and conditions of the NWP. If the district engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than miniunal, then the district engineer will notify the applic~at either. (1) That the project does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procxdures to seek authorization under an individual permits (2) that the project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level; or (3) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions. Where the district engineer determines That mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse effects occur to the aquatic environment, the activity will be authorizes within the 45-day PCN period. The authorization will include the necessary conceptual or specific mitigation or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plea that would reduce the adverse effects on the_aquatic eaviro~ent to the minimal level. When mitigation is required, no work in waters of the United Stales may occur omit the district engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan. 28 Single and Complete Project. The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP c~not be used more than once for the same single and complete project. Regional Additions to General Conditions General Condition 4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas.. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary Federal agency responsible for the censervation and management of migratory bird resources. Applicants should contact Mr. Rick Donaldson at 509-893- 8009, email riclLdonaldson.gov for additional information. General Condition 9. Management of Wa~~ows. Expected high flows referenced is this general condition are defined at the minimum as a 25 year flood event, as identified by the Idaho Department of Water Resourcx's {IDAPA 37.03.07, Rule 62.03.04.a). For culverts or bridges looted in a conmmnority qualifying for the national flood insraance program, the mininmim size culvert shall a<xommodate the 100-year flood design flow frequency (IDAPA 37.03.07, Rule 62.03.04.c). General Condition 12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Planting of vegetation is the preferred means to provide soil erosion control. Disturbed areas should be replamed with native vegetation and stabilized omit v~etative root mss cam beonme established, when practicable. Tlris is to Sze erosion and isesultant t delivery to the aquatic envy. Disttnbance to wetland and riparian vegetation should be avoided, where possible. Non-biodegradable iz~eaials, such as plastic netting, tlmat may eubap wildlife or pose a safety conaan should not be used for ~ ~abilization. General Condition 13. Temporarv Fills. Temporary fills must be emirely removed from waters of the United State.a when they are no longer needal for the project Temporary stockpiles may not be placid in a meaner such that it restricts overbook flow access of flows to the floodplain. General Condition 17. Endangered Species. Non-federal applicamB must contact either t3meir local Idaho Depaimment of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if any listed species or designated cdibic~l habitat might be in the vicinity of their project. To contact U.S. Fish a~ Wildlife Service in Bonner, Boundary, Kootenai, Shoshone, Benewah and Latxrh Counties, contact Mr. Rick Donaldson at 509-893-8009, a-aril rick donaldsonti~fws.g_ov. To contact U.S. Fish ffid Wildlife Service for other counties in Idaho, contact Ms. Carol Wanstmm at 208-378-538$, oz by e-mail carol wanstro~ ws.gov. Applic~aats sha11 notify the District Engineer of their fording. General Coz},dition l8. Historic Pro,~es. Applicants must contact the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office at 208-334- 3847 to determine if their project may affect historic properties listed in the National Register of Historic Placce and notify the District Engineer of their Eroding. General Condition 20. Mrtigation. Project mitigation plans shall include a list of perfornmance criteria (i.e., a species list, acreage of each habitat type m be created, source of hydrology, mitigation concurrent with project constemiction, plea to control invasive species, monitoring provisions, etc.) Mitigation plans shall also meet the requirements in Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 02- 02 emitted Guidance on Cody Mitigg~h'on Protects frn~A,gnatic Rerource wets Under the Corns Regulatory Proeram Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and RGL 06-03 emitted ~nuimum Monitoring Requirements for Co~pensato~y Mitigation Protects Involving the Creation. Restoration. and/or Emhancement of Aquatic Resources. Mitigation success will generally be achieved when the mitigation wetlands comply with the performance criteria and meet the wetland criteria in the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. Farther Information law. District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of as NWP. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or authorizations required by NWPs do not grant ffiy property rights or exclusive privileges. NWPs do not authorize any injury m the property or rights of others. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal projeu~. Defmuitions Best management practices (BMPs}: Policies, practices, procedlues, or structures implemented to mitigate the adverse environmental effects on surface water quality resulting from development. BMPs are categorized as structural or non- struotuu~al. Compensatory mitigation: The restoration, establishment (creation), enhancement, or preservation of aquatic resources for the purpose of com~nsating for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain a8er all appropriate and practicable avoidance and mintion has been achieved Currently serviceable: Useable as is or with some maintenance, but not so degraded as to essentially require rec:on~uction. Discharge: The term "discharge" mesas any discharge of dredged or fill material and any activity that causes or results in such a discharge. Enhancement: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biologiu~l characteristit~ of as aquatic resource to heighten, intensify, or improve a specific aquatic resource function(s). Enhancement trsults in the gain of selected aquatic resowrce function(s), but may also Iced to a decline in other aquatic resource fraction(s). Bnhancement does net result in a gain in aquatic resource area Ephemeral scream: An ephemeral stream has flowing water only during, and for a short duration at3er, precipitation events is a typical year. Ephemeral stream beds are looted above Una water table year-mend Groundwater is not a source of water for the stream. Runoff from rainfall is the primary source of water for stream flow. Establishment (creation): The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological rhacacteristius presem to develop an aquatic resouroe that did not previously exist at as upland site. Establishment results in a gain in aquatic resource area Historic Property: Any prehistoric ar historic district, site (including archaeologiusil site), budding, structine, or other object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties. The term includes properties of traditional religious and cultural im~rtance to an Indian _trbe or Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register criteria (36 CFR part 60}. Independent utility: A test to determine what constitutes a single and complete project in the Corps regulatory program. A project is considered to have independent utility if it would be constructed absent the cans(ruction of other projects in the project area. Portions of a multi phase project that depend upon otheS pha~ of the project do not have independent unity. Phases of a project that would be camslructed even if the other phases were not buclt can be considered as separate single and complete projects with independent utility. Intermrittent scream: An intermittent stream has flowing water during certain times of the year, why groundwater provides water for stream flow. During dry periods, intermittent streams may not have flowing water. Runoff from rainfall is a supplemental source of water for stream flow. Loss of w~ers of tlae United States: Wags of the United States tbet are penmane~3y adversely affected by Slling, flooding, excavation, or drainage because of the regulated activity. Puu~aent adverse effects include punn~ent discharges of dredged or f ll mbaterial that change as aquatic area to dry lead, increase the bottom elevation of a waterbody, or change the use of a waterbody. The acreage of loss of waters of the United States is a threshold cement of the impact to jurisdictional waters for determining whether a project may qualify for an NWP; it is not a net threshold that is calculated aver considering compensatory mitigation that may be used to off~t lossu~ of aquatic functions nand services. The loss of strum bed includes the linear feet of stream bed that is filled or excavated. Waters of the United States bemg~oratily filled, flooded, excavated, or drained, but restored to pre-construction contours and elevations a&er construction, are not includedm the measuaennent of loss of waters of the Unites States. Impacts resulting from activities eligible for exemiptioas under Suxlion 404(fl of the Clean Water Act are not considered when cs~lculating the loss of waters of the United States. Non-tidal wetland: A non Tidal wetland is a wetland that is not subject m the ebb and flow of tidal webers. The definition of a wetland c;an be found at 33 CFR 328.3(b). Non tidal wetlands contiguous to tidal waters are located landward of the high tide line (i.e., spring high tide line). Open water.• For purposes of the NWPs, an open water is any area that in a year with normal patterns of precipitation has water flowing or standing above ground to the extent that an ordinary high water mark can be determined Aquatic vegetation within the area of standing or flowing wafer is eithernon-emergent, sparse, or absent Vegetated shallows are considered to be open waters. Examples of "open waters" include rivers, streams, lakes, sad ponds. Ordinary High later Mark• An ordinary high water mark is a line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics, or by other appropriate menace that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas (see 33 t;FR 3283(e}}. Perennial stream: A perennial stteaan has flowing water y~-round during a typical year. The water table is looted above the stream bed for most of the year. t,3zoundwater is the prunary source of water for stream flow. Runoff from rainfall is a supplemental source of water for stream flow Practicable: Available and capable of being done a~ taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes. Pre-construction notification: A request submitted by the prsnject propoae~ to the Corps for confirmation that a particular activity is authorized by nationwide puxxndt The request may be a peraut applic~tioq letter, or sinm7ar document that includes information about the proposed work and its anticipated environmental effects. Pre-construction natific~tion uray be required by the terms and conditions of a nationwide permit, u>r by regional conditions. Apre-construiction notific~tian may be voluntarily submitted. in cases where pre-cons4ruction notification is not required acct the project proponent warts confirmation that the activity is authorized by nationwide permit Preservation: The removal of a threat to, or preverrtiag the decline o~ aquatic resourcca by an action in or near those aquatic resourcca. This term includes activities commonly associated with the protection and maintenance of aquatic resoiaces through the implementation of appropriate legal and physical mechanisms. Prcaervation does not result in a gain of aquatic resource area or functions. Re-establishmera~ The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning naturaVhistoricfunctions to aformer aquatic resource. Re-establishment results in rebuilding a former aquatic resource and results in a gain in aquatic resource area. Rehabilitation: The manipulatiava of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing naiwal/historic functions to a degraded aquatic resource. Rehabilitation results in a gain in aquatic resource finctioa, but does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area. Restoration: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning naturallhistoric functions to a former or degraded aquatic resource. For the purpose of tracking net gains in aquatic resourn area, restoration is divided irto two categories: Re-establishment and rehabilitation. R~`le and pool complex: Riffle and pool complexes are special aquatic sites under the 404(b}(1) C~idelina. Riffle and pool complexes sometimes characterize steep gradient sections of streams. Such stream sections are recognizable by their hydraulic characteristics. The rapid movement of water over a course substrate in riles results in a rough flow, a turbulent surrface, and high dissolved oxygen levels in the water. Pools are deeper areas associated with riffles. A slower stream velocity, a streaming flow, a smooth surface, and a finer substrate characterize pools. Riparian areas: Riparian azcas are leads adjacent to streams, lakes, and estuarine-marine shorelines. Riparian areas are transitional between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, through which surface and subsurface hydrology connects waterbodies with their adjacent uplands. Riparian areas provide a variety of ecological functions a~ services and help improve or maintain local water quality. (See general condition 20.) Shel~sh seeding.• The placement of shell5sh seed aacUor suitable substrate to increase shellfish prouluckion. Shellfish seed coas~ists of irranature individual shellfish or iadivxiual shellfish attached to shells or shell fragments {i.e., spat an shell). Suitable substrate may consist of shellfish shells, shell fragments, or other appropriate materials placed into waters for shellfish habitat Single and complete project: The term "single and complete project" is defined at 33 CFR 330.2(i} as the total project proposed or accomplished by one owner/developea or partnership or other asrociation of owners/developers. Asingle and complete project must have independent utility (see definition). For linear projects, a "single amt complete project" is all crossings of a single water of the United States {i.e., a single waterbody) at a specific location. For linear projects crossing a single waterbody several times at separate and distant locations, each crosaiag is considered a single and complete project However, individual channels in a braided stream or river, or individual arms of a large, irregularly shaped wetland or lake, etc., are not separate waterbodies, and cro~ings of such feat<uca carmot be considered separately. Stormwater management.• Stormwater management ie the novchaaistn for controlling stormvvater runoff for the purposes of reducing downskreann erosion, water quality degradation, and flooding and mitigating-the adverce effects of changes in lead use on the aquatic environment Stormrvater.management facilities: St~ormwater management facilities are those facilities, including but not limited ta, stormwater retention and detention ponds and best management practices, which retain water for a period of time to control runoffand/or i~mparove the quality (i.e., by reducing the concentration of nu>zients, sediments, he~dous substances and other pollutants) of stormwater runoff Stream bed.• The substrate of the dream channel between the ordinary high water marks. The substrate may be bedrock or inorganic particles that range in size from clay to boulders. Wetlands contiguous to the stream bed, but outside o€the ordinary high water marks, are not considered part of the dream bed. Stream channelization: The manipulation of a stream's course, condition, capacity, or locsrtion t3rat causes more than minimal interruption of normal stteaan processes. A channelized dream remains a water of the United States. Structure: An object that is aaraaged in a definite pattern of organization. Examples of strachrres inchuie, without limitation, any pier, boat dock, boat ramp, wharf, dolphin, weir, boom, breakwater, bulkhead, revetment, riprap, jetty, artificial island, artificial reel j permaneffi mooring structure, power h~ansmission line, permanently moored floating vessel, pr7ing, aid to navigation, or any other manmade obstacle or obstruction. Tgd¢t wetland A tidal wetland is a wetland (i.e., water of the United States} that is ffiuadated by tidal waters. The definitions of a wetland and tidal waters can be found at 33 CFR 328.3(6) and 33 CFR 328.3(f j, respcetively. Tidal waters rise and fall im a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a predictable rhythm due to masking by other waters, wind, or other effects. Tidal wetlands are located channelward of the high tide line, which is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(d). Yegerated shaddows: Vegetated shallows are special aquatic sites under the 404(6x1) Guidelines. They are areas that are permanently inundated sad under normal circumstancxs have rooted aquatic vegetation, such as ~ in marine and estuarine systems and a variety of vascular rooted plants in freshwater systems. Yl'urerbody: For purposes of the NWPs, a waterbody is a jurisdictional water of the United States that, dmirig a year with normal patterns of precipitation, has water flowing or standing above ground to the extent that an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) or other indicators of jurisdiction can be deterimined, as well as any wetland area (see 33 CFR 328.3(6)). If a jurisdictional wetland is adjacent meaning bordering, contiguous, or neighboring- to a jurisdictional waterbody displaying an OI3WM or other indicators of jurisdiction, that waterbody and its adjacxnt wetlands are considered together as a single aquatic unit (see 33 CFR 328.4(cx2)). Examples of "waterbodies" include streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. D]EFIlVTTIONS (Regional Additions) 1. F wetlands: Wetlands characterized by woody vegetation that is 6 meters tall or taller. They are looted where moisbue is relatively abundant, particularly along rivers and is the mountains and nomrally pow as overstory of trees and an understory of young trees or shrubs and an herbaceous layer. Reference: Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater habitats of the United States, Mr. Lewis M. Cowardin, Office of Biological Service, Fish sari Wrldlife Service, 1979. 