Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2007-01-23
A a~~ -.J ~A- ~„ CITY OF +!~~ti °-,~ Q ~,~' __~,~ C~~~'l~rll~l~yl IDAHO Y" Ty Fc ~ TrtEnsureE V n~V ~~ • Revised 1-22-07 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~ Joe Borton Charlie Rountr ~ Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: ~~cl~. ~h.c~.erso!/ 3. Community Invocation by -~Ihors~hryr~emter.° /~ i~ 1 /tt'~.r~ 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~~,~m v-c. 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 2, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: ~~or~v-~ B. Tabled from December 19, 2006: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: ~~ ~ ~,~(,r-~~,,,,~, 27~ Zoo'7 C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 056 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Clearsprinas Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: ,~~,~~ v+/ D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06- 054 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11 residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres in the proposed R-4 zone for Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 1 of 4 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. Revised 7-22-07 Clearsprings Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: ~®vc. E. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Meridian Veterinary Hospital at 415 W. Franklin Road: G~~v~c, F. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Treasure Valley Vet Hospital at 2600 S. Meridian Road: Q~~vK. G. Approve Dog Licensing Designee _ Agreement with Pet Care Clinic at 1151 E. Fairview Avenue: G~~~~ H. Approve Doa Licensing Designee Agreement with Idaho Humane Society at 4775 Dorman, Boise: a0~v~c- I. Access Easement between the Citv of Meridian (Grantor) and Rosario Place Limited Partnership (Grantee) for Vehicle and Equipment Access to Grantee's Storage Yard: ~~~ J. Public Works Change No. 1 of Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD Eagle, .Victory to Ridenbaugh Canal Project for a Cost of $3,982.75: ~~,~,o we., K. Public Works Budget Amendment for Full Time Person for Environmental Specialist: G~.,~.~,.•ov~c~ L. Addendum to Joint Powers Agreement for Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighter and Life Preservation Service Contract: ~~~ ~ ~ M. Change Order No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of Meridian and LCA Architects to Add Commissioning and LEED Services: ~~~„v~ 6. Department Reports: A. Public Works Department 1. Mutual Cooperation Agreement with United Water Idaho, Inc.: ~~,v~w~-~ B. Parks Department 1. Approval of Park Direction Signs for Roadways: y ~ a~cc.-~C. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 2 of 4 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. • Revised 1-22-07 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: ~~- 8. Continued Public Hearing from January 9, 2007: PP 06-055 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 lots on 39.28 acres in existing I-L zone and C-G zones for Sevam Subdivision by Ronald Van Auker - 3660 East Lanark Street: ~~~~ ~l~ ,~ ~/~ ~ ~~,,~~, 9. Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.65 acres), R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) (50.17 acres), TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (65.60 acres), TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) (20.71 acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential) (35.21 acres) and L-O (Limited Office) (3.48 acres) for South Ridue Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: 10. Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 224 lots including: 189 residential lots, 11 commercial /other lots and 8 Mega lots (to be developed in the future) and 16 common/open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN-C, TN-R, L-O, R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Rid4e Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: ~-~e~a~-.c.. ~!~ ~ ~,/.! ~~ovc~ 11. Public Hearing: MI 06-011 Request for a Miscellaneous application to amend the previously approved Development Agreement by including a provision to permit the installation of a double wide mobile office on the property at 4740 W. Chinden Boulevard for The Tree Farm Annexation (AZ 06-004) by Treehaven, LLC -north side of Chinden Boulevard on both sides of Black Cat Road: ~-.c~,~- ~l`.~ ~/~ ¢.~~ li7~-',,,,''L~ 12. Public Hearing: RZ 06-008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: ~~in~ ~/~. fo Z-x'07 13. Public Hearing: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Office / Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: C~c.r,~ j,,~,,,e, ~lh, ~, 2 _~_ p Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 3 of 4 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. Revised 1-22-07 14. Public Hearing: AZ 06-052 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.17 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road:~~G,,,~ ,G~~ ¢ c(,,~ ~-,-- d~-~~a-G 15. Public Hearing: PP 06-053 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 26 single-family residential building lots and 3 common /other lots on 5.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road: d~,,,~ 16. Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1282 A: AZ 06-042 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.18 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Cottswold Villacte Subdivision by Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust - 2180 East Amity Road: G I~~,,,,~r,~ 17. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(fi) - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation); Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 4 of 4 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. ~~~~~~ Posh ~ ~ul~ttc. ~G~~~~~~ ~_ ~~ ~'' C11'Y OP ~~%'~Vt ~'YI~IG~'17 .~ i~nHa a yF c ,,,1~ CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba Joe Borton Charlie Rountree Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter with Treasure Valley Worship Center: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 2, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Tabled from December 19, 2006: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 056 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Clearsprinas Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06- 054 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11 residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres in the proposed R-4 zone for Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 1 of 4 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. Clearsprings Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: E. Approve Doa Licensing Designee Agreement with Meridian Veterinary Hospital at 415 W. Franklin Road: F. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Treasure Valley Vet Hospital at 2600 S. Meridian Road: G. Approve Doa Licensing Designee Agreement_ with P_et Care Clinic at 1151 E. Fairview Avenue: H. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Idaho Humane Society at 4775 Dorman, Boise: Access Easement between the City of Meridian (Grantor) and Rosario Place Limited Partnership (Grantee) for Vehicle and Equipment Access to Grantee's Storage Yard: J. Public Works Chance No. 1 of _Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD Eagle, Victory to Ridenbaugh Canal Project for a Cost of $3,982.75: K. Public Works Budget Amendm_e_nt for Full Time Person for Environmental Specialist: L. Addendum to Joint Powers Agreement for Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighter and Life Preservation Service Contract• M. Change Order No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of Meridian and LCA Architects to Add Commissioning and LEED Services: 6. Department Reports: A. Public Works Department 1. Mutual Cooperation Agreement with United Water Idaho, Inc. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 2 of 4 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. 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: 8. Continued Public Hearing from January 9, 2007: PP 06-055 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 lots on 39.28 acres in existing I-L zone and C-G zones for Seyam Subdivision by Ronald Van Auker - 3660 East Lanark Street: 9. Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.65 acres), R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) (50.17 acres), TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (65.60 acres), TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) (20.71 acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential) (35.21 acres) and L-O (Limited Office) (3.48 acres) for South Ridae Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: 10. Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 224 lots including: 189 residential lots, 11 commercial /other lots and 8 Mega lots (to be developed in the future) and 16 common/open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN-C, TN-R, L-O, R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Ridae Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: 11. Public Hearing: MI 06-011 Request for a Miscellaneous application to amend the previously approved Development Agreement by including a provision to permit the installation of a double wide mobile office on the property at 4740 W. Chinden Boulevard for The Tree Farm Annexation (AZ 06-004) by Treehaven, LLC -north side of Chinden Boulevard on both sides of Black Cat Road: 12. Public Hearing: RZ 06-008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: 13. Public Hearing: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Office / Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 3 of 4 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. 14. Public Hearing: AZ 06-052 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.17 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road: 15. Public Hearing: PP 06-053 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 26 single-family residential building lots and 3 common /other lots on 5.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road: 16. Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1282 A: AZ 06-042 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.18 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Cottswold Village Subdivision by Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust - 2180 East Amity Road: 17. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(fi~ - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation); Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -January 23, 2007 Page 4 of 4 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. L February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of January 23, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: 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 Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shalt become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See Attached Minutes • • Meridian City Council Meeting January 23, 2007 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, January 23, 2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Joe Borton, Charlie Rountree and David Zaremba. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Gene Trakel, Ron Anderson, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and get tonight's meeting started. Good evening. We appreciate you all joining us here this evening. It is Tuesday, January 23rd. For the record it is five minutes after 7:00. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight we will be led in the pledge by Jason Ingersoll. If you will all raise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by William Nary. De Weerd: Jason, I have a City of Meridian pin to offer you as our thanks for leading us. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation and I do not see Pastor Slyter. Is he here tonight? So, as a substitute for Pastor Gordon Slyter we have our own City Attorney Bill Nary who will lead us in the community invocation. Please join us or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Nary: Thank you, Mayor. Lord, thank you for bringing us all together this evening, God, citizens and leaders alike, God, to discuss the issues of the day, the issues of our community, the pressing needs that we have in our city. Please grant us all wisdom and the opportunity to share these ideas in a common forum and in a common way to be able to reach the best consensus. Please bless this opportunity for this exchange to be both civil and worthwhile and a good sharing of ideas. Lord, we ask for these blessings upon our city and leadership, Lord, in these names we pray, amen. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 2 of 72 Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Item 4, adoption of the agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Item B on the Consent Agenda has requested to be tabled to February 27th, 2007. And Items 12 and 13 on the regular agenda -- or excuse me -- on the regular agenda have been asked to be continued -- need to be continued to February 6th and with those amendments I move we adopt the agenda. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 2, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 056 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Clearsprings Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06- 054 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11 residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres in the proposed R-4 zone for Clearsprings Subdivision by Mike Hill - 1035 East McMillan Road: E. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Meridian Veterinary Hospital at 415 W. Franklin Road: F. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Treasure Valley Vet Hospital at 2600 S. Meridian Road: G. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Pet Care Clinic at 1151 E. Fairview Avenue: Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 3 of 72 H. Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Idaho Humane Society at 4775 Dorman, Boise: I. Access Easement between the City of Meridian (Grantor) and Rosario Place Limited Partnership (Grantee) for Vehicle and Equipment Access to Grantee's Storage Yard: J. Public Works Chance No. 1 of Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD Eagle, Victory to Ridenbauah Canal Project for a Cost of $3,982.75: K. Public Works Budget Amendment for Full Time Person for Environmental Specialist: L. Addendum to Joint Powers Agreement for Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighter and Life Preservation Service Contract• M. Change Order No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of Meridian and LCA Architects to Add Commissioning and LEED Services: De Weerd: Item 5, Consent Agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: With Item 5-B being tabled to February 27th, 2007, I move that we approve the Consent Agenda as amended and for the Mayor to sign -- I'm reading the bottom here. For the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second for our Consent Agenda. If there is na discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports: LJ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 4 of 72 A. Wublic Works Department 1. Mutual Cooperation Agreement with United Water Idaho, Inc. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. Okay. Item 6 under Department Reports. We will start tonight's report with Public Works. Len. Oh. Brad. Watson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council members. As you know, normally, these agreements -- most agreements that the Public Works Department has are simply on Consent Agenda and don't get a lot of discussion. This is one that we thought should be in front of you both to provide a little background on some of the highlights of this agreement, as well as give you the opportunity to question me, Len, or Mr. Greg Wyatt from United Water is here in attendance to answer any questions you might have. And I know you have a long agenda, so I will try to keep this brief and hit the high points, but -- maybe just to back up. A little bit on the history of where this has come from. Not too many years ago United Water and the City of Meridian weren't what you would call amiable and this agreement, I believe, probably started the day I called Greg at his office and said, oh, by the way, we are going to protest your latest filing with PUC and so over the course of months in meetings and so some fairly involved discussions, we came to the point where Council approved a stipulation that was approved by the Public Utilities Commission, we dropped our protest, United Water changed their filing with the PUC, and we came away with that with the understanding that we would work towards this mutual cooperation agreement. So, Len and I met with Mr. Wyatt and I guess it's Chief Engineer Scott Reed quite a few times and we talked about a lot of issues, primary among those was service area. This agreement nails down as best we can at this point in time what the other service areas are going to be both for United Water around our perimeter and for the City of Meridian. And I guess before I get too far into this, just to dish out the thank you's, Len did the majority of the leg work in these negotiations. He and Scott and Greg met several times without me and went through the mechanics, did a really good job. So, just a few highlights on this agreement. You might reference the map at the very back and I guess my one caveat on the map is that it shows the proposed area of impacts. That has nothing to do with sewer, that has nothing to do with anything, but this agreement with United Water and that's what we started with or ended with with Greg and his staff. Part of this agreement shows that United Water will continue to serve north of Chinden. They already have facilities in part of that area, including the area that's now in our area of impact and our Comprehensive Plan. So, that would include I think subdivisions such as the Tree Farm and any other applications that are coming forward. We will provide sanitary sewer to that area. It also provides that anything that is existing within our area of impact, either existing or proposed, would continue to be served by United Water. Now, at this point I do want to point out that there is an existing facility south of Chinden and it's the Holy Apostle Church and they are connected