2. ~-Iiah value wetlands: Forested wetl~ds, peatlands, vernal pools, playa lakes, kettles, prairie potholes, and Class I, Class Il, reference, sad habitat sites identified in Wetiaad Conservation Strategies prepared by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center. 3. I~rvasive species: Species of pleats not native to the ecosystem under consideration sad whose in>roducfJion causes or is likely to cause economic or enviromneatal harm or harm to human health. (Executive Order 13112) (from USDA National Invasive Species Information Cent). 4. Kettle: A steep sided, usually basin or bowl shaped hole or depression, commonly without surface drainage, in glacial drift deposits, often conning a lake or swamp. Reference: Banes, Robert L. and Jackson, Julia A., Glossary of Geology, American Geological Institute, Falls Church, 1980. 5. Native species: Species that occurs naturally in a particular.region, state, ecosystem, sad habitat without direct or indirect human actions, Federal Native Plant Conservation Committee,1994. 6. Pearl d: Wetlands with waterlogg~ substrates and at least 30 cm of peat accumulation. Bursik, R J., ~d R K. Moseley. 1995. Ecosystem conservation strategy for Idaho Panhandle peatiaads. Cooperative project between Idaho Panhandle National Foiests and Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise. 28 pp. plus appendix. 7. Veinal per: Precipitaliion-filled seasonal wetlands inundated during periods when 4emperattu~e is sufficient for pleat growth, followed by a brief waterlogged-terres>zial stage and culminating in extreme dai«ating soil conditions of extended duration. Keeley, J. E. and P. H. zedler. pCharacterization and Global Distribution. of Veinal Pools. Pages 1-14 in: C.W. Witham, E.T. Bauder, D. Belk, W.R Ferrer Jr., and R Oraduff (Editors). Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Veinal Pool Ecosystems -Proceedings from a 1996 Conference. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. 1998. EXHIBIT C ~~ _~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ .~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ _, ~ ~~ .~' _ Sri :+~'• ' '1 ~ .:,,~'. ;i 7~. ~:i ~.-~ ~ ~_ ~ ~~ ,~ Exhibit D-7, page 7 ~~ ~Q ~~ _~~ ~r ~~~ ~~ ~~~ -~ , ~~Q ~~~ ~ ~h ;S. W N ~~~ ~ ~~ :~ ~~ a ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~a ~ ~- ~~ ~~~ y~1~ ~~e a ~~r ~XcO~/F~~~A~~11y9~Af~d.I~A~N/7~ ~g~~ ,.~,,. sros .r o t~s sr~rsoN ~ I ILL //I1W bAH~Y7~ ICf.IIVNUU/IY „ IrYYYaK1 rW!{dI Os •~•~•~J p e._._r~. _ .._ a _ ~ AlAGOIIVIY V, ® ~... U3DA - NATiTRAL RESOU4 CARR~ATIODT SSBYIt~ °"' p~AN VI~W° ~ii'p~I 0055 S~C~i0N5 ~ ~X15~1NG CONnI~10N -~ o ,~ ~~ fix, ~~ ~C, 7.r3N.~I~ ~'8+ (~ Exhibit D-1, page 2 PI.AA1 V~tIV1MtFi CROP, ~Gfl~ - Ef~t'@~IG ~ ~ c~cr~sra -rnrdu~nt~ Af7A GOI~ftY ~ r DMA - NARORAU ~i1~ CON888VATlON ~~ m ,m+ or pI.AN VIEW ~ p~~'05~~ ~ IVY MII.~ G~~K ~"e+°° !~'_ ' ~. ^ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ `'" ~ ~~ L '.. ~~! ~ ~ • ' ~ . ~~ r ~y -.~~,. `,~,. . ~~ • ~. ~IZAf~I,IN R0~7 .. ~~ ~: p: • ° - -~ r~ Exhibit D-1, page 3 P~MI V~Y4I~ P~POSW C~ ABLE C.~K a.,,b ~ .~ o ~ ~ ~r usD~ A~~ 1~'ARt)BAx. x~uec~ mus~ee a~uon•P ~ °iVi1 -- o ~~ ~~ ~~,s~~~c.~,r~N,~i~ pI.AN VIEW 0~ p~~QS~n ~IV~ MI4.~ G~~K W~'N CU1"5 ANn ~1f.1.5 o ~:~-., ~~~~ 5~.4, 5EY SSG, ~. r 3 N. ~ I ~ '.~8+ 00 Exhibit D-1, page 4 PI.Nd VFW OF PROPOSP~7 FAIL !~ CSC WIM Q1(5A1~/ Fil.S .rw., Ras .P o~ ~~soN ~ Fhb !~ LAC (~51Q~AttOAi - TAMIRA 141 a.. ass q~ ~ r,am,~ AClA GOINtY ~ 1d~AA1, p ~.• USDA - NATDBAL IiB.90UBCS8 CDNSEltYAR40N Sg~PiCE °i`° ~v~~~` 5 N N N N N N CA of m O O ~ N O) ~ W O O i t 0 0 N W ° O ~ _ .p t p O ~ ~ m ~ ~ a ° ° ~ o 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 ° Exhibit D-9, page 5 FIVE MD.~ C.~~lC ~.,-~.~ o. ~ ~ FlV~ ARll E Q~K I~5f0a'A9'~) - fAi~A 1 d•., ~ n~.rs o~ . b ~ d ~• q~~~p ~~ /~~~•1~p~f~ hiMO ~ NiYY6Y wl~~l{~IY IVlf Oldr ~o~ cots ~r~Ls ~ J' ~.+~ M ~\'.•WVMI ~: :4 ;1~~ ~~ ~~ H w_ ~•~ ~•• ~ { Y 12" Cap baq Ilse wood stakes ~ ~ _~,~ Vec~ aN ca,~ and fill sw-faces as shdwm ir1 the ve,ttorl plan 1 ~2,~ ~~ r ~I ~~ ~~AUUIn1UG N0~' 1'0 5C/~.~ Exhibit D-1, page 6 GtJ~ iAG DCTf1~,5 0„~ . pus ,p . Feu Fi1~ l~ ~.1~{'ORA710N - TAfdd~At~il s- ~.~ 9 s~e~ ~ AI?AC4lldtY~t7 ~AAt. ~ ti.., U9DA -- NATURAL R CO~YATION ~RYYCS °i°'~ N O O m 4 O N O t b .A O O W O O O .-s O 0 -~i N a rp o J A 0 J d '+' J "'' 0 N N O t A Q N O .a O 0 2 m o~ C N `" Exhibit D-1, page 7 ~ ~-~ q. m FNS A~ C.f~K R~SfORATIOiV ~ fA,~P~! ,.., ~,~rs ~ Ai7AGOll{V11~ SWQ7 +I, Q7 USmA - NATQBAI. BB~OIIRC$8 t~P6Ti0Id B.F~FiCS °~V E[.EVAT~tS O .~+. ~ Oi~f ~ ~ ~ 6~f LU O ~ N 41 ~ rp ~..~ranotus J O ~ ~ ~ N N N N 4 O O _+. ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ {O{. "'J O 4D O -+ N W ~ t7 CTI t7 O O Q f N O O 41 O A a Cy O o ~ o o d ~ ~ ° N ° s o = o 0 O 0 0 N O O _ _ E x h 3. b i t D -1 , page 8 G~55 ~G11tJiV #Z C Oa-ZZ} „~,., rya x e ~ DIVE A~IL~ G~K ~SffNtA110~1-1pVt~A~ALN ~-~' A v~ - ~~vs~, agsavac~ c~rts~v~x sty ®"~ tl C t C NC O ~+a, O O A Q V O .~ 0 Exhibit D-1, page 9 ,.,,,.,_a+~ .r n Q1 ip H Sx d 3 ~k W A a V .T. rn ;~ fns ~a.~ c ~x~ar~ - r+~ra-r ~ y s ~" At?A GOI.~trY ~t7 N~71AN, B7 USDA - NATUBAi. CiIATSEBYA1T010' 3~R~1{:E °i" ~EVArro~-s Q V C -~ N 4f a e i°. '~ ELEVATIONS N N N A~ ~ N N p~ N N w ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O W ~ a f « .a . a p ~ V G~ to Q -- N GJ .p Cft ~ V OD } p O O f O O N O W O O m C7 O 7 ~- a a .~ + ~ -- + ~ N o o W 0 m 0 t ao 0 a 0 n 0 J 0 ° E xh ib i t D-1 , page 1 0 ~ n~.~ c ~sr~-~ ~ Taman r~ ~„~ e,,, ~ AI9A G~f1Y ~ per, p~ _ e.. +0' via - ~. cca~ex~ox ~ °r" . st.ICYA I ItJ1Y, i O } pN 'A N ~ N ~ N V ~ N O~ Rt N Wp CO N CA O N (3f .~ N ~ ..a N N W v 41 N W a A N CA ~ (31 N b! .a ~ N QD v ~t N Of ... CD N ~ .~ ~ N ~ O N OD a d O O J 0 N O d O O O O y W D c 0 V O 0 0 N 0 a !i O 0 m 0 a 0 ~xna.rozc v-i , Page 7 7 ~I~ I~C5t0~'A'fi~f ~ fAMIRA ~AGN 4 n to A A ~: A 1N T w ~. m n a~ 0 a~ ~~7( ma~yy,~ ~~yyRR~~ r L~.GY~~L//yV ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q Q Q Q~~ Q Q Q O> Q W Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ~ ~ ~. J J ~ j ~ .~ ...f ~ ° t7'1 V OD CU Q -- N W .A. V1 Q V aD CO O ~ O a 0 0 a 0 0 0 o Q y H o ~ o ~ ...> d t~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ z t A ° N V rr~ d m ° o ~ i ~ ° a 0 r o. N O i ° E xh ib it D - 1 , page ~ 2 CROSS Sc~'ftUA1 #6 C3+~7J ,~,. ~., q ~ ~ ~n~ r~ cox; ~s~r~Ont - r~aa ~ ~.~ ~- ~ AGA COld~l?Y y ~••' am. Q7 v } ®.ENAi10N8 N N N oN N N N N N N N N N N N N S- ~ ~ S m ~ as ~ w a ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~p o o a ea 1 e7 j. N O O W O OD O O ~ O 7 y f~0 . ... e S m o c iw m 0 0 t~ 0 J e7 i '~' S .- J '~' N Exhibit D-1, page 13 ~ ~ ~ ~nr~ naa.~ ~sr~noiv - ra-r~ ~ ~. y Y Ai7A ~l.~'11' G ~ ~ ~•• p • ~ ~}~ p~~p~~ ry~p~g•~a pp~~~~ V 1vIA ~ •Y1f ~/3f~Y/ ~~ yy~~~im16lYNV1~ pIpL~71~rb Oldlr t N O }O ~ C Q O f O O N O O W O }O .A O O CJ9 ~p O ~! O O ,f ^J O O Op O O O Q O M fd A ~_ O yip W W d .i t ~..~ O C.~D5S S~LTFDi~ #8 C 5+78) ~.. 4~5 ,P o ~ ~ ENE ~~~ - rA-~A o... y ~~ ~ ~ MA COI~VTY ~ ~ ~, ~uEVarro~s Of p> O p ~ ~ ~ N ~ `J Ca0 (~O O ~ rn 0 o ~ 0 t 0 0 a a t# s ° ~ g 0 ° 0 w 0 0 y ° A a f/1 O 7 m w m m G1 ° ~ Exhibit D-1, page 15 9 d+d~F ,,,,,., ~.r ~ y ~' ~lV~ AAl~ GI2~K 1~SA' - rp-y~q ,,.~ _,i.waPS or $ ~ Ai7A GOlAdtl' S1NGp , ~ ~., v ~TSDA - NATDRAL t~NS~ve ~er!avrr~ °io1M ELEVATtOHS - ~ ~ ~ N ~ c , ~ $ ~ a~ o °f o s On g ~ ~ ~ - an o v ~s 0 o a r 4 0 0 d N 0 A • +O C 7 67 }o ~ O ~ ~ n ~ ~ Q r ~ A~ O 1 Q 1 , O 0 N ~ 1 ~ ~ _ a ~ ~ t V 1 O 01 1 p f r m 1 f O N 1. O 1 0 N N O N E x h ib i t D- 7 , p a g e 1 6 G~955 S~CtI{,~I #10 C 7+37) „4,._ ~s,r 9i '~ I~ FIVE Hr~ C~iC t~01'J-110N - tAN~A 1 ~~ '~Q7 ~ ~ AI7A L.. ~ ~ vsnA - xa~ wxsssv~ort ~"' p~~m~ n~r~~5 r L PL~~!ti ~~r?~.~^' See 5 Node Cross & neslgn IZepu~t l.• ~ i ~ ~~ Ses Veget~e, P6aa NOTE: No wdlavs wdl be plated on the fast side of the Gh~el neslcp+ ~,~ '~10 yea, QIO - 530 CF5 50 yew, 0150 - 7r~ CAS 100 yew, QI00 < 900 CP5 Velac~y ~ QIO - I.Ofps AM1~ rHas~ngs N - 0.035 PLHNT DETAiL Exhibit D-1, page 17 ~dt9Vfi t~fA1.5 ,..., ~ .r o ti,,.,+ ~~ ~ N?AG011~tY5WLD N~l37WJ, ® -"' ~A -- NA77JRAL R~90USC.BB cV~4oN sr+~ercr ''`" C Memo To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green From: Roxanne Holland, EIT, Staff Engineer hollandr@meridiancity.org Meridian Public Works Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 200 Phone: 898-5500 Fax: 898-9551 CC: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Interim City Engineer Kyle Radek, P.E., Assistant City Engineer ~~ Date~ September 4, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for September 9, 2008 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Five Mile Creek Restoration Proied -Deed of Conservation Easement Attached is a Deed of Conservation Easement with Arthur Berry and Kobe, LLC. The Deed of Conservation Easement grants the City of Meridian a conservation easement 700 feet long and is part of the Five Mile Creek Restoration project. The State-Local Agreement, Nampa- Meridian Irrigation License Agreement and the Riparian Aquatic Resource Mitigation Agreement have all been previously approved. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves and signs the Deed of Conservation Easement with Arthur Berry and Kobe, LLC, for tits Five Mile Creek Restoration Project, Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. • Page 1 i ~ DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT To all future owners of the following described property, SEC 7 T3N R1E OF THE USGS MERIDIAN QUAD SE 1/4, SE '/a , 500' feet west of Locust Grove at Franklin Road, 700 feet along 5 Mile Creek, within the floodway boundaries as identified on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps 1600100232 and 1600100251 revised February 19, 2003, located in Ada County, Idaho. THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT is made this day of 20 , by Arthur Berry and Kobe, LLC (Grantor), having an address at 1124 Santa Maria Dr. Boise Idaho 83712, in favor of City of Meridian (Holder), having an address at 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83624. WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of real property {Property) more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. WHEREAS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act (CWA) 404 permit number NWW-2008-206-BO1 a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein. The final approved permit will authorize certain activities that affect waters of the United States. WHEREAS, the Permit requires that the City of Meridian replace and protect the wetlands as designed in the attached Exhibit C (Designed Wetlands), located on the Property, by keeping the Designed Wetlands in a natural condition. WHEREAS, Grantor, in consideration of the consent granted by the Permit, agrees to convey to Holder a conservation easement placing certain limitations and affirmative obligations on the Property for the protection of the Designed Wetlands and in order that the Designed Wetlands shall remain substantially in its natural condition. WHEREAS, Holder, as a governmental body [see types of Holders in I.C. § 55- 2101 ] under the laws of the State of Idaho, desires to accept the conservation easement, including covenants and agreements, affecting the Designed Wetlands. WHEREAS, the State of Idaho has recognized the importance and validity of conservation easements by its enactment of the Uniform Conservation Easement Act, Idaho Code Sections 5-2101 through 2109, under which this conservation easement is created. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 1 NOW THEREFORE, for the foregoing consideration, and in further consideration of the restrictions, rights, and agreements herein, Grantor conveys to Holder a conservation easement on, over, under, and across the Designed Wetlands, together with reasonable access from the Property, in perpetuity, consisting of and subject to the rights, conditions, and restrictions, enumerated below and those interests of record as of the date of this conservation easement. Holder accepts the conservation easement and agrees to all attendant terms and conditions. I. PURPOSES/RIGHTS OF HOLDER It is the purpose of this conservation easement to assure that the Designed Wetlands will be retained forever as designed and to prevent any use of the Designed Wetlands that will impair or interfere with the Designed Wetlands. To carry out this purpose, the following rights are conveyed to the Holder: A. To preserve and protect the Designed Wetlands, including the topography, soil, hydrology, vegetation, and wildlife; B. To enter upon the Property at reasonable times to enforce the rights herein granted and to observe, study, and make scientific observation of the Designed Wetlands, upon prior notice to the Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, in a manner that will not unreasonably interfere with the use and quiet enjoyment of the Property by Grantor, its heirs, successors or assigns at the time of entry; and C. To enjoin any activity on, or use of, the Designed Wetlands that is inconsistent with the purpose of this conservation easement and to enforce the restoration of such areas or features of the Designed Wetlands that maybe damaged by any inconsistent activity or use. II. RESTRICTIONS This Deed of Conservation Easement prohibits and limits the following activity in, on, or about the Designed Wetlands: A. Changing, disturbing, altering, or impairing the natural riparian ecosystem and other natural, ecological, or wildlife features or values in and on the Designed Wetlands, except as otherwise provided or allowed herein. B. Construction or placing buildings, roads, signs, billboards, or other advertising, utilities, or other structures on or above the Designed Wetlands. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 2 C. Dumping or placing of soil or other substances or material as landfill, or dumping or placing trash, waste, or other unsightly or offensive materials. D. Removal or destruction of the live trees, shrubs, or other vegetation, except for the removal of noxious or exotic invasive plant species, except as expressly authorized in the Uses and Practices section (Section III} of this Deed of Conservation Easement. E. Excavation, dredging, or removal of loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock, or other material substance in such a manner as to affect the Designed Wetlands. F. No agricultural, industrial, or commercial activity shall be undertaken with respect to the Designed Wetlands. G. Using herbicides or pesticides upon the Designed Wetlands without prior consent of Holder or designated third-party. H. Any other use of, or activity on, the Designed Wetlands or the Property that is or may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant, the preservation of the Designed Wetlands substantially in its natural condition, or the protection of its environment is prohibited. III. USES AND PRACTICES CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT The following uses and practices upon the Designed Wetlands, though not exhaustive, are consistent with and shall be permitted by this conservation easement, except for the requirement of prior approval by the Holder or its successors where such requirement is expressly provided herein: A. Landscaping to prevent severe erosion or damage to the Property, provided that such landscaping is consistent with preserving the natural condition of the Designed Wetlands. B. Pruning trees and shrubs to prevent health and safety hazards, including, but not limited to, fire hazards, site obstructions, and road obstructions. Pruning/removing trees and shrubs that establish more density than shown on approved design plans. C. All other acts or uses not prohibited by this conservation easement, which are consistent with the purposes of this grant. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 3 • IV. ENFORCEMENT A. Grantor intends that enforcement of the terms and provisions of this conservation easement shall be at the discretion of Holder, and that Holder's failure to exercise its right under this conservation easement in the event of any breach of this conservation easement by the Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver of Holder's enforcement rights under this conservation easement in the event of any subsequent breach. B. If Grantor or its successors-in-interest violate the terms of this conservation easement, Holder shall have all remedies available at law and equity, including without limitation the right to seek an injunction with respect to such activity and to cause restoration to that portion of the Designed Wetlands affected by such activity to the condition that existed prior to the undertaking of the prohibited activity. C. Holder will pay all costs associated with its obligation to preserve and protect in perpetuity the natural, ecological, and open space of the Designed Wetlands (including costs associated with monitoring compliance with the terms of this conservation easement). D. The Corps, pursuant to its authority under 404(s) of the Clean Water Act, may bring an enforcement action against Holder, its heirs, successors, or assigns, if there is a violation of this conservation easement. V. ASSIGNMENT Holder may assign its interest in this conservation easement without the prior consent of Grantor to any "qualified organization" under Idaho Code Section 55-2101, but shall give Grantor 30 days prior written notice. As a condition of such transfer, the transferee shall agree to all of the restrictions, rights, and provisions, herein and to continue to carry out the purpose of this conservation easement. VI. GRANTOR'S TRANSFER OF THE PROPERTY A. This conservation easement shall run with and burden title to the Property in perpetuity for the benefit of the Holder or its assigns and successors, and shall bind Grantor's heirs, successors, or assigns. B. Grantor shall insert the terms and restrictions of the conservation easement in any subsequent deed or other legal instrument by which Grantor divests itself of any interest in the Property. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 4 C. If Holder, its heirs, successors, or assigns acquire fee title to the Property from Grantor, its heirs, successors, or assigns, it is agreed that the easement will not merge into the dominant estate. Rather, the restrictions, responsibilities, and rights of the Grantor will pass to the Holder upon taking title to the Property. This instrument will become a conservation deed restriction on the Property, subject to all rights, restrictions, and purposes described herein. VII. REVOKE, RELEASE, ALTER, AMEND This conservation easement may be amended, altered, released, or revoked only by written agreement between the parties, their heirs, assigns, or successors. Such an agreement shall be filed in the public records of Ada County, Idaho. VIII. PROCEEDS This conservation easement constitutes a real property interest immediately vested in Holder. In the event that all or a portion of the Property is sold, exchanged or involuntarily converted following extinguishments or the exercise of eminent domain, Holder shall be entitled to the fair market value of this conservation easement. The parties stipulate that the fair market value of this conservation easement shall be determined by multiplying the fair market value of the Property unencumbered by this conservation easement (minus any increase in value after the date of this grant attributable to improvements) by the ratio of the value of this conservation easement at the time of this grant to the value of the Property (without deduction for the value of this conservation easement) at the time of the grant. Holder shall use its share of the proceeds in a manner consistent with the purposes of this conservation easement. IX. TAXES AND OTHER ASSESSMENTS Grantor, or its successors-in-interest, shall pay ali real property taxes and other assessments levied by competent authority on the Property. X. WARRANTY This Deed of Conservation Easement is made with general warranty of title. XI. SEVERABILITY If any part of this conservation easement is found to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder shall continue in full force and effect. DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 5 • XII. NOTICE All notices, consents, approval, or other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly given if sent by United States first class mail, addressed to the appropriate party or successor-in-interest. Notice shall be deemed received within 7 days after mailing of the specific notice, consent, or approval. XIII. RECORDING The Holder shall record this instrument in a timely fashion in the official records of Ada County, Idaho, and may re-record it at any time as may be required to preserve Holder's rights in this conservation easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this conservation easement, covenants, re~gictions, and agreement, as of the date specified below. and ~/~D ~ d~ ~/~~~ Da[e HOLDER Signature and Title Date DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT PAGE 6 Acknowled ements STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada) The foregoing day „ of his driver's license as i and y~r.1••ttbtloa.en ~~~ ;* ~: pv9ti1G ,,••9 inn o' ~ •',•~ STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) Notary Public/Yor Idaho Residing at -- ~~~ My commission expires The foregoing conservation easement was acknowledged before me this day of 20 by who is [ ]personally known to me or [ ]has produced his driver's license as identification. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public far Idaho Residing at My commission expires DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT ease ent was acknowledged before me this 20C~, by is (,r7 personally known to me or [ ]has WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day ./` ~ PAGE 7 September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-O REQUEST Change Order No. 1 for Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements with Star Construction, LLC for $6,414.49 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: V COMMENTS See attached Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubtlc meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • Memo To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green From: Roxanne Holland, EIT, Staff Engineer hollandr@meridiancity.org Meridian Public Works Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 200 Phone: 898-5500 Fax: 898-9551 CC: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Interim City Engineer Date: September 4, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for September 9, 2008 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the September 9, 2008 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Chancae Order No. 1 for Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements (construc~ionZ Additional work is requin~l for the completion of the Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements (construction). This change order consists of the following work and amounts to 8% of the construction contract: • Repairs to the pump house at Heroes Park. • Fix leaking intake structure. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Change Order No. 1 for the Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements project {construction) with Star Construction, LLC, for $6,414.49 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 n U CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, ID 83642 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER I, Change Order No.: ~ Project Number: Q854a Date: 9!3/2008 Effective Date: CONTRACTOR: Star Construction, LLC PROJECT: Class A Reclaimed Wastewater Disinfection and Distribution Improvements The Contractor is hereby directed to make the following changes from the Contract Documents and Plans. Desciption: 7) Pressure grout building and slab 2} Dewater intake structure and seal section failure infiltration 3} Install 2 valve collars Reason for Change OMer: Repair settling problem at the pump house at Heroes Park and seal leaking joints around the intake structure. Attachments: CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Prioe: $79,790.00 Original Contract Completion Date: Original Contract Completion Days: Net changes form previous C.O.'s.: Net Days change form previous C.O.'s: No. 0 to 0 No. 0 to 0 - - $0.00 Contract Price Prior to this C.O.: Contract Completion Date before this C.O.: $79,790.00 Net Increase (decrease) of this C.O.: Net Days Increase (decrease) of this C.O.: $6,414.49 Contract Price wah all Approved C.O.'s: Contract Completion Date with all Approved C.O.'s: $86,204.49 RECOMMENDED: (CONSTRUCn oN MANAGER) ACCEPTED ~ TRA - /~ Date: G.C ~ ~ G,r~ `, ~~ Date: Q [~ ! ' T "" Q PROVED: (CrrY PURCHASING AGENT! COUNCIL APPROVAL By: Kean wags Date: Date: APPROVED: (CITY) ATTEST: By: Mayor Tammy de Weerd By: City Clerk, Jaycee Holman Date: Date: • September 5, 2008 C~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 200$ APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-P REQUEST Award of Bid and Author¢ation to enter into contract with ( S~ for Settlers Village Square -Phase 1 for ( ) ~i ~,Q ~ ~ ~ AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY GITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: . Emailed: Staff Initials• COMMENTS ~,"x°°`~ Materials presented at public meetings shag become properly of the City of Meridian. ~ ~ Jayc®e Holman From: Kathy Wanner Sent: Monday, September 08, 204$ 10:20 AM To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green Cc: Keith Watts; Steve Siddoway; Elroy Huff Subject: Agenda Item ~ T~ifla~q Square Jaycee Page 1 of 1 ~~~~5,~~ Here is the information for tomorrow nights agenda. This is the result of the bid opening Friday afternoon. The highlighted areas are the ones that need to be filled in your current agenda. Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with Paul Construction for ~ei~l~r~ ~I1ag~ Square - Phase I. The contract is the result of Invitation to Bid #PKS-08-006. Recommended Council Action: Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Gontract with Paul Construction for S~ exsl.~4lTag~ Square -Phase 1 project for the MOT- TO-EXCEED amount of $566,489.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign and Gity Clerk to ~CGLI*'Ft~ ~YVaYt~1.EY Meridian City Finance Office 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83b42 (208) 888-0433 ext 227 Fax: (208)887-4813 wan nerk~merid ancity.org 9ii aiaaos . Page 1 of 1 Tara Green From: Kathy Wanner Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 4:04 PM To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green Subject: Agenda Item -Settlers Village Jaycee, I•re-read this a couple times before I pushed send, but I still didn't catch it until afterwards, but the underlined part is corrected to read "Settlers Village Square - Phase 1. Not Old Town Streetscape. Kathy Please place the following item on the Consent Agenda Department Reports on Tuesday September 9: This is a bid that opens tomorrow (Friday, Sept 5 at 2:30 p.m.), so we need to reserve a place on the agenda for it, and we will get the name of the low bidder and dollar amount to you on Friday afternoon or Monday. Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with (name of winning bidder) for Settlers Village Square - Phase 1. The contract is the result of Invitation to Bid #PKS-08-006. Recommended Council Action: Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with (Name of winning Bidder) for Settlers Village Square - Phase 1 project for the NOT-TO-EXCEED amount of $( ) and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Cathy Wanner Meridian City Finance Office 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 888-4433 ext 227 Fax: (208) 887-4813 wannerk@meridiancity.org 9/5/2008 Page 1 of 1 Jaycee Holman From: Kathy Wanner Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:20 AM To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green Cc: Keith Watts; Steve Siddoway; Elroy Huff Subject: Agenda Item -Settlers Village Square Jaycee Here is the information for tomorrow nights agenda. This is the result of the bid opening Friday afternoon. The highlighted areas are the ones that need to be filled in your current agenda. Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with Paul Construction for Settlers Village Square - Phase 1. The contract is the result of Invitation to Bid #PKS-08-006. Recommended Council Action: Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with Paul Construction for Settlers Village Square -Phase 1 project for the NOT- TO-EXCEED amount of $566,489.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to Cathy 1Nanner Meridian City Finance Office 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 888-4433 ext 227 Fax: (208) 887-4813 wannerk@meridiancity.org 9/10/2008 r ~ September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 200$ APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-Q REQUEST Contract with Star Construction for Well 27 Flush Line for a Cost Not to Exceed $29,409 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Ini#ials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the CHy of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached ~~r~~ • any work which is copyrighted by the Contractor, the City reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevoc~bie lica~nse to repnxiuce, publish and use such work, or any part thereof, and to authorize others to do so. 1.3 The Contractor shall provide services and work under this Agreement consistent with the requirements and standards established by applicable federal, state and city taws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions. The Contractor represents and warrants that it will pertorm its work in a~rdance with generally acxspted industry standards and practices for the profession or professions that are used in performance of this Agr~merrt and that are in effect at the time of performance of this Agreement. Except for that representation and any representations made or contained in any proposal submitted by tie Contractor and any reports or opinions prepared or issued as part of the work performed by the Contractor under this Agreement, Contractor makes no other warranties, either express or implied, as part of this Agreement. 1.4 Services and work provide by the contractor at the City's request under this Agreement will be performed in a timely manner in aoc~rdanoe with a Schedule of Work, which the parties hereto shall agree to. The Schedule of Work may be revised from time to time upon mutual written consent of the parties. 2. Consld®ra~tlon 2.1 The Contractor shall be compensated on a Lump Sum basis as provided in Exhibit B "Payment Schedule" attached hereto and by refierence made s part hereof IN THE Not To-Exceed amount of $29,408.00. 2.2 The Contractor shall provide the City with a monthly statement, as the work warrarrts, of fees earned and costs incurred for servicx3s provided during the billing period, which the City will pay within 30 days of receipt of a corre>~ invoice and approval by the City. The City will not withhold any Federal or State incxnme taxes or Social Security Tax from any payment made by City to Contractor under the terms and cxanditions of this Agreement Payment of all taxes and other assessments on such sums is the sole responsibility of Contractor. 2.3 Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, Contractor shall not be entitled to no receive from the City any additional consideration, compensation, salary, wages, or other type of remuneration. #or servicans rendered under this Agreemenrt., including ,but not Umited to, meals, lodging, transportation, drawings, renderings or mockups. Specifically, WELL 27 SY PASS PIPELINE - page 2 of 11 Contractor shall not be entitled by virtue of this Agreement to consideration in the form of overtime, health insurance benefits, retirement benefits, paid holidays or other paid leaves of absences of any type or kind whatsoever. 3. T®nm: 3.1 This agreement shall Mme effective upon execution by both parties, and shall expire upon (a) completion of the agreed upon work, (b) September 30, 2008 or (c) unless sooner terminated as provided Flow or unless some other method or time of termination is listed in Exhibit A. This Agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of (a) bankruptcy or insoly®ncy of either party, or (b) sale of Contractors business. 3.2 Should Contractor default in the performance of this Agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, City, at City`s option, may terminate this Agreement by giving written notification to Contractor. 3.3 Should City fail to pay Contractor all or any par of the compensation set forth in Exhibit B of this Agreement on the date due, Contractor, at the Contractor's option, may terminate this Agn~ment if the failure is not remedied by the City within thirty (30) days from the date payment is due. 3.4 This Agr~ment shall terminate automatically on the ocxurrenc~ of any of the following events: a. Baniwptcy of insolvency of either party; b. Sale of Contractor's business; or c. Death of Contractor 4. Termin~on: If, through any cause, COWTRACTOR, its officers, employees, or agents falls to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, violates any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, falsifies any re~rd or document required to be prepared under this agreement, engages in fraud, dishonesty, or any other act of misconduct in the performance of this contract, or if the Clty Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of WELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 3 of 11 CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to CONTRACTOR of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. CONTRACTOR may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least sixty (60) days notice to CITY. In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily complete hereunder. Notwithstanding the above, CONTRACTOR shall not be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by CONTRACTOR, and the CITY may withhold any payments to CONTRACTOR for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the CITY from CONTRACTOR is determined. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve CONTRACTOR of its liability to the CITY for damages. 5. Ind®pendent Contractor: 5.1 In ail matters pertaining to this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither CONTRACTOR nor any officer, employee or agent of CONTRACTOR will be deemed an employee of CITY. Except as expressly provided in F~chibit A, Contractor has no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in the City and therefore has no authority to bind or incur any obligation on behalf of the City. The selection and designation of the personnel of the CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by the CITY. 5.2 Contractor, its agents, officers, and employees ere and at all times during the term of this Agreement shall represent and conduct themselves as independent contractors and not as employees of the City. 5.3 Contractor shall determine the method, details and means of performing the work and services to be provided by Contractor under this Agreement Contractor shall be responsible to City only for the requirements and results specified in this Agreement and, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, shall not be subjected to City's control with respect to the physical action or activities of Contractor in fulfillment of this Agreemenrt. If in the performance of this Agreement any third persons are employed by Contractor, such persons shall be entirely WELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 4 of 11 • r: and exclusively under the direction and supervision and control of the Contractor. 6: lndemnlflcaition and Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and aU fosses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or properly and losses and expenses and other costs including litigation costs and attorney's fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in cxannection with the performance of this Agreement by the CONTRACTOR, its servants, agents, officers, employees, guests, and business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of the tortuous conduct of CITY or i#s employees. CONTRACTOR shall maintain, and specifically agrees that it will maintain, throughout the temp of this Agr~ment, liability insurance, in which the CITY shall be named an additional insured in the minimum amounts as follow: General Liability One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or ocxurrence, Professional Liability One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or ocxurrence, Automobile Liability Insurance One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or occurrence and Workers' Compensation Insun~nce, in the statutory limits as required by law.. The limits of insurance shall not be deemed a limitation of the covenarrts to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY; and if CITY becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurances limits, herein provided,.CONTRACTORrnvenants and agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for all such losses, claims, actions, or judgments for damages or injury to pen3ons or property and other , including litigation costs and attorneys' fees, arising out of, resulting from , or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the Contractor or Contractor's officers, employs, agents, representatives or subcontractors and resulting in or attributable to personal injury, death, or damage or destruction to tangible or intangible property, including use of. CONTRACTOR shall provide CITY with a Certificate of Insurance, or other proof of insurance evidencing CONTRACTOR'S compliance with the requirements of this paragraph and file such proof of insurance with the CCTV at least ten (10) days prior to the date Contractor begins performance of it's obrgations under this Agreement. In the event the insurance minimums are changed, CONTRACTOR shall immediately submit proof of c~mplianc~ with the changed limith. Evidence of all insurance shall be submitted to the City Purchasing Agent with a cxapy to Meridian City Acxounting, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 6.2 My deductibles, self-insured retention, or named insureds must be declared in writing and approved by the City. At the option of the Ciiy, either. the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles, self insured retentions or named insureds; or the Contractor shall provide a bond, cash WELL 27 BY-P~-SS PIPELIWE - page 5 Of 11 • i cash or letter of credit guarranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. To the extent of the indemnity in this contract, Contractor's Insurancx3 coverage shall be primary insurance regarding the City's elected officers, officialr,, employees and volunteers. Any insuranoe or self-insurance maintained by the City or the City's elected officers, officials, employees and volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with Contractor's insurance exca3pt as to the extent of City's negligence. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 6.4 All insurance coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the insurance and indemnity requirements stated herein. 6.5 The limits of insurance described herein shad not limit the liability of the Contractor and Contractor's agents, representafives, employees or subcontractors 7. Bonds: Payment and Pertormance Bonds are required on ail Publics Works of Improvement Projects over $25,000.00 8. Noltces: Any and all nofices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless othennrise stated in this agreement, shall be in wrii~ng and be deemed communic~t~ when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: City of Meridian Purchasing Agent 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Star Construction Attn: Ancillrminger POBox157 Star. ID 83669 Idaho Public UNorks license #: 14428-AAA-4 WELL 27 SY-PASS PIPELINE - page 6 of 11 Either party may change their address for the purpose of this paragn~ph by giving written notices of such change to the other in the manner her®in provided. 9. Attorn®y Fe®s: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties fiereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shag be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement 10. Tlm® is of th® Easenc®: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, cx~ndition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perfomt any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of, and a defauk under, this Agreement by the party so failing to perform. 11. Assignor®nt: It is expressly agreed and unden~tood by the parties hereto, that CONTRACTOR shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of its rights under this Agreement excerpt upon the prior express written consent of CITY. 12. Dlscriminatton Prohibited: In performing the Work required herein, CONTRACTOR shalt not unlawfully discriminate in violation of any federal, state or local law, rule or r~ulation against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. 13. Reporl~s and Information: 13.1 At such times and in such forms as the CITY may require, there shall be furnished to the CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as the CITY may request pertaining to matters ~vered by this Agreement 13.2 Contractor shall maintain all writings, documents and records prepared or compiled in cmnnection with the pertorrnance of this Agreement for a minimum of four (4) years from the termination or completion of this or Agreement This includes any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photo static, photographic and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of c~mmun'ication or representation including letters, words, pictures, sounds or symbols or any combination thereof. 1NEU_ 27 BY-PASS PIPEUME - page 7 of 11 14. AudN,s and Inspections: At any time during normal business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of CONTRACTOR'S recmrds with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall permit the CITY to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 15. Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material: No material pnxluced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to copyright in the United States or in any other country. The CITY shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepared under this Agreement. 16. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of work required hereunder, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all app[icxable laws, ordinances, and crodes of Federal, State, and local govemmer~. 17. Changes: The CITY may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Work to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of CONTRACTOR'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and CONTRACTOR, shall be incorporated in wrBiten amendments which shalt be executed with the same formalities as this Agn3em®nt. 18. Construction and Severabllity: If any part of this Agreement Is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agneement is reasonably capable of cxlmpletion. 19. 1Naiv®r of Default: Waiver of default by either party to this Agreement shall not be deemed to be waiver of any subsequent default. Wan-er or breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach, and shall not be construed to be a mod~ic~tion of the terms of this Agreement unless this Agreement is modfied as provided above. 20. Advice of Attorn®y: Each party warrarrts and represents that in executing this Agreement. It has rec~+ived independent legal advice from its attorney's or the opportunity to seek such advice. 21. Entir® ABr~eem®nt: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreemerrts or understandings, WELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 8 of 11 oral of written, whefiher pr®vious to the execution hen~of or contemporaneous herewith. 22. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and cronstrued and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. 23. Approval Required: This Agn~ement shall not become effectlvve or binding until approved by the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: Dated: Approved by Council:_ 8/9/08 Attest: a5 HOLMAN, CITY Approved ss to Content CONTRACTOR BY: Dated: ~ ~ any , ~ . , ti u ~ ~ .. , ~ , , ,,, ~ ~~~~,/', ~,~ -. %,, ~~ . ~~c#Blic Works D®partrrtent Approval BY: KEITH ATTS, P RCHASING AGENT Dated: ~ - 9' D8 Approv®d as to Form CITY ATTORNEY BY: NAME• ~~y/e ~f TITLE: rte: ,~ ~.- Dated: ~/llt~0"~ WELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 9 of 11 Attachment A SCOPE OF WORK All labor, materials, ~uipment and incidentals as requin3d for the WELL #27 PUMPING FACILITIES BY PASS PIPELINE per BID #PW-08-002. WELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 10 of 11 r Attachment B MILESTONE !PAYMENT SCHEDULE A. Total and complete compensation for this Agreement shah not excel $29,409.00 I?F~ICING SCHEDULE Furnish all labor, materials, equipment, and incidentals as required for the WELL #2? PUMPING FACILITIES BY PASS PIPELINE, per the attached drawings and s cific~tions. Estimated Unit Price Bid Item Item No. Item Description Quantity Unit bid Total 206.4.1.1.3 Hand Placed Riprap 2 CY $150.00 $ 300.00 10-inch Class 150, 601.4.1.A.5 AWWA C900,PVC 58 LF $ 45.00 $2610.00 Drain Pi e 12-inch Comigated 601.4.1.A.11 Galvanized Steel Pipe, 20 LF $ 35.00 $ 900.00 18 au e 802.4.1.A.1 A inch Manhole, Type 1 ~ $1200.00 $1200.00 SP-1 Flush Structure 1 1 LS $6904.00 $6904.00 SP 2 Flush Structure 2 1 LS $8785.00. $8795.00 SP-3 Piping Drain 2 EA $450.00 $900.00 SP-4 Storm Water 1 LS $5500.00 $5500.00 Mana ement SP-5 Ten Mile Creek By-Pass 1 LS $2500.00 $2500.00 LUMP SUM TOTAL ................................................................$ 29.409.00 Travel ex~nses~ will ~ paid at no more man th® City of M®rldian's Travel and Expen~ R®imbur~ment Policy. 1NELL 27 BY PASS PIPELINE - page 11 of 11 Memo To: Jaycee Holman; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek CC: File, Clint Dolsby Date: September 4, 2008 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for October 16 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the September 9 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Contract with Star Construction for construction of the Well 27 Flush Line Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves a Contract with Star Construction for constnuction of the Well 27 Flush Line at a cost not to exceed $29,409 and authorizes the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 ~ ~ September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-R REQUEST Child Safety Day Property Use Agreement With State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See aFtached Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials pr®sented at pubNc meetings shah become properly of th® CHy of Meridian. VV/VVl L.vVV VV .6V rnn LJN 014 ~J V\Q lB rmI 1D 4~14Y PO Box ~ Oul'~nt, bUA 98327 Fez Z53A12--7275 I~„~'7. IgJ VV IlVV.7 Yes ~e~ ~cc; ~dL~ ~ ~ ~o~it,~ >~ `~ mar '~ 2~ _ ~~- osQ ~ Phi 2 s 3 - Qt2-- tf y,~ 7 ~~ ._ ZO8- 845 340 t ~ 3 ~: c~; ~~1 sue, p~ ~!/~ 3 ~M ^ For ReuleMr ~ Please c~~„t ~f Pitsass 8~, a Pty. Reeyzls CQAdFIQEPtTIp-LI11I f1~TICE: 'fie Infarmallfln c~ntait~i in lfi~ m~ messa~ wnta~s Prnri~eed and ~i material arrdlor trade secn3t rrrateriaJs for the sots use of the a~ve tr-dividuals named above. If you ere trot the interroted n~ient feted at~re, you rare herr~by notated that arty dishsure, copying or n of the inPortr~on or d1e taking of any actlan in reftarwe ~ the corlter~ts of tltis irarts-ntssdon ~ STRICTLY PROHIBti®. If you have n~hr~ this traresnis~n in emar, Please notify us 6nrtrediaoety by teieAhone so that vwe ~t age for the return of this matetlai ~ no cast b you. (Q~ "~ ~~/~24 s~' ,~t a S ~~ nc~ C-~/ ~ Mil L/ ~.`1~~ of 2.~3 ~` ~t 2- ~Z.~S,_ ~~~ l ~~ ~ f~~~ t3t~d Safety ~ Rmperty Use Agneentent Thy ~s an Anent (~ °Agr+eement'j ttet~een Sta6e Farm Alnnval Auk mstrrartce Comp~atry, ~ bet~f of its artd aims (°STATE FARM'.tor"ated at 111Q0 %~ ~, QuDartt. Wla~irtoton 9832'1. aml tare ~ of Nfrt . tA1tTtYESSETH IA~iEREAS, tare ~~ desire to en~r bao art Ott regard Ore tree of OYVNER`S r for Ste ptepese of a car sit des up ev~tt ~ herent ~ for9t. VYkEREAS, t#te t agree as fo~ows: DATE f~ TI-~ EIIERIT. TIC err~t w~ be f~ wt 24. . b ~ 12:91) arai endim~ ~ ~soa Z. EVEN Lt3CA'Tit~N. Tft~ ev~tt wli be iteid at lire fiaHorrirtg bran: Fne Staffer ~ 3 -3545 W. Loratst Grove .,. ....rte •r~..v ..v .... ...n i..v ~~~ ~ vao to .u.m vV VU ~ IgJ VVJJ VVJ ciHO~c~ ~ LA1n1. Thy Agreb'nent sfi~ ~ gowemed by Ills 18WS of tit8 Stab Oaf hlahci 8. SURVIVAL The topowmg Sections tatr~nalian eifl~ A~ndum: USE OF STATE FARM NAt~, HOLD HARMLESS, LJMITAT~+I OF UAHh.ITY~ CHOICE OF LAW, a~ Sl~IVAL 9. TERMINATION.Notwlthabnd~ any brnts b tha ~r~rary hen. Owner ~y ~m6tate this Agne~nt eat any tlna; by sending b State Fame a nee of ~n if Owner ewes ohms b die CAR SEAT CHECKfCHI1D SAFETY DAY fnnn am- tenant of ~ Piaperty cr any ~wamn~snl~ ~, 10. L,IhIITATION ~ LIAHK.ITY. EXCEPT FOR THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 (HOLD HARMLESS~,ANY'I'HiNG IN THEAGTOTHEt~NTRARY NOTIIIfITHSTANDIING, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES ~IA-TSOEVER SHALL EITHER PARTY t3E LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY SPECIAL, CONSEQU PUNfTIYE, INDIRECT, ~ INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WFiATSOEVB~. EXCEPT FORTHE PROVISIONS ~ SECTION 4 (HOLD HARMLESS). Ilil NO EVENT fIYHATSOEVER SHALL EITHER PAR1Y'S TOTAL. LIABiUTY TO THE OTHER FOR ANY OTHER DAMAt~ES tNHATSOEVERE%CEfD ~1 THEAGGREGATETHESUMOFTI~+iTHOUSANDDaLLARS (~1Q.~). STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILt: INSURANCE COMPANY m Ia~mr Oe 4111~d Printed or Types Name ,~oNN .i~,s-H~~' Prtntied or Typal N Mava~ r~ VIDE I~~SIC.~_...s.I-I"-a-r-pt~(,~, Tie ~~ `~ r ~~ ~f ~z-~7 ~~.oo~ Dab \`` ~`. ~~~ :,,Dab ~~ Fa ~ AL ay y' ,~ T'$t'1 ,~Q `~ .~ ., ~, '~, September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-S REQUEST Addendum No. 6 to Agreement for City Prosecutor /Criminal Legal Services with the City of Boise AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: 'MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See aFtached ~`~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shag become properly of the City of Meridian. A ,~ ~~~~ ~ RESOLUTION 20271 BY THE COUNCIL: BISTERFELDT, CLEGG, EBERLE, JORDAN, SHEALY AND TIBBS A RESOLUTION APPROVING ADDENDUM N0.6 TO AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE. CITY OF BOISE CITY (LEGAL DEPARTMENT) AND THE CIfiY OF MERIDIAN FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL/PROSECUTORIAL SERVICES TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID ADDENDUM NO. 6 ON BEHALF_OF BOISE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY; IDAHO: Section 1. That Addendum No. 6 to_ an Agreement by and between the City of Boise City and the City of Meridian, a copy of said Addendum No. 6 marked Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, be, and the same is hereby, approved as to both form and content. Section 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be, and theyhereby are, authorized to respectively execute and attest said Addendum No. 6 for and on behalf of the City of Boise City. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Boise City, Idaho this 23rd day of September ,2008. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Boise City, this 23rd day of September ,2008. APPROVED: ,,•"'+ MAYOR -Da~i H. Bieter R-360-08 • EXI3IBIT "A" ADDENDUM N0.6 TO AGREEMENT FOR CITY FROSECUTOR/CRINIIrTAL LEGAL SERVICES DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2002 This addendum No. 6 is entered into 23rd day September , 2008 by and between the City of Meridian (hereinafter referred to as °'Meridian"), and the City of Boise, (hereinafter referred to as "Boise"), for the purpose of amending and extending an Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 2002. Whereas, on November 1, 2002 Meridian and Boise entered into an agreement for Boise to provide certain prosecutoriaUcriminal legal services to Meridian; and Whereas, the agreement was extended and modified by Addendums approved in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to modify certain terms of the agreement related to the amount of payment; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to extend the agreement as modified for an additional one (1) year term. Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, Meridian and Boise agree to amend that certain Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 2002 as follows: 1. That Section 4 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: 4. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES. Meridian agrees to pay Boise for services rendered pursuant to the terms of this Agreement as follows: 4.1 As compensation for all Primary Legal Services, including all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Boise in performing the Primary Legal Services, Meridian shall pay Boise the total sum of twenty one thousand three hundred twelve dollars ($21,312) per month, with the annual total cost of two hundred fifty-five thousand seven hundred forty-four dollars ($255,744). 4.1.1 Payment of Primary Legal Services shall be paid by Meridian to Boise on or before the 20a' day of the following month. 