to United Water. They have their own on-site sewer system. My recommendation as far as this agreement is that we continue to allow that to be served by United Water. The facilities are in place and functioning. At some point in time I do believe that those on-site sewer facilities that Holy Apostle has • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 5 of 72 could fail, as well as the potential for them to expand southward and they would need sanitary sewer from the City of Meridian. I just want to make that clear that that's what this agreement entails. One of the other highlights is that we have what's called a gray area along our -- mostly along our eastern boundary with the city of Boise and United Water. This gray area is simply an area which -- where each utility could potentially serve development and, really, the key to that is going to be whether Boise city sewer can serve it or whether Meridian sewer can serve it. If Meridian sewer can serve it, then, Meridian water will follow along. That's really what this means. If Boise city sewer ends up taking it and we say that that's okay based on discussions between engineering staffs, then, United Water will serve it. There is one other highlight to point out. It talks about sewer billing and consumption data. I want to emphasize that just provides the framework for the details that we will be putting together for not only the billing department, but for IT and how we get that data from United Water in order to bill sewer accounts that have United Water Service. We have to work out some of these technical issues with IT, finance, billing, building and even plan review and engineering. So, all I'm trying to say is this is not the end all and be all that will make this work. There is still some leg work to do and some details to workout. I think those are the highlights that I had keyed on. If there are any questions I would be happy to answer them. As I said, Mr. Wyatt's here to answer any questions as well and with that I will close. De Weerd: Brad, I guess I would, first, like to start with my congratulations to both you and to Mr. Wyatt for -- and certainly your staffs for entering into these discussions and working on a communication that is essential in today's environment and absolutely necessary. So, we appreciate the due diligence on both sides to find an agreement and to find compromise and to move forward. I think that speaks well to both entities. Watson: Thank you. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor. Brad, as it relates to billing and some of the details yet to be identified, do you have a timeline established and agreed to with your staff, as well as United Water that -- for instance, the consumption data and the sewer billing process will be worked out before we have any hook-ups? Watson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, we actually -- I shouldn't say we. IT and billing staff actually did have a preliminary meeting with United Water staff last fall to at least look at the details of this. I didn't want to mobilize the troops, so to speak, until I was sure that Council was okay with this and I had a read on it. I don't think that any of these problems -- or not problems, but any of these coordination issues are that complicated. We certainly will get it in before any of those properties north of Chinden are up and running. It's a matter of months to me. Rountree: Okay. Watson: At the most. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 6 of 72 Rountree: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, any other questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. r1 ~_ De Weerd: Mr. Wyatt, would you like to make any comments? Wyatt: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do appreciate the opportunity to stand before you and join with you in this -- in what for us is a great opportunity to continue to work together in a cooperative nature and I do thank Len and Brad and their staffs for the work that they have put into this and their cooperative effort. It's always a give and take, as any negotiation seems to be, and just the professionalism with which they showed themselves I was impressed and I appreciate that. We are continuing to look for opportunities where we can cooperate together as water providers in this valley and so if -- as those opportunities present themselves and if we have opportunities to present again before you, I just would just thank you for your time and ask for those opportunities. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Thank you. Watson: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there was one somewhat related item that I just wanted to bring up before we got too far into this agreement. We are also at least looking for a little feedback on something that we have been exploring with United Water in terms of emergency connections. Both staff have reviewed an agreement that would provide for a facility where we could, in an emergency situation, feed each others' systems and only in an emergency. Granted there are a lot of details to work out and we are working through those, but I guess we are just looking for either a raised eyebrow or an okay to proceed on that issue. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad, I think that's a great idea and I -- you know, it's a -- it's something that we can certainly use as a back up and I think both entities could and not only us, but I think United Water would benefit from something like that and I would be very much in favor of it. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I, too, would be in favor of it. It certainly provides an opportunity to increase the fail safe aspect of the water system to all the customers in both sides of the water line, so, yeah, I think that's something we need to explore. • i Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 7 of 72 Watson: Okay. Borton: Agreed. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would call that a stroke of genius and say at-a-boy. Watson: We will give them -- we will give United Water credit. They approached us on this first. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything to add, Len? Grady: Yeah. That was pretty much it, Madam Mayor, was several months ago they approached us for this emergency connection. I think we are down to some of the finer details as to who can open the valves and, you know, what the procedures are, who calls -- who calls who on a Christmas Eve at 1:00 o'clock in the morning type of thing, and, then, United Water has that agreement now and as they get comments back to us we will be presenting it to you for -- ultimately for approval, so -- De Weerd: They have that agreement that they are one to call at 1:00 a.m? Thank you, Mr. Wyatt. You're double time; right. Thank you. Well, we appreciate this partnership and our glad to see it moving forward, so thank you -- thank you all. Rountree: Do you need a motion to -- De Weerd: Yes, we do. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we approve the mutual cooperation agreement between the City of Meridian and United Water. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the agreement before you. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Parks Department Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 8 of 72 1. Approval of Park Direction Signs for Roadways: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 6-B is our Parks Department. Mr. Strong. Strong: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I handed out prior to the meeting a packet with hopefully answers to the questions that you asked me to bring back to you from last week's department report related to directional signage to parks and I will just go through these an item at a time. There was a question about maintenance and what we discovered in talking to ACHD staff is that ACRD will install and maintain the signs; however, we have to provide the signs for them to place. The life expectancy of the signs as designed -- as specified is around ten years, certainly, unless they are vandalized or some other situation like that, but they are about a ten year life span. There was a question about size of the signs and the sample that was provided to you last week was a -- what we are proposing as a standard 24 inch by 30 inch sign. ACHD does place up to 30-by-30 inch signs on corridors where speeds -- higher speeds like along Eagle Road and other areas like that where cars are approaching much faster and a larger sign is easier to see from some distance when you're going at speeds. So, there would be the possibility of altering assigned corridors like Eagle Road or where speed limits are faster. All signs have at least a three inch letter, so that they can see -- be seen from a reasonable distance, so that they can make the tum. The color that was proposed in the packet is what's being standardized by ACHD for directional signs to get people to parks and other similar facilities, so we are proposing staying with that color. Also, I discussed last week that what we are including on the sign is the city logo, so that it identifies that if you're looking for Seasons Park that it is a city park, it's not a homeowners park or