4.1.2 Boise shall provide Meridian with a monthly itemized invoice of all services performed at the request of Meridian beyond the Primary Legal Services (including all out-of-pocket expenses). Provided the invoice is received by the Sa' of the month, Meridian shall remit payment to Boise by the first business day of the following month. Meridian Addendum No. 6 Page 1 u 2. That section 9 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF TERM OF AGREEMENT. The parties mutually agree to renew or extend the term of this Agreement, as provided in the Contract Extension - FY-2009, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" 3. Except as modified by this Addendum No. 6, the original Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services between the City mf Meridian and the City of Boise dated November 1, 2002, which incorporates Addendums Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall remain in full force and effect. IT IS SO AGREED. IN ~~TNESS WHEREO~, the parties have executed this Addendum No. 5 on this ~PG[day of 5`epfem P./'' , 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: Mayor Ta y de Weerd CITY OF BOISE BY: Mayor David Bieter ~,~,,~~~urury- ATTEST: ~y O~ M~~d/9~~~~'>. o '- BY: Jaycee loran, Fity k ~ '''~'-----r n ++++++`~+~~` ~~ Meridian Addendum No. 6 :° ~ ~ ! EXHIBIT "B" CONTRACT EXTENSION - FY-2009 Prosecution and Criminal Leal Service for the City of Meridian Cost for Services The Boise City Attorney's office proposes to continue to offer Meridian City a flat annual fee to be billed in monthly installments to provide the services described in this proposal. Primary Leal Services Primary prosecutorial legal services include: • Prosecutorial intake screening and review of all police-generated misdemeanor reports and citations; • Timely filing decision and notification back to MPD and customer; • Prosecution of infractions and misdemeanors occurring within the Meridian City limits or pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between MPD and BPD; • Coverage of the additional caseloads in the new criminal courtrooms assigned by the Trial Court Administrator. Primary civil legal advice and guidance to the Meridian Police Chief and MPD include: • Access to members of the Public Safety Division for immediate assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week through cell phone and/or pager under MPD's protocol; • On-site legal services by a rotation of police attorneys three half-days each week; • Routine review and approval of MPD's public records requests and property dispositions; • Legal training for Block Training and Advanced Academy on search and seizure, trial preparation, investigations, and domestic violence; • Training on other needs (including those identified through the screening process) by request of the Meridian Police Chief; • Regular legal bulletins, including Idaho case law, U.S. Supreme Court, and the Ninth Circuit. Annual Cost - $255,744 Monthly Installment - $21,312 CITY OF BOISE To: Mayor and Council FROM: Jodi Nafzger, Assistant City Attorney ORDINANCE or RESOLUTION NUMBER: DATE: September 15, 2008 SUBJECT: Meridian City Prosecution Services Contract Extension ACTION REQUIRED: Approval of resolution for contract extension for Meridian prosecution and police advisor services for fiscal year 2009. FISCAL IMPACTBUDGET IMPLICATIONS: Meridian City will pay the City of Boise $21,312 per month. The total annual amount will be $255,744. This represents an overall bid increase of 5.8%, which includes the new case management system, adding another half-day (for a total of 3 half-days) of on-site attorney advice by a rotation of 2-3 police attorneys, and increased travel costs. BACKGROUND: The City Aftorney's Office presented the contract extension proposal to the Meridian City Council on July 9, 2008. The proposal was again met with much satisfaction .and Meridian has accepted the terms of the attached contract in the adoption of their 2009 budget. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Addendum No. 6 to the 2002 Agreement for Prosecution Services, and Contract Extension - FY-2009. Tara Green Page 1 of 1 From: Michelle Albertson Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 9:04 AM To: Tara Green; Jaycee Holman Cc: Bill Nary Subject: Meridian addendum prosecution/legal services Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Attachments: MPD Contract Extension 09.doc; Meridian addendum nob-legal services.doc Tara & Jaycee -attached is the Addendum No. 6 to Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services with the City of Boise, along with Exhibit B. Please place on the Council Agenda for September 9 for approval. Would it be possible to prepare two originals for signature? Thanks, Michelle 9/5/2008 ~J EXHIBIT "A" ADDENDUM N0.6 TO AGREEMENT FOR CITY PROSECUTOR/CRIMINAL LEGAL SERVICES DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2Q02 This addendum No. 6 is entered into day , 200$ by and between the City of Meridian (hereinafter referred to as "Meridian"}, and the City of Boise, (hereinafter referred to as 'Raise"), for the purpose of amending and extending an Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 2002. Whereas, on November 1, 2002 Meridian and Boise entered into an agreement for Boise to provide certain prosecutorial/criminal legal services to Meridian; and Whereas, the agreement was extended and modified by Addendums approved in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to modify certain terms of the agreement related to the amount of payment; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to extend the agreement as modified for an additional one (1) year term. Naw, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, Meridian and Boise agree to amend that certain Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 2002 as follows: 1. That Section 4 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: 4. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES. Meridian agrees to pay Boise for services rendered pursuant to the terms of this Agreement as follows: 4.1 As compensation for all Primary Legal Services, including all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Boise in performing the Primary Legal Services, Meridian shall pay Boise the total sum of twenty one thousand three hundred twelve dollars ($21,312) per month, with the annual total cast of two hundred fifty-five thousand seven hundred forty-four dollars ($255,744}. 4.1.1 Payment of Primary Legal Services shall be paid by Meridian to Boise on or before the 20{h day of the following month. 4.1.2 Boise shall provide Meridian with a monthly itemized invoice of all services performed at the request of Meridian beyond the Primary T,egal Services (including all out-o£ pocket expenses). Provided the invoice is received by the 5~' of the month, Meridian shall remit payment to Baise by the first business day of the following month. Meridian Addendum No. 6 Page 1 2. That section 9 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF TERM OF AGREEMENT. The parties mutually agree to renew or extend the term of this Agreement, as provided in the Contract Extension - FY-2049, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" 3. Except as modified by this Addendum No. 6, the original Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services between the City of Meridian and the City of Boise dated November 1, 2002, which incorporates Addendums Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall remain in full force and effect. IT IS SO AGREED. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum No. 5 on this day of 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: /~~r~i~ Mayor Ta y de Weerd CITY OF BOISE BY: Mayor David Bieter .,,,.s,~~~F~rr1i~ ~~~ i~~~ ATTEST: `; . G\,~~1 OF ME~j~/,9,1+ •,~ r ' ~:~°'~ F ; o BY: Jaycee lman, pity k =9 1~~: .~ ATTEST: BY: Annette P. Mooney, City Clerk Meridian Addendum No. 6 Fage 2 EXHIBIT "B" CONTRACT EXTENSION - FY-2409 Prosecution and Criminal Legal Service for the Citv of Meridian Cost for Services The Boise City Attorney's office proposes to continue to offer Meridian City a flat annual fee to be billed in monthly installments to provide the services described in this proposal. Primary Legal Services Primary prosecutorial legal services include: • Prosecutorial intake screening and review of all police-generated misdemeanor reports and citations; • Timely filing decision and notification back to MPD and customer; • Prosecution of infractions and misdemeanors occurring within the Meridian City limits or pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between MPD and BPD; • Coverage of the additional caseloads in the new criminal courtrooms assigned bythe Trial Court Administrator. Primary civil legal advice and guidance to the Meridian Police Chief and MPD include: • Access to members of the Public Safety Division for immediate assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week through cell phone and/or pager under MPD's protocol; • On-site legal services by a rotation of police attorneys three half-days each week; • Routine review and approval of MPD's public records requests and property dispositions; • Legal training for Block Training and Advanced Academy on search and seizure, trial preparation, investigations, and domestic violence; • Training on other needs {including those identified through. the screening process) by request of the Meridian Police Chief; ' • Regular legal bulletins, including Idaho case law, U.S. Supreme Court, and the Ninth Circuit. Annual Cost - $255,744 Monthly Installment - $21,312 +r i RESOLUTION 2027.1 BY THE COUNCIL: BISTERFELDT, CLEGG, EBERLE, JORDAN, SHEALY AND TIBBS A RESOLUTION APPROVING ADDENDUM N0.6 TO AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY (LEGAL DEPARTMENT) AND THE CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL/PROSECUTORIAL SERVICES TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID ADDENDUM N0.6 ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That Addendum No. 6 to an Agreement by and between the City of Boise City and the City of Meridian, a copy of said Addendum No. 6 marked Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, be, and the same is hereby, approved as to both form and content. Section 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized to respectively execute and attest said Addendum No. 6 for and on behalf of the City of Boise City. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Boise City, Idaho this 23rd day of September ,2008. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Boise City, this 23rd ~y of September ,2008. T: ~j.~ `.~• ~~ -John E. Fav APPROVED: MAYOR -Davi H. Bfeter R-360-08 EXHIBIT "A" ADDENDUM NO.6 TO AGREEMENT FOR CITY PROSECUTORiCRIMINAL LEGAL SERVICES DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2QU2 This addendum No. 6 is entered into 23rd day September , 2008 by and between the City of Meridian (hereinafter referred to as "Meridian"), and the City of Boise, (hereinafter referred to as "Boise"), for the purpose of amending and extending an Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 20(}2. Whereas, on November 1, 2002 Meridian and Boise entered into an agreement for Boise to provide certain prosecutorial/criminal legal services to Meridian; and Whereas, the agreement was extended and modified by Addendums approved in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to modify certain terms of the agreement related to the amount of payment; and Whereas, Meridian and Boise desire to extend the agreement as modified for an additional one (1) year term. Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, Meridian and Boise agree to amend that certain Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services dated November 1, 2002 as follows: 1. That Section 4 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: 4. PAYMENT F®R SERVICES. Meridian agrees to pay Boise for services rendered pursuant to the terms of this Agreement as follows: 4.1 As compensation for all Primary Legal Services, including all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Boise in performing the Primary Legal Services, Meridian shall pay Boise the total sum of twenty one thousand three hundred twelve dollars {$21,312} per month, with the annual total cost of two hundred fifty-five thousand seven hundred forty-four dollars ($255,744). 4.1.1 Payment of Primary Legal Services shall be paid by Meridian to Boise on or before the 20a' day of the following month. 4.1.2 Boise shall provide Meridian with a monthly itemized invoice of all services performed at the request of Meridian beyond the Primary Legal Services (including all out-of-pocket expenses). Provided the invoice is received by the 5~' of the month, Meridian shall remit payment to Boise by the first business day of the following month. Meridian Addendum No. 6 Page I 2. That section 9 of the Agreement is hereby modified to read as follows: POSSIBLE EXTENSION OF TERM OF AGREEMENT. The parties mutually agree to renew or extend the term of this Agreement, as provided in the Contract Extension - FY-2009, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" 3. Except as modified by this Addendum No. b, the original Agreement for City Prosecutor/Criminal Legal Services between the City of Meridian and the City of Boise dated November 1, 2002, which incorporates Addendums Nos. I, 2, 3, 4, and 5 shall remain in full force and effect. IT IS SO AGREED. lei TNESS WHEREO ,the parties have executed this Addendum No. 5 on this ~!ltday of $"e f'P/Y~ ~~/` 2008. CITY OF MERIDIAN 7 BY: ~~1'~ ~ .~Gd~ Mayor Tam, y de Weerd ,~„sic~nuyrr` r,~ ATTEST: `_ . ~~`t ~ ~~b/,~~, r ~~: .~ ~a BY: _ Jaycee loran, pity k ~ ~. '9pq r tg~c ., ~• CITY OF BOISE ~~~'-h~r~~ ~trS-~~~~~t~ BY: Mayor David Bieter ~+ ~~ Meridian Addendum No. 6 EXHIBIT "B" CONTRACT EXTENSION - FY-2009 Prosecution and Criminal Leval Service far the Citv of Meridian Cost for Services The Boise City Attorney's office proposes to continue to offer Meridian City a flat annual fee to be billed in monthly installments to provide the services described in this proposal. Prima, Legal Services Primary prosecutorial legal services include: • Prosecutorial intake screening and review of all police-generated misdemeanor reports and citations; • Timely filing decision and notification back to MPD and customer; • Prosecution of infractions and misdemeanors occurring within the Meridian City limits or Pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between MPD and BPD; • Coverage of the additional caseloads in the new criminal courtrooms assigned by the Trial Court Administrator. Primary civil legal advice and guidance to the Meridian Police Chief and MPD include: • Access to members of the Public Safety Division for immediate assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week through cell phone and/or pager under MPD's protocol; • On-site legal services by a rotation of police attorneys three half-days each week; • Routine review and approval of MPD's public records requests and property dispositions; • Legal training for Block Training and Advanced Academy on search and seizure, trial preparation, investigations, and domestic violence; • Training on other needs (including those identified through the screening process) by request of the Meridian Police Chief; • Regular legal bulletins, including Idaho case law, U.S. Supreme Court, and the Ninth Circuit. Annual Cost - $255,744 Monthly Installment - $21,312 L J CITY OF BOISE To: Mayor and Council FROM: Jodi Nafzger, Assistant City Attorney ORDINANCE or RESOLUTION NUMBER: DATE: September 15, 2008 SUBJECT: Meridian Ciry Prosecution Services Contract Extension ACTION REQUIRED: Approval ofresolution for contract extension for Meridian prosecution and police advisor services for fiscal year 2009. FISCAL IMPACT/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: Meridian City will pay the City of Boise $21,312 per month. The total annual amount will be $255,744. This represents an overall bid increase of 5.8%, which includes the new case management system, adding another half-day (for a total of 3 half-days} of on-site attorney advice by a rotation of 2-3 police attorneys, and increased travel costs. BACKGROUND: The City Attorney's Qffice presented the contract extension proposal to the Meridian City Council on July 9, 2008. The proposal was again met with much satisfaction and Meridian has accepted the terms of the attached contract in the adoption of their 2009 budget. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Addendum No. 6 to the 2002 Agreement for Prosecution Services, and Contract Extension - FY-2009. ~`•. ~. .; ,.;~~, RESOLUTION 2021 ~l BISTERFELDT, CLEGG, EBERLE, BY THE CO ~ ~ ~ JpRDAN, SHEALY AND TIBBS ., e ~ ~~ RESOLUTION APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 6 TAORA ~ N~EA THE CITYD A BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY (LEGAL DEP OF MERIDIAN FOR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL% E MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AUTHORIZING TH TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID ADDENDUM NO.6 ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY, IDAHO: tion 1. That Addendum No. 6 to an Agreement by and between the City of Sec ise Ci and the City of Meridian, a copy of said Addendum No. 6 marked Exhibit "A" Bo ~' attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, be, and the same is hereby, approved as to both form and content. Section 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized to res ectively execute and attest said Addendum No. 6 for and on behalf of the City of p Boise City. Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. the Council of the City of Boise City, Idaho this 23rd day of ADOPTED by ~ 2008. Se tember the Ma or of the City of Boise City, this 23rd day of APPROVED by Y September _~, 2008. ATTEST: APPROVED: CITY CLERK -John E • Faw MAYOR -David H. Bieter R-360-08 September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUtJCII MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-T REQUEST Approve 2~9 Stenographic Service Agreement with MD ~Ilis, Inc. for Stenographic Services AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings sha8 become property of the City of Meridian. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ~ ~~C~' s IUD ~~~~° TffiS AGP~~!~MENT, made this ~ day of 2008, by and betvwe~ the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", whose address is 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and M. D. Willis, Ll{~y hereinafter referred t0 A4 "Contractor", whom address 1S 1695 E. Comisky, Meridian, Idaho, 8:1642 PRENIISES: A. Whereas, as part of its rocords, CITY dues to produce minutes and verbatim transcripts of hems; aad, B. Whereas, CONTRACTOR is in the busi~ss of providing stenographic services to public bodies, and others who need verbatim tr~mscaipts; arul G Whererui, CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to enter irrto an agreement whereby, CONTRACTOR would furnish stenographic service to the CITY. NOW, Z~EREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. S~rope of Services: CONTRACTOR shall perform atl the y services provided under this a in coffiection with taking and testimony at hearings in P~ before the Meridian City Councrl and the Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission. CONTRACTOR agrees to attend four (4) regular City Council meetings each mondr, aad two (2) regular scheduled Planting and Zoning Commission m each moutL, and at those meetings, to firms the proceedings as to produce mimrtes ar~d verbatim hmnaaipts. CONTRACTOR wr71 furnish m the City Attorney and the Planning I~pattment, within two worlong days following a given meeting, a rough draft of the tt~ript. A fi~l transcript shall be finmsla3d to the City Clew's office with a copy thereof, within five working days following the meeting. In the event CITY requires additio~l stenographic services beyond the six monthly meetings set forth above, CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such additimral services provided that CONTRACTOR receives not less than two days notice prior to such meeting or meetings. 2. Contractor Noa-ARendauoe -Emergency: In tlar event that an emergency or Mme other event not within CONTRACTOR'S control prevents CONTRACTOR firm attending one of the meetings herein, CON'TRACTOR'S at that meeting shall be excused and CONTRACTOR shall ptieparer the minutes/hearing r~rd fi~ audio tapes furnished by the City Clerk. In that event, CONTRACTOR shall not be paid the meeting ice fee but will be compenmted for the actanl transcripiioa Agreement for Sthic Services FY09 -page 1 of 1 • CONTRACTOR shall notify the City Clerk as soon as possible regarding the emergency and reason for non-a~endance. 3. Time of Performance: The services of CONTRACTOR are to commence on the 1ffi day of October, 2008 and continue through the 30`~ day of Sept, 2009, unless terminated or renewed. 4. Compensation: CITY shall pay to CONTRACTOR the sum of TWENTY DOLLARS ($20.00) p~ hour (roundad to the n one-half hour) per meeting attendmnce vY CONTRACTOR and fin~ther shall send an ~~ attached dmamnent transcription attach and produce an original hanscript, o~ copy thereof and one Microso~ Word formatted electronic copy upon request at SIX DOLLARS ($6.00) per page ba~rl. upon single s~ced with margins of not more than one inch each on all sides on as 81/2" z 11" page with the font to be Anal 12 Pitch. S. Method of Payme~ CONTRACTOR wFl invoice the City ofMeridian Acxounting Department at 33 Fast Idaho Avenue, IVieridiaa~, Idaho 83642 directly for all current amounts earned under this Agreement at the end of each morrth. The CITY will pay all invoices no later than the 15~ day of the month following delivery of the Invoice to CITY. 6. Notices: Any and all notices requital to be given by either of the parties lumrto, unless otherwise . in this agreemerrt, shall be in vvtiting aad be deemed communicated when mailed is the United Sues mail, certified, tnttnn receipt r~aest~, adder as follows: City of Meridimt 33 I~ Idaho Avenue Meridiem, Idaho 83642 M. D. Willis, Inc. 1695 E. Comisky Meridian, Idaho, 83642 Either party may change their address for the propose of this ~a~ph by giving written notice of such change to the other ffi the maoner herein provided. 8. Attorney Fem: Should any litigation be ~ lutvveen the parties hereto concxrning this Agroeme~ the Prevailing parry shall be e~itled, in addition to any other relief as may be gcaoted, to court costs and reaso~ble attotne3rs' fees ~ determined by a Court of o~ juri~iction. This provision shall be deemed to be a e coact betw~n the pmrties aad shall saivive arty de~ilt; won or forfeiture of this Agreemment. Agr~ment for Stenographic Servicos 1'Y09 -page 2 of t • • 9. Time is of the Essence: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the with n to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations larreimder shall r~onstiiute a breach oi; and a default under, this Agreement by the party so f~nling to 10. SnbrAntracffiag: None of the nrrvices covered b-y this aunt shall be subcontracted without the prior written con~t of the CITY. CONTRAACTOR shall be fuuy responsible to CITY for the acts and omisnions of subcontractors, and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by them, as CONTRACTOR is for the acts and omissions of pei~n directly employed by CONTRACTOR. 11. Assignment: It is expressly agc~eed and understood bry the parties hereto, that CONTRACTOR shall not have the right to as~gn, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of its rights under this Agr~me~ except upon the prior express written of CITY. 12. Drs~imiaation Proh>'bi~: In performing the cervices required herein, CONTRACTOR shall not dis~nainate aga;m~ any perm on the basis of race; color, religion, sex, rational origin or , age or disabdity- 13. Duplication, ReprodacNon and Use of 1Vlaterial: No material pr~liuCed in whole or in part wader this A-greemeot shall bar subject to copyright in the United States or in arty other country. The CITY shall have icted authority tv publish, disclose and otlierwis~ use, in whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepaz+ed under this Agreement. 14. Tenminafton for Caase: ~ through any caiu~, CON'T'RACTOR, its officers, employees, or agents fails to fiilfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this A- violates any of the covenaNs, ~~ or stipulations of this Agreement, CITY shall thereupon have the right to tenmi~te this Agreement by giving written notice to CONTRACTOR of such won and sJPg the effective date thereof at lemt fifteen (15~ days before the effective date of such termination In such event, all finished or rmfmished daxrments, data, maps, studies, ~~ models, P~ aad Pmp~ by CONTRACTOR under this Agr~aerrt shall, at the option of CITY, become its property, and CONTRACTOR shall be errtitled to receive just and egnrtable compensation for auy work orr7y cromple~d Notwithstandingthe above, CONTRACTOR shall not be relieved of liability to CITY for damages sustaboa~d by CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agtuemerrt by CONTRACTOR, and CITY may withhold any ~ymeats to CONTRACTOR for the purposes of offset nolfi sack time as the exit amount of damages due CITY from CONTRACTOR are detemuined. This provision shill survive the won of this Agrea=meat aad shall ~t relieve CONTRACTOR of its liability ~ CITY for damages. Agr~ent for Stenographic Services FY09 -page 3 of 3 ~ ~ CITY understands and acknowledges that CONTRACTOR has the right to terminate due to cause instigated by CITY. in that situation, CONTRACTOR would have the same rights as CITY identified herein. 16. Independent Co~etor Status: Both the CITY and CONTRACTOR agree that the relationship cns~d by this agreement is that of independent aa~tor amd. not that of employee and employer. CONTRACTOR is responv'ble for the payment of any taxes, including, but not limited to, all federal, state and iocs:l per~nal and business income taxes, sales anti ux taxes, other business taxes and license fees, arising out of the activities of the CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR is respon~'ble to keep in force all ne~sary public liability insurance and vehicle insurance with carriers which are satisfactory to CITY, and shall hold the CITY harmless from all claims, demands or suits arising out of the performance of xrvices user this agreement. 17. Insurance: CONTRACTOR will supply CITY with prof of ins~aance general liability and vehicular liability ins~uance limits of not leas than FIVE HUNDRID THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000). This provision may be waived for an contractor. Waived Initial 18. Constra~iton and Severability: If any part of this Agreement is land to be invalid or unenforcas#ble, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part ofthis Agreement ~ long as the rem ofthe Agtcement is r~nably capable of completion. 19.Opt~ton to Rencw: CITY shall have the option do renew this agreement for eve one year periods p~novu3ed that CITY notifies CONTRACTOR no later than thirty (30) days before the eatcl of this agreement and any extension or renewal thereofi of CITY'S exer+ci~ of such option. 20. Entire Ag~eme~ This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and s~ any anti all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether devious to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. 21. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and and enforced in accordance with the laws ofthe State of Idaho, and the ordinances ofthe City of Meridian. 22. Approval R~mir~l: This A shall not become effective or binding until approved by the City of Meridian. Agreement for Stenographic Services FY09 -page 4 of 4 • IIN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this A- and made it effectsve as heieinabove provided. DATED AND 3IG1~iED this ~~day of September, 2008. CITY OF N~RIDIAN BY- ~/~ ~GTi Tammy de We ~, Mayor Attu: ~~~,,,,:~~; ~, ~:.,,~~,,, o Jay .Holman, City Clerk= S~~ s' '9p t ts't ~ • 4~~.~ ~ ~ , M. D. WILLIS, INC. BY: M. De® Willis, President ` s~ Eileen Willis, Agreement for Stenogrdpluc Services FY09 -page 5 of 5 ~ ~ ~ September 5, 2(~8 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2~8 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6 REQUEST Swear in Brad Hoaglun as City Council Member Seat No. 2 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Matericls presented at pubUc meeiines shall become properly of the City of Meddlan. ~ ~ ~ OFFICIAL OATH OF OFFICE I, Brad Hoaglun do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Idaho, and the Laws and Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho and that I will to the best of my ability, faithfully perform the duties of the office of City Council of Meridian, Idaho, during my continuance therein, so help me God. Brad Hoaglun Subscribed and sworn to before me This 9t" day of Septmber, 2008. Tammy eerd Mayor ity of Meridian Filed Q! (~~ ~,,,~„~,~,~.,... oar 'L ,~ ~o ~.. - SEAL Jaycee ~ Holman ~ ~-- ~`~ City Clerk -City of Meridian ~~'-,9d ~r ~s~c •~ .~,,,~~` ', ~~ oP ,''~'`~~n~~inu sin+"`~~~`\`. • September 5, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Finance Department ITEM NO. 7-A-1 REQUEST Ada County Landfill Rates /Service Update AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS w' Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubpc meetings shall become properly of ftre City of Meridian. • • September 5, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Legal Department ITEM NO. 7-8-1 REQUEST Discussion on FY09 Benefits AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. ~°e }~ '~ L ,~'~ 1 +~ j .:. _ q 4 1 ~: W .~ Vl ^® ~ ~ ~~ ~ N '~ r , ® ~ C.~: ~ ~ +~ (~' ~ ; _. `~ ~ N m W E U 2. a • 7 ~ E O ~ N X - y I ~ m ~ ~ a> 9 asap .c m c d F E O .~ er a Z Z' g~ h 9 .~ _ ~ -o 'c .a t ~ o -p p 'm0 a U m a ~ ~ E `~ ~ ~ ~ C= O Ul ~~" a' ~O O ~~ O T,. ~O U mU i. ('7 ~~ N o ~ iL .. o~ O o LL ~ ~ ~ O ~ Zp ~ aYi. 0 O ~ ' ~ ~ c ~ ° m O QG7 p (() ~ N ~ g ~ p ~ ~ ~ its ~ ti ~ '~ ~ : O m O- a ~ ~ r O O ~ r . O o_ tC f$j ~ 06~ 7 ~ ($1 '~O '~ ~. O Q a O ~d ~ O ~°. + (0 O ~ ~ U _ O a- N- ~ ~ EO °~ U m E O m ~ m sr ~ '~ ~ ~ a ~ cad ® s v ~ ~-~ ~ o m d ~ -ma -° c~O' ~, a ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ > °.~ o ~O a > o ~ m ~ v m ~ °~ ~C ~ ~ m~ ~°~. m ~ C3 0 ~ >- a o ~ V m U ~`~~ vu a ~~ o V ~ W Z ~ as S U N Q 7 g ~ 2 ~ !6 ~~ O 0 0 G M N N ~ ~ N 0 . ~ K~ ~ ~... ~ O ~ ~ o ffT O O O r 0 '~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ O O ~ O ®. m ~ 3 ~ p p lfI ~ r u Lfl Fk f ~ ~ y o E T rr ~ c6 1 ~ O ~ ~;,, ~ ~ ~ U ~ C7 in 0~.. ~ ~ ~ g m d o c~ aci~ ~~ ~ ~a-sv ~ ` ® ~ - y N 7 p v ~ c 0 ~ ~ ~ C m '~ c6 O 'i'i ~ = ~ .OV a eo o' o 7 N ~ er: '~ O fly V U =~~ m ++ E C c C o ~ ~ m ~ m E ° v ~ m~ c O ~ (b I wwu ~ ~ C ? "_ ~ a. N a 6~ ~'~. G a m .. !. m ~ , '° .. ww ~ ~ September 5, 2008 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Public Works Department ITEM NO. 7-C-1 REQUEST PW Departmental Reorganization AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • ! September 12, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 16, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 7-D-~ REQUEST Mutual Aid /Joint Powers Agreement Regarding Controlled Substances & Illicit Drugs AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: See aMached CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: ~; ~IASt,-~~ CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of MerWian. MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the SHERIFF'S OFFICES OF CANYON COUNTY & ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; and THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITIES OF NAMPA, CALDWELL, BOISE, MERIDIAN & GARDEN CITY, IDAHO, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "parties" and each individually as a "party," aze public agencies as defined and authorized by Idaho Code §§67-2326, 67-2327 & 67-2328 to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this Mutual Aid/Joint Powers Agreement (the "Agreement"), with respect to law enforcement regazding controlled substances and illicit drugs, as authorized by Idaho Code §§67-2328 & 67-2337 and other applicable state and federal statutes and regulations; and WHEREAS, controlled substances and illicit drugs aze an ongoing and continuing law enforcement problem which frequently crosses county lines; and WHEREAS, controlled substances and illicit drugs continue to have a serious negative impact on the citizens and communities in both Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, the Ada County Sheriff s Office, the Canyon County Sheriff's Office, the Boise Police Deparkment, Caldwell Police, Nampa Police, Meridian Police and Gazden City Police cooperate in atwo-county drug enforcement effort; and WHEREAS, it will benefit the taxpayers of both Ada and Canyon Counties to establish a cooperative law enforcement program to combat controlled substances and illicit drugs; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to be able to voluntarily assist each other, when needed, by the exchange of law enforcement services and facilities; and MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - I WHEREAS, each party owns and maintains equipment and employs personnel to perform their respective duties and responsibilities; and WHEREAS, each party has sufficient equipment and personnel to enable it to provide assistance to the other parties under this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the geographical boundaries of each party are located in such a manner as to enable each party to render mutual aid assistance to another under this Agreement; and WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this Agreement to permit the parties to make the most efficient use of their powers by cooperating to their mutual advantage and, thereby, provide services and facilities in a manner that will accord best with geographic, economic, population, and other factors influencing the needs and development of the local community. NOW, TIIEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. Definitions. (a) "Party" or "parties" mean the Sheriff's Offices of Canyon County & Ada County, Idaho; and the Police Departments of the cities of Nampa, Caldwell, Boise, Meridian & Garden City, Idaho, or such entities acting by their respective law enforcement agencies if the context so requires; (b) "Requesting Parry" means any party requesting law enforcement assistance from any other party; (c) "Assisting Party" means any party rendering law enforcement assistance to a requesting parry; (d) "Voluntary Assistance" means a party working on controlled substance and/or illicit drug investigations in the other parry's jurisdiction which is related to a criminal investigation in the jurisdiction of the parry offering voluntary assistance; MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 2 (e) "Chief Law Enforcement Officer" means that person who is a department or agency head with peace officer jurisdiction or his/her duly authorized representative having primary responsibility for law enforcement within the jurisdiction or territory, whether designated by appointment or election; (f) "Officer" means any sworn peace officer directly employed by the parties hereto or a reserve officer. The term "officer" includes all persons temporarily assigned by a party. Section 2. Pu ose. The purpose of this Agreement is to obtain maximum efficiency in cooperative law enforcement operations through mutual assistance within each party's jurisdiction pursuant to the terms of this Agreement in regard to controlled substances and illicit drugs. The duty of each party under this Agreement is discretionary, but each party agrees that it will provide such assistance to the extent it determines that it has sufficient equipment and personnel to provide the requested assistance as described in this Agreement. All parties agree that the purpose of this Agreement is not to provide normal and usual law enforcement duties for the other party. Each party acknowledges that it has no right to demand assistance of another party. Section 3. Duration of Agreement. This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until any party terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 14 of this Agreement. Section 4. Administration of Mutual Aid/Joint Powers Agreement. This Agreement shall be administered by athree-member board comprised of the Canyon County Sheriff, the Ada County Sheriff, and the Chief of Police of one of the Police Departments which are a party to this Agreement beginning with the Chief of Police of the Meridian Police Department. Both Sheriffs shall serve continuously from the Effective Date of this Agreement MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 3 as set forth in Section 17(c) hereof; the third member Chief of Police shall serve atwo-yeaz term commencing with the Effective Date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 17(c) hereof and, at the conclusion of said two-yeaz term, replaced with the next successive Chief of Police as hereinafter set forth, to-wit: Meridian Gazden City Nampa