some other facility, it's kind of the standard brand for city facilities in the way that we are looking at it. And, then, the last question was where would the signs be located. In discussions with ACHD currently when you look at our -- the city website and you go under parks and you look for a specific park, you will find an icon or a place that you can click that you can get directions to the park. We are using those directions to the park for possible comers or suggested comers for placement of signs and you have some -- the map as it appears in the website that's presented to you and there is a red X where we are going to propose to ACHD that the signs go. The final decision is ACHD's decision where they actually are placed. But we feel it's probably most practical to place signs on the comers that are described as directions to the park in the website when people are looking for how to get someplace. So, with that much description I will certainly stand for questions again and, hopefully, this will satisfy your questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 9 of 72 Rountree: Just a suggestion on your sign placement. Folks are going to be coming from multiple directions to some of these parks and your X marking the spot only indicates one route, which is the route that's described in the website, but it seems to me, for instance, Chateau Park there ought to be a sign on Ten Mile in the Ustick area as well as you head south on Ten Mile so you know to tum on Chateau to get to Chateau Park. So, just those kinds of things. It would be more signs, I would anticipate, but I think that people are going to be coming from north Meridian as well, possibly. Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, that is, actually, one of the considerations that we discussed and in looking at the cost of signs, they are going to run just about a hundred dollars a sign in the first -- the first round and, of course, we have to provide a duplicate sign if one's damaged for placement. So, we thought a practical way to start was what's described on the website, but we have considered the same thing that you're commenting on. For a park like Kiwanis Park to come in from Locust Grove it is multiple signs to get to the park and I think what we would want to encourage in that case is that if they are trying to find it for the first time that they come from Eagle Road into the park, because it would be simpler for them to get there. If they want to find their way out on Three Bar, then, they could probably find their way back at some point in time. So, we have discussed those considerations and we certainly will work with ACHD sign staff -sign placement staff to come up with their -- to provide signs based on their recommendations as well, because they would probably have some similar recommendations from other points, like Ustick Road to Seasons Park. Rountree: Madam Mayor, another comment. You might be looking at something like the directions to Kiwanis Park, as opposed to the 20 by 30 signs and trail blazers that are much smaller, but could indicate park direction. They would reflect the same color as the main sign on Eagle Road, but something less obtrusive to the neighborhood, but still provide the direction. Strong: Cost would probably be -- Rountree: Significantly less. Strong: That's a good idea. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a comment that may save some money in the future and that would be when you're having the current signs that you need manufactured would be possibly to prepare some extra blanks that -- part of making, you know, the metal piece the right size, you know, painting it, drilling the holes, and just not letter it until you have a place • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 10 of 72 • to put it -- I don't know what your storage problem would be, then, but if one needs to be replaced it could be replaced much faster if all it needs is lettering and that may actually save some money as well. Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, my understanding of those signs that the color is a reflective adhesive surface, so that there is some practicality in doing that. Now, whether that surface is all a part of a decal that's created for a specific park I'd have to ask and it may be and the aluminum blank we could certainly have on hand and, then, have that surfacing attached later. That may be practical. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Strong: Madam Mayor, what I would like is just your approval that -- to go ahead with the sign placement if the sign meets your approval, I guess, because -- and like I mentioned last week, my concern with that is because we are incorporating the city logo on the sign. So, certainly don't want to place signs around town displaying the city logo without your knowledge and certainly approval. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: I'm fine with it. I don't know that we need a motion; just direct the Parks Department to move forward with the signage. Bird: I'll second that. Rountree: Then, I will make that a motion. Bird: I know it isn't amotion -- I know it wasn't a motion, but I agree with you. De Weerd: Okay. Well, it is an agreement; right? Okay. It sounds like you got good consent here. Strong: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. There is plenty of seating in the front for those of you standing in the back. If you would like to come on down and join us. We are fairly well behaved, so you're safe in the front row. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 11 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. There were no items that were moved from the Consent Agenda to the regular agenda. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from January 9, 2007: PP 06-055 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 lots on 39.28 acres in existing I-L zone and C-G zones for Seyam Subdivision by Ronald Van Auker - 3660 East Lanark Street: De Weerd: So, I will go ahead and open the two -- the one public -- continued Public Hearing, Item No. 8 with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Sayem project. It's located approximately 1,200 feet east of the intersection of Franklin Road and Eagle Road. This is a preliminary plat application only. It is already annexed and zoned. The preliminary plat proposes eight lots with a mix of C-G and I-L zoning. Portions of the site have already been developed, including the Ashley Fumiture building on the southwest comer of the property, which is proposed Lot 4, and the Lanark warehouse complex at the north end of the site, which is now proposed Lot 1, Block 1. The reason the applicant has -- one of -- well, one of the reasons the applicant is bringing the application before you tonight is that in 2004 they did receive approval for an administrative lot split. One of the requirements of that lot split was that they submit a subdivision application and include both the 3.74 acre parcel created for Ashley Fumiture and the remainder 35.55 acre parcel that the Lanark warehouse currently sits on. So, the applicant did agree to that condition and this fulfills that condition. The Commission heard this item and recommended approval at their December 7th, 2006, public hearing. Brad Miller spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition or commented. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were the landscape buffer between uses. This property is currently zoned both I-L and C-G and we do require a land use buffer between those two zones. So, that was an item of discussion. And, then, the timing of constructing the landscape buffers adjacent to Franklin Road. I believe staff has also added a number of photographs of the site. It does have a fair amount of terrain change on it. The key Commission changes to staffs initial recommendation was that they did decide that the 35 foot wide street landscape buffer along Franklin Road -- so, that's toward the bottom of the screen there -- could be built on a lot-by-lot basis. It's already -- as you saw from the photos it was already constructed for Ashley warehouse and, then, there is another lot there that would be developed in a future phase. They also decided that the 25 foot landscape buffer between uses could be reduced to ten feet. I did want to note that I'm beginning to be a little concemed that this particular applicant has been able to get that standard reduced a number of times, while other applicants have not requested it at this point, but I'm just getting a little concemed with the frequency of this request and whether Council would like to see that standard changed to be consistent. Prior to -- another key change to staffs initial recommendation was they did require prior to submittal of the final plat application for the property that the applicant shall receive City Council approval for a rezone application on the property. That rezone application would adjust the zoning boundaries so they were consistent with the lot lines as proposed in this plat. Again, if Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 12 of 72 you look at the zone map you can see how it goes along the front and, then, kind of jogs up for Ashley Furniture. The proposed zone boundary would need to be adjusted to accommodate those lots on the southern end of this property. The outstanding issues before City Council -- we did just want to note on the record the applicant has agreed to develop a 35 foot wide landscape buffer along Franklin Road, but the revised landscape plan and preliminary plat still do not clearly show the required 35 foot wide street landscape buffer along Franklin Road, exclusive of ACHD right of way is required with condition 1.1.4 and 1.1.10. With that I will answer any questions Council may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff at this time? Rountree: I have none right now. Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I do have a question and that's on the -- allowing the 25 foot landscape buffer to be reduced to ten feet. I was on the Planning and Zoning Commission when this came through there and my recollection of the discussion was that it was just not -- we weren't waiving the extra -- I know the discussion was and I don't know if it made it into the final motion. I thought our intent was that there be alternate compliance for the missing 15 feet, extra trees, and I even thought that the applicant had agreed to that. Canning: My understanding from staff -- I didn't -- I'm sorry. Madam Mayor, Councilmember Zaremba, my understanding from staff was that they did agree to put up a fence, but that there wasn't much other alternative discussed and for waiving over half the landscape buffer, I'm just beginning to get concerned that if there is a change I need to make to the code, if Council could let me know their thoughts on that, because this particular applicant is fortunate to be -- to be able to request the last three times they have been up here a mix of C-G and I-L zoning, so they have always had control of both pieces of property and I think that that's been a good reason to reduce the buffers that it was -- it seemed reasonable given that they were still the owners of both pieces of property, but I'm just beginning to get concerned is all I wanted to say and if I need to look at change to the UDC, please, let me know. Zaremba: But I'm guessing that alternate compliance didn't make it into the conditions. Must not have. Canning: I can look for the exact condition of approval and get back to you in just a second. Zaremba: Thanks. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 13 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Miller: Brad Miller representing Van Auker Properties, 3084 East Lanark in Meridian. To quickly answer the question, it did make -- the alternate compliance did make it into the -- into the requirements and we did agree to that. Madam Mayor, I know that you always take interest in our subdivision names and I feel that I need to point out to you how we came up with this subdivision name. We purchased this property from Mr. and Mrs. Carman -- Mr. Orin and Mrs. Carman Mayes about 12 years ago and I wanted to pay respect to them and call it the Mayes Subdivision, but the county engineer would not allow that, so we just reversed the lettering of Mayes and -- so that's Mayes spelled backwards and they seemed to be fine with it. De Weerd: I just thank you that it's not Porky Pig II. Miller: Well, it's -- I'm grateful, too, because it's embarrassing for me to have to come up and speak in those -- for those. The three issues that Anna represented -- and I appreciate her presentation -- are, number one, the perimeter landscaping. As you notice, I intentionally included photographs of the Ashley fumiture store -- and, Anna, if you wouldn't mind going to those. There was retaining walls that were required there and there is a grade variation of six to eight feet at the low end and about 12 feet at the -- on the Ashley Furniture side. So, you can see that right there. There is retaining walls there to your left and, then, landscaping. It would be very difficult to go in and do that landscaping right now, that 35 feet of landscaping. We are not opposed to the 35 feet. We will do that. We would like to have that within an easement, rather than as a separate landscape lot, because there will not be a homeowners or a property owners association with this. The second item is that 25 foot landscape buffer. Anna, I think I have only -- this is only the second time I asked for it. Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't want to seem like a bad guy, but this area here -- and I think we do need to change it, Anna, to five feet, instead of 25 feet, but in this area -- the complexion of this area -- De Weerd: Oh, wow. Just a small change. Miller: The complexion of this area has changed and it's not really an industrial. We have built an industrial building to the north, which we are in the process of doubling the size on right now. We are at 72,000 square feet and we are going to take it up close to 150,000 square feet. But the uses that we will put in here -- right now in that existing building we have Oregon Tile and Marble, which does wholesale the and marble. We have Michael's of Oregon is in the far end doing strictly distribution warehousing. And, then, on the west end we have an wholesale fumiture outfit there. And so they are not offensive uses. Some of them are closer to commercial than they are industrial. So, I don't feel that there is an incompatibility with uses that we would put in there. You can't afford to put a strictly industrial use in there with the land values that way they are and the quality of buildings that we will be building there. So, I think that the reduction of the 25 feet to ten feet is reasonable and we would be more than happy to increase the greenery or whatever that might be. The final item is on the zoning of the lots. With the Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 14 of 72 Ashley Furniture lot we were required to change the zoning there, because the lot did have split zoning and the staff report had indicated that they wanted the property lines moved to meet the zoning and I would rather move the zoning to meet the property lines. So, those are the three issues I have with this application. If there is any questions I would be more than happy to answer them. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. There doesn't seem to be -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: A question for Brad. He indicated, yes, those conditions were put in and you're saying those are -- Miller: Those are -- excuse me. Rountree: -- the conditions that you see are agreeable? Miller: Yes. Yes, they are. As they are stated in the revised staff report. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Thank you. Miller: Thank you very much. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Seeing none -- and there is no further comments by the applicant? Staff? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, it is included as a condition. It simply states that it will have increased vegetation. It doesn't give me much guidance. Oh, I'm song. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, ultimately, I'm the one that approves altemative compliance. I tend to be rather hard on folks and require quite a bit of altemative in their compliance. I guess that's a little bit why I'm frustrated, because if it were just me approving this type of altemative, I would -- I would be looking for the world for that kind of reduction and I'm not sure that they could provide anything that would satisfy my concept of what would be altemative compliance on --from going from a 25 foot to a ten foot reduction. But I understand the reasons for it and I'm not saying I disagree, that's why I just wanted to bring it up. If Council wants me to remove or change that standard, please, let me know sometime in the near future. I'm preparing an ordinance amendment, so -- Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 15 of 72 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: And, Director Canning, my recollection is that the applicant volunteered extra trees and perhaps many extra trees. As you are in charge of alternate compliance, I'd beat him up for anything you can get. Canning: I'm getting a forest named after me. Rountree: Madam Mayor, a comment that may or may not be helpful to Anna that may require a change in this particular language. But it seems to me the intent is a buffer and whether that's sound or visual or whatever, it's something between uses. In my mind that could be a combination of structure or berming or vegetation or all three and maybe not necessarily more vegetation, but maybe an earthen mound. The thing that concerns me about more landscaping, from what the applicant indicates, is this is not going to have landscaped lots that are going to be managed by a property owner organization, such as a homeowners association. So, each individual lot is going to be responsible for it. That, then, becomes a compliance issue if the landscaping is not maintained, as opposed to if it's simply grass and a berm and some shrubs or a fence or a combination of fence, berm, and shrubs. I know that's not helping a lot, but the intent is the buffer, something in this case that can and will be maintained, particularly in the depths of the subdivision on Franklin I think our intent is not only a buffer, but it's a visual piece for people entering the city. So, that's something that we want some reasonable landscaping and somehow or another figure out how he can get it cared for. And I guess that would be a question for both you and Brad to address. Miller: Brad Miller with Van Auker properties. Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, we are a little bit different than the average developer in that we build and lease our properties. In the case of Ashley Furniture we did sell that property to them, but there are CC&Rs that they have to maintain the landscaping. But our intent is to build out all these lots ourselves, own those properties, but that doesn't change -- I mean that doesn't preclude us from in the future selling one of those and that would -- I mean that would be an issue and we would, obviously, want -- we will own the -- if we do sell any we will own the majority of them in there and we would want to have a hammer to be able to enforce the maintenance of the landscaping, because it would affect the value and the desirability of that subdivision. So, I mean we would want it to be well maintained. I would be willing to include it in the CC&Rs or something to that effect. Thank you. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Does that give you enough feedback? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 16 of 72 De Weerd: On this particular application. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe the area that the buffer will be located is on the north side of that internal road. A nod from Mr. Miller would be helpful. That's the current zoned boundary and where are you going to move -- you're moving that, though. That's where the new boundary would be. Miller: The zoning is -- is right here. So, we will adjust that zoning. So, this would be C-G. This would -- these most likely would be I-L. I mean there is a possibility that we may even move it all the way over and have this whole thing C-G. This one I would imagine we will keep I-L. So, this could be a potential C-G, I-L situation. This could be a potential C-G, I-L, but I got a gut feeling we will probably go C-G with this, but I can't say that for sure. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from the Council? Okay. Council, we have an open Public Hearing. Do I have a motion? Or not. Do you need further information? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on PP 06-055, Item 8. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. 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. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing no discussion, I move that we approve PP 06-055, with public -- or applicant and staff comments. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Rountree: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 17 of 72 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Does the motion maker intend that the zoning be moved, as opposed to the lot lines and -- Bird: I think that was what was agreed upon, wasn't it? Rountree: I'm getting the vibrations that's what was agreed upon. Bird: Yeah. That's what I took it -- that's what I -- I didn't hear it -- yeah. I took it that way between -- I would put that in, yes. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Any other clarification needed for the record on this motion? Okay. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.65 acres), R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) (50.17 acres), TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (65.60 acres), TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) (20.71 acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential) (35.21 acres) and L-O (Limited Office) (3.48 acres) for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from January 16, 2007: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 224 lots including: 189 residential lots, 11 commercial /other lots and 8 Mega lots (to be developed in the future) and 16 common/open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN-C, TN-R, L-O, R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett -south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 9 and 10 are continued public hearings from January 16 on AZ 06-031 and PP 06-031. I will tum this over to staff. It was limited to specific information. Anna. ~ ~ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 18 of 72 Canning: Yes, it was, Madam Mayor. Just to refresh everyone, this is the South Ridge project. It is located on the south side of Overland Road between Linder and Ten Mile. At the Council's last hearing you asked us to come back with more information and revised development agreement provisions. You also asked us to come back with more information on the realignment of Overland Road, especially with regard to whether it should line up with Lamont and on what occurred and/or will occur with regard to the ACHD approval. And, then, finally, President Borton requested some follow information after our initial attempts at addressing the development agreement provisions and I'm going to speak to those as well. And, then, finally finally, we got some additional information from Sue Sullivan later this aftemoon and from Wendell Bigham and I will update you on those items also. They are all with regard to the specific provisions you raised at your last hearing. Mr. Hood went through the proposed development agreement provisions and he addressed those that Council was concerned with. In the notes you have before you tonight I have only included those that are modified. The first one was item number three. This one was actually -- I added it to the list as a request from President Borton to clarify a question on the original Caleb Hood memo. So, the question was is -- are we adding enough detail about the usable common open space and Mr. Hood has suggested that we add the following language to specify what that is. To say that a usable common open space area park of at least 10,000 square feet, excluding parking area and/or drainage areas, and including some recreational equipment, e.g., gazebo with benches, barbecue area, tot lot, swimming pool, clubhouse, et cetera, within the open space area. So, Mr. Hood was not trying to limit it to any particular theme to the open space, in case it went -- if it went to somewhere where they were anticipating children, they could do a tot lot, if it went to a price market -- De Weerd: Your time is up. Canning: Thank you, ma'am. I really didn't want to go through all of this. If they were anticipating a market product that wouldn't have children, they could put in perhaps a gazebo or a barbecue area. So, he wanted to leave that flexibility open. With regard to provision number 12, he has stricken the city park to note that it should be a private park and we have also added information with regard to redevelopment of the mega lots, that no variances to lot dimensions, setbacks, or block lengths shall be requested by the applicant as part of the redevelopment of the mega lots. So, that when those preliminary plats came in, they would not be suggesting variances to accommodate an odd remainder piece or something like that, that they would have to stick with those mega lots, basically, and make them work with code. That the applicant agrees to plat the public library lot in -- or, I'm song, moving on to item number 16 of the provisions. During the hearing President Borton had asked some questions about -- about the tiling of the drainage feature that kind of separates the library and the elementary school. Mr. Jewett addressed that, but Mr. Borton still had concerns. We did contact the school district and just as of this aftemoon we did receive word from Mr. Bigham that he would prefer that that open water facility between the library and the elementary school be tiled, instead of developed as a kind of natural water amenity, that that be tiled or somehow covered. All right. Moving on to provision number 17. This one primarily Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 19 of 72 changes the city park to a private park as requested by City Council. I know that the parks director does want to speak to this issue once I have finished my overview of these provisions. Moving to provision number 21. This was with regard to relocating the stub street. We are proposing to add language that states that the said stub street shall be located near the west property line. Also, provide a public street -- a public stub street to either parcel number -- and he gives two parcel numbers -- when Mega Lot 2 develops and I do need to note this. The request to move the stub street to the west did come from Council. The other stub street -- because we are being very specific in that area, we felt it was important to note that as those preliminary plats come through we are probably going to be looking for a stub street to an adjoining property. So, we just wanted to include that now. I don't think the -well, the developer hasn't expressed any concerns with that stub street, but those parcel numbers reference parcels to the -- in that western comer, not on the southern property boundary. We added the requirement of a maximum height of 22 feet and that would be measured between average finished ground level of the lot to the average height of the highest roof surface. The applicant has also agreed and shall be required to construct a solid six foot tall vinyl fence adjacent to the lots in Val Vista Subdivision and Aspen Cove Subdivision prior to issuance of building permits within the first phase of the development. We added a condition stating the applicant shall be -- I'm sorry. Provision of the development agreement stating the applicant shall be required to construct a minimum of 1,000 residential dwelling units and a maximum of 1,252. Another provision that the applicant shall comply with all of the adopted state and federal air and dust particulate emission standards. The applicant shall make all reasonable attempts to abate, mitigate, dust settling on adjacent properties generated by the development of the property. The applicant shall keep a water truck on site at all times, unless otherwise allowed by authorized city staff, and use said truck to abate the emission of dust. Moving on to another provision. It states that the development of the village center at Overland Road and Linder Road -- with the development of those, the applicant shall incorporate and build at least one transit stop, including benches and covers. The applicant shall incorporate and construct a park and ride area near the proposed fire station and Ten Mile Road. When that initial proposal came out of staff, President Borton did ask us for clarification on whether transit now exists in the area. The answer is no. Overland is also not currently in Valley Regional Transit's regional operations or capital improvement plans for bus service. But what we have heard time and time again that is if we can provide the kind of densities that can support transit and the kind of facilities, that they will be able to provide that bus -- or transit facility in the future. So, staff does recommend keeping that provision in, because we do see a lot of potential for Overland Road serving both bus and park and ride uses in the future. It acts as a natural kind of frontage street to the freeway. Finally, the last provision of the development agreement would be that prior to signature of the first final plat the applicant shall submit and obtain City Council approval for development agreement modification that proposes architectural guidelines for this development. So, that is the end of the development agreement provisions as requested by City Council. The Mayor had also asked for some information as to what we had done with Duane Drive when Council approved Redfeather development. That one was a little different, because they were physically abutting one another, whereas here we have an adjoining five acre parcel that is not Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 20 of 72 being proposed for development, but what Council approved in that instance was to go ahead and make -- physically make the connection, but to install a gate. And, then, that gate keeps traffic from flowing either way, but there was a provision put in there that -- let me find it. That the gate on Duane Drive could be removed and Duane Drive opened for all vehicular traffic between Redfeather and Perkins Brown at the discretion of ACRD commission after a public request and subsequent public hearing on the matter. So, that's how Redfeather was approved. So, that would be certainly something that staff could propose if one of those five acre lots wants to connect to that stub street, we could certainly look at the possibility of providing a gate at that time. Where there is no traffic that could move through that there at this time, staff did not feel it was appropriate to build a gate just now. Okay. So, we addressed those issues. Now, I'm going to take a breath. Now, I'm going to move on to the memo from Pete Friedman regarding why Overland Road -- with the process we went through at the Ten Mile charrette to get it where it was and why it didn't connect to Lamont and I am prepared to give you a lot of discussion for his memo, but I'll also I think try to shorten it up a little bit, but I can answer more questions if you have them. Basically, the rationale for realigning was the proximity to existing Overland -Ten Mile intersection with the future interchange and the desire to direct traffic on that further south, so that we could -- so, that that interchange could operate better and that there were grade issues that would necessitate changing that intersection anyway. When we looked at whether it should connect to Lamont, the applicant raised the point that there were topographic issues connecting to Lamont as well and that there really -- the topography of the area made the proposed location the best one. And our consultant staff went out and met with the applicant on site and they agreed with that assessment. We received additional information from ACHD and they are, basically, agreeing with the statement that it's -- now I'm -- I'm pausing, because I'm getting confused and I'm not sure if it's ACHD or ITD, but one of the transportation agencies -- I'll find my notes in a moment -- did agree that the proposed location was better than connecting to Lamont. They didn't want to put that kind of traffic off to the existing street section on Lamont. The third reason that was by keeping it in its current location it does fall within one property developer -- one developer's ownership and, therefore, facilitates getting that constructed at one time and that's always a big consideration of ours. So, that was the third reason. With regard to that statement, Mr. Borton asked about us to clarify what it was meant by dedicating a portion of the right of way for the realignment of Overland Road. What -- Mr. Jewett has proposed to built -- he's proposing to build all of Overland Road realignment. He would be solely responsible for dedicating and constructing the first two lanes of that realigned Overland, including sidewalks. He would, then, ask for -- he still is planning to build the rest of it, but he would be eligible for reimbursement on the additional lane. And those - - that reimbursement would be through impact fees as Overland -- because Overland is an arterial roadway currently in ACHD's capital improvement plan. Okay. Our draft plan also shows a west extension of Overland Road and that topic came up, too. And that's very conceptual at this point. Since we have developed that charrette plan we have been receiving more information that -- that that continuation of that may not be desirable or feasible. So, we have been looking at -- in that Ten Mile plan that perhaps Overland should stop there at Ten Mile and not continue further. Finally, ACHD is in the process of completing the south Meridian transportation study that includes this area ~ ~ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 21 of 72 and the current draft -- I said this at the last hearing -- but a current draft identifies -- no. I'm sorry. This -- that paragraph is in reference to the last statement I made. Okay. Now, we are going to move on to the ACRD approval and the letter that I read into the record last time and some clarification on that letter. Mrs. Den Hartog did go through her original letter and clarify some of the issues. The first one was a different public involvement process would be necessary for a major realignment of a principal arterial roadway. For clarification was that due to the nature of the proposal, the Commission indicated that a broader public process would be more appropriate, because more people, other than just those impacted by the development, would be affected by the proposal. ACHD staff notified all property owners within 300 feet of the development as to the date and time of the commission meeting. However, the realignment of Overland was viewed as having more of a regional impact, thus requiring a broader public process. I asked Mr. Inselman to further clarify that and this is the response. If the city approves South Ridge with the realignment of Overland and the city and the applicant request ACHD to take an action, then, ACHD will be compelled to initiate a public process for the realignment of Overland Road. At that -- at a minimum that public process will most likely need to include a public information meeting or open house with the appropriate level of advertising and public notice. Later he goes on to say that the most effective process -- and I agree -- would be to allow the south Meridian transportation plan to be completed and this already addresses the realigned Overland. There is a public information meeting scheduled for next week. If they were trying to schedule any other public information it wouldn't happen before the one for the south Meridian plan would. So, really, it would appear that the timing of the south Meridian transportation plan falls in line with the timing of this project and that that plan could address this issue regarding ACHD's need for more public involvement. The second issue in Mrs. Hartog's letter was the formal adoption of the Ten Mile area plan by the City of Meridian, because the proposed Ten Mile area