Caldwell Boise The boazd shall meet at least annually and at any other time, subject to the call of the Chairman of the board. Section 5. Consent to Extension of Peace Officer Authority. The respective Chief Law Enforcement Officers of each of the parties hereby severally consent that the authority as a peace officer of the officers of each and every other party hereto, in regazd to investigations concerning controlled substances and illicit drugs, is extended into the jurisdiction or territory of such consenting Chief Law Enforcement Officer as follows: (a) To officers while assigned to narcotics and/or gang detectives of the parties. (b) To any officers when requested by such Chief Law Enforcement Officer or senior ranking officer on duty. (c) Upon recognition by an officer of a situation or circumstance within the jurisdiction or territory of the parties to this Agreement which requires law enforcement action or other emergency action. The party whose officer is performing such voluntary assistance shall notify the party within whose territory or jurisdiction the voluntary assistance is being rendered as required by I.C.67-2337(5). General control of officers acting outside their original MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 4 jurisdiction is addressed in Section 7 of this Agreement. In situations where prior notice is not practical, full notice will be provided for as soon as possible. (d) On those occasions when an officer of a parry is working on a law enforcement case in the city or county of another parry, the officer will enjoy full powers of investigation and arrest consistent with I. C. 67-2337. ( e) When an officer of a party enters the jurisdiction of another party to work on drug cases in the jurisdiction of the other party, the officer shall notify the narcotics supervisor of the destination jurisdiction of his/her presence and intentions. (f) In all instances of assistance, whether requested or voluntary, the assisting party may render any such assistance as it can give consistent with its own law enforcement needs at the time. In all instances of assistance, whether requested or voluntary, the assisting parry may at any time and at its discretion withdraw such assistance when it becomes obvious to the assisting parties' senior ranking officer that they are needed in their own jurisdiction. All assistance rendered under the authority of this section shall be within Ada County and Canyon County. Section 6. Request Procedure. Requests for mutual aid shall be made through presently established communications systems such as telephone, police radio, or teletype. Responses for law enforcement mutual aid outlined in this Agreement shall be within the territorial limits of Ada County and Canyon County. Requests for assistance involving major occurrences which may require a large number of officers, resources, or a considerable expenditure of time shall be made to an officer of command status of the assisting party as defined by the assisting agency's departmental policy manual. MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 5 Section 7. Control in Reauest-Assistance Oaerations. Officers of the requesting party will be primarily responsible for making and processing arrests and the impounding and/or safeguarding of lives or property within the territorial boundaries of its jurisdiction. When an assisting officer, while in the requesting jurisdiction, takes a person or property into custody, he or she shall relinquish custody of said person or property at the earliest convenience to an officer of the requesting party for disposition in accordance with the laws of the requesting jurisdiction. Property subject to forfeiture will be handled in accordance with Tdaho Code §§37-2744 and 37-2744A. Officers of the assisting party who are subpoenaed to court as a direct or indirect result of providing assistance shall honor all subpoenas by the requesting jurisdiction. Each party shall bear all costs and pay all compensation associated with their officers in answering subpoenas or making court appearances. Section 8. Resuonsibility for Damages. Each party shall assume complete liability for damages, claims, expenses or injuries resulting from the conduct of or caused by its officers under this Agreement pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-2337(4). Section 9. Standard of Conduct. Each party providing assistance shall maintain the standards of professional conduct of a peace officer as required by Idaho law. Section 10. Financing and Personnel. There shall be no joint financing of activities under this Agreement. No compensation shall be due and owing for services rendered and equipment furnished under this Agreement by a party. Each party agrees to be responsible for the payment of compensation and benefits for its MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 6 employees who provide mutual aid assistance under this Agreement for another party. Each party shall independently budget for expected expenses under this Agreement. Officers of the assisting party shall not be considered employees of the requesting party. Each party shall be responsible for all wages, salaries, benefits, insurance and workers' compensation for their respective officers. Section 11. Provision of Eauipment. In rendering mutual law enforcement assistance, each party shall be responsible for the provision and maintenance of its own equipment, materials, and supplies except in cases of emergency wherein it appears to the officers or employees immediately involved that the sharing or use of equipment owned or furnished by another party or parties is necessary or proper. Each party shall bear the costs for any damage done to equipment owned by the party while it is being transported to the place of assistance, while it is used at the place of assistance whether by the party or another party, or while it is being returned after the assistance, to the extent it is not covered by the insurance of the party providing it. However, if a party is requesting use of another party's equipment without the involvement of officers from the assisting party in deployment and utilization of said equipment, then the requesting party shall be responsible for any damage done to the equipment during transport, use or return to the extent it is not covered by the insurance of the party providing it. Due to the nature of this Agreement, it is not contemplated that there will be a need to acquire, hold, and/or dispose of any real or personal property in the exercise of this Agreement, except as provided for in this section. Section 12. Reports. After occurrences wherein mutual law enforcement assistance was required and given, all participating parties shall make an exchange of all reports arising out of such operation; MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 7 provided, however, that nothing in this section shall purport to waive, limit or remove the duties of confidentiality imposed or allowed by law as to any such reports or the contents thereof. The narcotics reports shall be sent to the narcotics detective's supervisor of the other party upon report completion. Section 13. Review of Agreement. T'he parties may review this Agreement on a regulaz basis or as needed to evaluate the sufficiency of the Agreement in addressing the needs of the parties. The parties may make any desired changes in this Agreement provided they aze mutually agreed upon and documented in writing. Section 14. Voluntary Termination. This Agreement may be voluntarily terminated in whole or in part as to any party hereto on notice by the party given in writing to all other parties hereto not less than thirty (30) days in advance of the contemplated termination. Parties agree to cooperate and participate in the prosecution of any cases which azose under this Agreement and prior to any termination of this Agreement. Section 15. Joint Law Enforcement Ouerations Included. Any joint law enforcement operations, present or future, in which the facilities, equipment, or personnel of any of the parties to this Agreement are utilized shall be deemed within the purview of this Agreement and be subject to all provisions hereof unless otherwise provided for by the specific agreement among the parties thereto. Additional or supplemental joint operations, joint powers and mutual aid agreements entered into by any of the parties to this Agreement may be added to this Agreement and attached as addendums hereto. All such addendums so added shall merge with this Agreement and be considered a part hereof. If any MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 8 conflicts arise between the main body of this Agreement and the terms of the addendums hereto, the conflict shall be resolved by giving precedence to the terms of the addendum, unless such precedence would result in a violation of law. Section 16. Pre-Incident Plannin . The commanding officers and other individuals designated by them may from time to time mutually establish pre-incident plans which shall indicate the type and locations of potential problem azeas where mutual aid assistance may be needed. This Agreement may be supplemented by schedules and lists of types of equipment and personnel that would be dispatched under various possible circumstances and the number of personnel that would be dispatched under certain circumstances. In addition, the parties may engage in mutual training sessions to promote the efficient operation of this Agreement. The parties agree to take such steps as aze feasible to standazdize the equipment and procedures used to provide assistance under this Agreement. Section 17. Miscellaneous. (a) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as either limiting or extending the lawful jurisdiction of any party hereto other than as expressly set forth herein; (b) Appropriate officials of the parties may promulgate such written operation procedures in implementation of this Agreement as to them appeaz desirable; (c) This Agreement shall be effective upon the execution of the original by the parties hereto and upon one original being deposited with the keeper of the records of each of the parties hereto. For purposes of this Agreement, said Effective Date is 2008; (d) All law enforcement powers, all of the privileges and immunities from liability, exemptions from law, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, workers' compensation MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 9 and other benefits which apply to the activity of officers, agents or employees when performing their respective functions within the territorial limits of their respective political subdivisions shall apply to them to the same degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of their functions and duties extraterritorially under the provisions of the Agreement. (e) This Agreement does not create a separate legal entity. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the respective parties have given their respective consents and do execute this Agreement by and through their legal representative, who are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of that party. CANYON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ' Smith, Sheriff NAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT gy. ~ _...,~ _ _.. __ ~_Bill Augs er, Chief of Police ADA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE Bye Gary e heri CALDWELL POLICE DEPARTMENT By: Chris Allgood, ief of Police BOISE POLICE DEPARTMENT By: Mil a Masterson Chief of Police POLICE DEPARTMENT By; Hensley, Chief of MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT By: ~~, Jeff ey 'ef of Police DepertmentUvlutual Aid Joint Powers Agreement 2008 rev.10 7 08.doc MUTUAL AIDIJOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -10 MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the SHERIFF'S OFFICES OF CANYON COUNTY & ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; and THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITIES OF NAMPA, CALDWELL, BOISE, MERIDIAN & GARDEN CITY, IDAHO, hereinatler collectively refen~ed to as the "parries" and each singly as a "party," are public agencies as defined by Idaho Code §67-2327 and are authorized by Idaho. Code §67-2328 to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this Mutual Aid/Joint Powers Agreement (the "Agreement', with respect to law enforcement regarding illegally controlled substances and illicit drugs, as authorized by Idaho Code §§67-2328 & 67-2337 and other applicable state and federal statutes and regulations; and WHEREAS, illegal controlled substances and illicit drugs are an ongoing and continuing law enforcement problem which frequently crosses county lines; and WHEREAS, illegal controlled substances and illicit drugs continue to have a serious negative impact on the citizens and communities in both Ada and Canyon Counties; and WHEREAS, the Ada County Sheriff's Oi~ce, the Canyon County Sheriffs Office, the Boise Police Department, Caldwell Police, Nampa Police, Meridian Police and Garden City Police cooperate in atwo-county drug enforcement effort; and WHEREAS, it will benefit the taxpayers of both Ada and Canyon Counties to establish a cooperative law enforcement program to combat illegal controlled substances and illicit drugs; and MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -1 • WHEREAS, the parties desire to be able to voluntarily assist each other, when needed, by the exchange of law enforcement services and facilities; and WHEREAS, each party owns and maintains equipment and employs personnel to perform their respective duties and responsibilities; and WHEREAS, each party has sufficient equipment and personnel to enable it to provide assistance to the other parties under this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the geographical boundaries of each party are located in such a manner as to enable each party to render mutual aid assistance to another under this Agreement; aad WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this Agreement to permit the parties to make the most efficient use of their powers by cooperating to their mutual advantage and, thereby, provide services and facilities in a manner that will accord best with geographic, economic, population, and other factors influencing the needs and development of the local community. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. De+. (a) "Party" or "parties" mean the Sheriff s Offices of Canyon County & Ada County, Idaho; and the Police Departments of the cities of Nampa, Caldwell, Boise, Meridian & Garden City, Idaho, or such entities acting by their respective law enforcement agencies if the context so requires; (b) "Requesting Party" means anY PAY requesting law enforcement assistance from any other party; (c) "Assisting Party" means any party rendering law enforcement assistance to a requesting Party; MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 2 • ~ • (d) "Voluntary Assistance" means a parry working on an illegal controlled substance and/or illicit drug investigations in the other party's jurisdiction which is related to a criminal investigation in the jurisdiction of the party offering voluntary assistance; (e} "Chief Law Enforcement Officer" means that person who is a department or agency head with peace officer jurisdiction or his/her duly authorized representative having primary responsibility for law enforcement within the jurisdiction or territory, whether designated by appointment or election; (fj "Officer" means any sworn peace officer directly employed by the parties hereto or a reserve officer. The term "officer" includes all persons temporarily assigned by a party. Section 2. Parnose. The purpose of this Agreement is to obtain maximum efficiency in cooperative law enforcement operations through mutual assistance within each party's jurisdiction pursuant to the terms of this Agreement in regard to illegally controlled substances and illicit drugs. The duty of each party under this Agreement is discretionary, but each party agrees that it will provide such assistance to the extent it determines that it has sufficient equipment and personnel to provide the requested assistance as described in this Agreement. All parties agree that the purpose of this Agreement is not to provide normal and usual law enforcement duties for the other party. Each party acknowledges that it has no right to demand assistance of aaother party. Section 3. Duration of Aureemenk This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until any party terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 14 of this Agreement. MUTUAL AIDlJOIATT POWERS AGREEMENT - 3 • Section 4. Administration of Mntaai Aid/Joint Powers Agreement. This Agreement shall be administered by athree-member board comprised of the Canyon County Sheriff, the Ada County Sheriff, and the Chief of Police of one of the Police Departments which are a party to this Agreement beginning with the Chief of Police of the Meridian Police Department. Both Sheriffs shall serve continuously from the Effective Date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 17(c) hereof; the third member Chief of Police shall serve atwo-year term commencing with the Effective Date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 17(c) hereof and, at the conclusion of said two-year term, replaced with the next successive Chief of Police as hereinafter set forth, to-wit: Meridian Garden City Nampa Caldwell Boise The board shall meet at least annually and at any other time, subject to the call of the Chairman of the board. Section 5. Consent to Extension of Peace Officer Anthor~rtv. The respective Chief Law Enforcement Officers of each of the parties hereby severally consent that the authority as a peace officer of the officers of each and every other party hereto, in regard to investigations concerning illegally controlled substances and illicit drugs, is extended into the jurisdiction or territory of such consenting Chief Law Enforcement Officer as follows: (a) To narcotics and gang detectives of the parties. (b) When requested by such Chief Law Enforcement Officer or senior ranking officer on duty. MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 4 r: (c) Upon the recognition by any such officer of a situation or circumstance within the jurisdiction or territory of the parties to this Agreement which requires law enforcement action or other emergency action. The party whose officer is performing such voluntary assistance shall notify the party within whose territory or jurisdiction the voluntary assistance is being rendered. General control of officers acting outside their original jurisdiction is addressed in Section 7 of this Agreement. In situations where prior notice is not practical, full notice will be provided for as soon as possible. {d) Gn those occasions when an officer from either party is working on a law enforcement case in the county of the other party, they will enjoy full powers of investigation and arrest consistent with Idaho Code Section 67-2337. ( e) When an officer enters the jurisdiction of the other party to work on drug cases in the jurisdiction of the other party, the officer shall notify the narcotics supervisor of the destination jurisdiction of his/her presence and intentions. (f) In all instances of assistance, whether requested or voluntary, the assisting party may render any such assistance as it can give consistent with its own law enforcement needs at the time. In all instances of assistance, whether requested or voluntary, the assisting party may at any time and at its discretion withdraw such assistance when it becomes obvious to the assisting parties' senior ranking officer that they are needed in their own jurisdiction. All assistance rendered under the authority of this section shall be within Ada County and Canyon County. Section 6. Rearrest Procedure. Requests for mutual aid shall be made through presently established communications systems, telephone and police radio, or teletype. Responses for law enforcement mutual aid outlined in this Agreement shall be within Ada County aad Canyon County. MUTUAL AIDlJOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - S • • • Requests for assistance involving major occurrences which may require a large number of officers, resources, or a considerable expenditure of time shall be made to an officer of command status of the assisting party as defined by the assisting agency's departmental policy manual. Section 7. Control in Rearrest-Assistance Operations. Officers of the requesting party will be primarily responsible for making and processing arrests and the impounding and/or safeguarding of lives or property within the territorial boundaries of its jurisdiction. When an assisting officer, while in the requesting jurisdiction, takes a person or property into custody, he or she shall relinquish custody of said person or property at the earliest convenience to an officer of the requesting party for disposition in accordance with the laws of the requesting jurisdiction. Property subject to forfeiture will be handled in accordance with Idaho Code §§37-2744 and 37-2744A. Officers of the assisting party who are subpoenaed to court as a direct or indirect result of providing assistance shall honor all subpoenas by the requesting jurisdiction. Each party shall bear all costs and pay all compensation associated with their officers in answering subpoenas or making court appearances. Section 8. Responsibility for Damanes. Each party shall assume complete liability for damages, claims, expenses or injuries resulting from the conduct of or caused by its officers under this Agreement pursuant to Idaho Code Section b7-2337(4). Section 9. Standard of Conduct, Each party providing assistance shall maintain the standards of professional conduct of a peace officer as required by Idaho law. MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 6 Section 10. Fnnancine and Personnel There shall be no joint financing of activities under this Agreement. No compensation shall be due and owing for services rendered and equipment famished under this Agreement by a party. Each party agrees to be responsible for the payment of compensation and benefits for its employees who provide mutual aid assistance under this Agreement for another party. Each party shall independently budget far expected expenses under this Agreement. Officers of the assisting party shall not be considered employees of the requesting party. Each party shall be responsible for all wages, salaries, benefits, insurance and workers' compensation for their respective officers. Section 11. Provision of Eaniument. In rendering mutual law enforcement assistance, each party shall be responsible for the provision and maintenance of its own equipment, materials, and supplies except in cases of emergency wherein it appears to the officers or employees immediately involved that the sharing or use of equipment owned or fiunished by another party or parties is necessary or proper. Each party shall bear the costs for any damage done to equipment while it is being transported to the place of assistance, while it is used at the place of assistance, or while it is being returned after the assistance, to the extent it is not covered by the insurance of the party providing it. However, if a party is requesting use of another party's equipment without the involvement of officers from the assisting party in deployment and utilization of said equipment, then the requesting party shall be responsible for any damage done to the equipment during transport, use or return to the extent it is not covered by the insurance of the party providing it. Due to the nature of this Agreement, it is not contemplated that there will be a need to acquire, MUTUAL AIDIJOIlVT POWERS AGREEMENT - 7 .. hold, and/or dispose of any real or personal property in the exercise of this Agreement, except as provided for in this section. Section 12. Re°orts. After occurrences wherein mutual Iaw enforcement assistance was required and given, all participating parties shall make an exchange of all reports arising out of such operation; provided, however, that nothing in this section shall purport to waive, limit or remove the duties of confidentiality imposed or allowed by law as to any such reports or the contents thereof. The narcotics reports shall be sent to the narcotics detective's supervisor of the other party upon report completion. Section 13. Review of Agreement. The parties may review this Agreement on a regular basis or as needed to evaluate the sufficiency of the Agreement in addressing the needs of the parties. The parties may make any desired changes in this Agreement provided they are mutually agreed upon and documented in writing. Section 1~4. Voluntary Termination. This Agreement may be voluntarily terminated in whole or in part as to any party hereto on notice by the party given in writing to all other parties hereto not less than thirty (30) days in advance of the contemplated termination. Parties agree to cooperate and participate in the prosecution of any cases which arose under this Agreement and prior to any termination of this Agreement. Section 15. Joint Law Enforcement Operations Included. Any joint law enforcement operations, present or future, in which the facilities, equipment, or personnel of any of the parties to this Agreement are utilized shall be deemed MUTUALAID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 8 ~ i within the purview of this Agreement and be subject to all provisions hereof unless otherwise provided for by the specific agreement among the parties thereto. Additional or supplemental joint operations, joint powers and mutual aid agreements entered into by any of the parties to this Agreement may be added to this Agreement and attached as addendums hereto. All such addendums so added shall merge with this Agreement and be considered a part hereof. If any conflicts arise between the main body of this Agreement and the terms of the addendums hereto, the conflict shall be resolved by giving precedence to the terms of the addendum, unless such precedence would result in a violation of law. Section 16. Pre-Incident Plannine. The commanding officers and other individuals designated by them may from time to time mutually establish pre-incident plans which shall indicate the type and locations of potential problem areas where mutual aid assistance may be needed. This Agreement may be supplemented by schedules and lists of types of equipment and personnel that would be dispatched under various possible circumstances and the number of personnel that would be dispatched under certain circumstances. Tn addition, the parties may engage in mutual training sessions to promote the efficient operation of this Agreement. The parties agree to take such steps as are feasible to standardize the equipment and procedures used to provide assistance under this Agreement. Section 17. Miscellaneous. (a) Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as either limiting or extending the lawful jurisdiction of any party hereto other than as expressly set forth herein; (b) Appropriate officials of the panties may promulgate such written operation procedures in implementation of this Agreement as to them appear desirable; MUTUAL AIDlJOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - 9 (c) This Agreement shall be effective upon the execution of the original by the parties hereto and upon one original being deposited with the keeper of the records of each of the parties hereto. For purposes of this Agreement, said Effective Daze is .2008; (d) All law enforcement powers, all of the privileges and immunities from liability, exemptions from law, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, workers' compensation and other beneffits which apply to the activity of officers, agents or employees when performing their respective functions within the territorial limits of their respective political subdivisions shall apply to them to the same degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of they functions and dunes extraterritoriallyundemhe provisions of the Agreement. (e) This Agreement does not create a separate legal entity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the respective parties have given their respective consents and do execute this Agreement by and through their legal representative, who are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of that party. CANYON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE By: Chris Smith, Sheriff ADA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE By: Gary Raney, Sheriff NAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT By: Bill Augsburger, Chief of Police CALDWELL POLICE DEPARTMENT By: Chris Allgood, Chief of Police MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -10 .. BOISE POLICE DEPARTMENT By: Mike Masterson, Chief of Police GARDEN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT sy: MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT ay: Jeff Lavey, Chief of Police James Beasley, Chief of Police jalW:iWorlc~MNampalPolice DepartmentlMutual Aid Joint Powers Agreement 2008 rev.l 8 28 08.doc e MUTUAL AID/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -11 September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Ward Schwider • AP 08-003 September 9, 2008 ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from August 12, 2008 -Request for City Council Review for an Appeal of Director's Determination to deny alternative compliance to allow a portion of former Idaho Truss site to be used for shared parking for Broadway Integrated Project - 130 E. Broadway AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet /Minutes Ca1b,~nu.~. R.~~ c. Neo.~-r,~ m IU ~-G8 Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. September 5, 2008 AP 08-004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT Anna Canning Meridian Planning Director ITEM NO. 10 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from September 2, 2008 -Request for City Council Review for a McDonalds Redbox (DVD Kiosk) located in an approved C-N zone - 3415 West Cherry Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Previous I#em Packet O~e~r ~~ ~ S T~us~c~, -~ ~ ss ~ ~~~~~ ®~. ~.SL~t.~.~..Qd~. ~L~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubpc meetings shall become property of the Cffy of Meridian. ~ ~ September 5, 2008 AP 08-005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT The Land Group ITEM No. 11 REQUEST Public Hearing-CC Review of Planning Director's denial of Instant Equity Auto's request for CZC 08-010 to operate wJout connection to city services ZS< denial of ALT OS-004 request for reduced landscape buffers adjacent to Fairview Ave & a residential zoning district for Instant Equity Auto -1065 E. Fairview Avenue AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See aftached Staff Report C~n-li.nu~ Vie, See attached Comments Contacted: ~ Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubUc meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. • September 5, 2008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 9, 2008 APPLICANT ITEM NO. ~ Z REQUEST Public Hearing -Proposed Fee Increases for Solid Waste Collections by Sanitary Services Company AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See attached CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shad become property of the City of Meridian. ~ ! Proposed Solid Waste Collection Rate Changes Proposed Rates Effective 10/1/08 Sanitary Service I nc. Current Rate Proposed Rate Structure Structure Residential $ 12.70 $ 13.85 Toter Carts $ 2.75 $ 2.87 Habitual Late Can Fee $ 5.00 $ 5.00 Commerolal Cans (Current) 1/vvk y„~ 3~vk 1 - 3 cans $ 21.46 $ 42.92 $ 64.37 4 - 6 cans $ 42.92 $ 85.83 $ 128.75 7 - 9 cans $ 64.38 $ 928.76 $ 193.11 Commercial Cans (Proposed) 1lwk 2/wk 3/wk 1 - 3 cans $ 23.64 $ 47.29 $ 70.92 4 - 6 cans $ 47.29 $ 94.56 $ 141.85 7 - 9 cans $ 70.93 $ 141.86 $ 212.76 Commercial CorKatners (Current) 1/wk 2/wk 3/wk 4x/wk 5/wk 6/wk 1 112 Yd 3 Yd $ 79.93 $ 113.97 $ 147.41 $ 197.76 $ 247.99 $ 298.23 6 Yd $ 83.76 $ 135.67 $ 187.66 $ 247.25 $ 325.02 $ 393.73 8 Yd $ 130.68 $ 211.13 $ 291.49 $ 388.67 $ 485.89 $ 583.07 $ 155.14 $ 241.40 $ 321.78 $ 416.21 $ 516.83 $ 612.95 1 112 Yd 3 Yd 6 Yd 8 Yd 1/wk 2/wk 3/wk 4x/wk 89.15 $ 127.12 $ 164.42 93.42 $ 151.32 $ 209.31 145.76 $ 235.49 $ 325.12 173.04 $ 269.25 $ 358.90 C_ommerclal Com cton3 Current Proposed 2 Yd $ 43.30 $ 49.68 3 Yd $ 59.28 $ 68.59 4 Yd $ 75.59 $ 87.84 5 Yd $ 91.94 $ 107.14 6 Yd $ 107.78 $ 125.90 8 Yd $ 144.95 $ 169.17 Temporary Container Service Current Proposed Delivery $ 19.70 $ 20.56 Daily Rental - 3 Yd $ 0.75 $ 0.78 Monthly Rental - 3 Yd $ 19.70 $ 21.00 Extra Dump 3 Yd $ 25.96 $ 30.12 Extra Dump 6 Yd $ 40.79 $ 42.58 Extra Dump 8 Yd $ 52.51 $ 54.81 Miscellaneous Collection Services Tires $ 4.00 $ 6.00 Refrigerators $ 46.05 $ 47.70 Overtlow Cleanup $13.00 for 5 min $13.60 for 5 min 275.78 $ 362.52 $ 439.15 433.51 $ 541.95 $ 650.34 464.23 $ 576.46 $ 683.67 Roll Off Servlc~ (Current) $49.00 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (6 -10 CY containers) $109.65 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (20 - 40 CY containers, Weekdays) $166.20 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (20 - 40 CY containers, Weekends) $135.60 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (asbestos -Ada County) $215.75 perhaul + disposal + franchise fees (asbestos -Idaho Waste Systems) $84.65 per hour Extra services Roll Off Servl~ (Prop osed) $51.15 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (6 -10 CY r~ntainers) $114.45 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (20 - 40 CY containers, Weekdays) $173.48 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (20 - 40 CY containers, Weekends) $141.54 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (asbestos -Ada County) $225.20 per haul + disposal + franchise fees (asbestos -Idaho Waste Systems) $88.36 per hour Extra servic~ss Landfill Rates with Franchise Fees (Current) Size Loose Solid Waste Construction Demolfion Compacted waste Wood Waste 6 Yd $ 31.80 $ 63.60 $ 15.90 8 Yd $ 42.40 $ 84.80 $ 21.20 10 Yd $ 53.00 $ 106.00 $ 26.50 20 Yd $ 106.00 $ 212.00 $ 212.00 $ 53.00 30 Yd $ 159.00 $ 318.00 $ 318.00 $ 79.50 40 Yd $ 212.00 $ 424.00 $ 424.00 $ 106.00 Landfill Rates with Franchise Fees (Pro ) Size Loose Solid Waste Construction Demolition Compacted waste Wood Waste 6 Yd $ 31.80 $ 79.50 $ 12.72 8 Yd $ 42.40 $ 106.00 $ 16.96 10 Yd $ 53.00 $ 132.50 $ 21.20 20 Yd $ 106.00 $ 265.00 $ 265.00 $ 42.40 30 Yd $ 159.00 $ 397.50 $ 397.50 $ 63.60 40 Yd $ 212.00 $ 530.Q0 $ 530.00 $ 84.80 1 container 2 containers al Cardboard Collet Commercial 1 container 2 containers - 3 CY cool 1 x/week 39.00 $ 70.00 $ Collection (Proposed) - 5 CY 40.71 $ 73.07 $ ' xlweek 3 xNveel 70.00 $ 100.00 100.00 $ 130.00 rs xNveek 3 x/weel 73.07 $ 104.38 104.38 $ 135.69 ~~~: San~tar~ Seru~ces a. MEMGIRANDUM TO: Mayor Tammy de Weerd Members of the Meridian City Council: Mr. Joe Borton, President Mr. Charlie Rountree, Vitt President Mr. Keith Bird Mr. David Zaremba FROM: Steve Sedlacelc, General Manager, San~ary ;services, inc. DATE: August 12, 2048 SUBJECT: Annual Rate Adjustment for Solid Waste Collection Services Introduction Sofid waste collection rates are adjusted annually in accordance with Section 21 of our contract with the City of Meridian with: an effective date of t?ctober 1. Typically this involves adjusting rates based upon the change in the Consumer Price Index {CPI}. This year, landfill tipping fees at the Ada Councy Hidden Hollow Landfill are also expected top increase effective October 1. This memorandum presents the solid waste coNection rate adjustment based upon the change to the CPI and the increased landfill tipping fees. I..andfill F®® Changes Effective October 1, 2008 it is assumed .that the Ada County Commissioners will raise disposal fees at the Hidden Hollow Landfill. Since the Commissioners have not released the new rate structure a# the time of this memorandum we have assumed #hat the ra#e increase will be 50°lo in all waste c~tegaries with a slight reduction in the wood waste rate. Table 1 indicates the current and the assumed future {October 1} rate structure for all waste entering the Ada County Hidden Hollow Landfill. ~~ P.O. Box 626, Meridian, iD 83880 Phone 2os1668-3999 Fax 208/888-5Q52 Printed on Recycled Paper