plan prompted the redesign of the revised application. And she goes on to clarify that it was the draft transportation map produced as a result of the Ten Mile area plan charrette, meaning that spurred the redesign of this particular development application. That document is still in draft form and subject to change as it continues through the Public Hearing process. There were concerns raised by the desirability of making a final decision on the realignment of Overland Road before the Ten Mile area plan had been formally adopted. I again asked Mr. Inselman for a little bit of clarification as -- would they have to wait until the city adopted the Ten Mile area plan and his response was the south Meridian transportation plan could satisfy this requirement. Again, the transportation plan has the realigned Overland Road in it. That plan is scheduled to be complete in April with possibly commission action in May. This planning effort could and probably should be the ACRD public process for considering the realignment of Overland, as it encompasses the transportation needs of the whole area. The third issue that Mrs. Hartog's letter addressed as a concern for the ACHD commission was which design alternatives is selected for ITD for the Ten Mile interchange. The commissioners stated that knowing the design selection would be helpful in understanding the full impact to both Ten Mile Road and Overland Road and any future intersection along either of those roadways relative to proposed interstate ramps. I asked Mr. Inselman if that meant they were -- that ACRD commission wouldn't be acting on this until the interchange plans were fully Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 22 of 72 approved and he stated that he did not believe that that was the case, that the commission simply expressed a view that it would be desirable and helpful to know what type of interchange design would be chosen. In addition to that, I received an e- mail from Sue Sullivan late this afternoon and her statement was that the Ten Mile interchange project terminized -- the southerly end is on Ten Mile Road just north of the Ridenbaugh Canal. She goes on to state that they don't intend to reduce or widen the canal. You know, I put that discussion in the wrong place, so I'm sorry. It doesn't relate to the first item, so I'll address that in a moment. Sony about that. So, those were the reasons that ACHD had given. Mrs. Hartog, then, goes on to address some of the questions raised by Meridian City Council at your last hearing. She, basically, says that staff analyzed the proximity of other nearby roadways intersecting the Ten Mile Road and they did feel that the proposed new intersection of the realigned Overland Road with Ten Mile would meet district policy with both -- with regard to Lamont as well. So, the separations that are being proposed on this application do seem to meet district policy. They also went back and they -- staff determined -- again, this is just staff looking at this application to address some of Council's concerns. They did feel that -- determine that aligning the proposed new Overland Road with Lamont was not a desirable option. I mentioned that earlier. So, it was ACHD. While Lamont Road is currently classified as a collector roadway, there are a number of existing residences that front on the roadway. If the realigned Overland Road were to align with Lamont, it would effectively make Lamont a de facto principal arterial roadway without going through the normal roadway classification process. However, by offsetting Lamont Road it opens up the opportunity to possibly extend Overland Road west of Ten Mile Road parallel to Lamont through largely undeveloped acreages. And, again, that is consistent with the memo Mr. Friedman prepared for Council. I think that addresses all of ACHD's memo to the Commission. The final one was -- I did receive a memo from Sue Sullivan with regard to this project. Because the project actually doesn't adjoin an ITD facility, she had not received notice prior to your other hearing. But she did get an opportunity, she got ahold of the plat and was able to review it for some -- and to provide these comments. The first was that the termini of the ITD project is the southern end of the Ridenbaugh Canal. So, they are stopping just north of the Ridenbaugh. So, they currently do not plan to replace or widen the canal crossing. To do so would likely delay their project they say. So, if the Ten Mile Road needs to be widened south of there or the bridge to that new intersection with Ten Mile and Overland, she suggests that perhaps somebody else should be responsible for that improvement is what the memo says. And those were her only -- that was, really, her only concern was just that one stretch of roadway. The applicant does have control over nearly all, if not all of that property. I'm not sure if he has control over half of the canal -- half of the property adjoining the canal or all of the property that crosses the canal. Okay. That is my very detailed update for the Council and I would be happy to answer any questions. And I'm sorry that I -- I really worked on organizing it for you, but if I have -- if I have confused you on anything, please, let me try and address it. De Weerd: No. We appreciate the detail that you brought back. Council, do you have any questions for Anna? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 23 of 72 Bird: I'd just like to echo the work that they did. Canning: Thank you. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, same -- that's exactly what I was looking for was all -- among the millions of things we discussed on all sides of the issues, to say, okay, here is what we think you said, that's very helpful. It gives us a target. Canning: To be quite truthful, it seems like the transportation agencies -- at least at staff level all agree that this proposed realignment seems to be working and seems to be a real workable solution. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. It was left open for specific reasons. Mr. Nary, I would appreciate it if you could kind of give some guidance on any testimony we receive from the public as to the parameters. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it would seem appropriate at this juncture that as staff has reported on those things, I think the applicant, obviously, should have an opportunity to address that as well. If you want other public testimony, it is going to have to be very narrowly addressing those particular ones and if we get off track, then, we are going to have to stop them and remind them that's not what we are here on, we are only here on these subject matters only. But we can certainly see if there is things the public has additional comment to, either what Mrs. Canning has provided or what Mr. Jewett can provide if he has any additional comment. I did notice in our information that Mr. Strong has a memo as well in regards to the park and it does relate to an issue, so I don't know if you want to hear from Mr. Strong prior to Mr. Jewett, too. De Weerd: Yes. Mr. Strong. Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the park in particular and felt compelled to do so, because of discussion to -- to rather than to keep the park as a public park, to make it a homeowners park, and partly because of the amount of time and energy that we have spent with Mr. Jewett over the -- over probably a year and a halfs period of time from the very beginning of looking at the development of this property to develop it as a public park and that's addressed in the first bullet point on the memo that I have given to you. We have gone through numerous meetings. Mr. Jewett has been to two parks and recreation commission meetings to work through issues that they brought up to get to a point of positive recommendation for the park site to be moved forward to you for approval. There has been numerous concessions that Mr. Jewett's addressed and made to satisfy those concerns through that process, so certainly want to thank his diligence in working with us through that process, because we were very excited about the prospect of this park and because this property has a location for a future park in our future land use map is what was driving us to look at this as a neighborhood park and a public park. It fits our capital improvement plan process and what we have recently developed in a Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 24 of 72 capital improvement plan to help us meet our number of acres per thousand residents in the community as we build parks and provide public open space for the community in the coming ten year period that we have identified capital projects for the city. So, like I say, some of that is addressed in that first bullet point. The second bullet point was to address that as we have moved through the process we didn't find any history anywhere that the location of a homeowners swimming pool, clubhouse adjacent to a public park was -- would be an issue. It's not in code that that's not an appropriate marriage of sorts of property. It seemed to make sense for just proximity of recreational facilities for both homeowners in the area and the general public to locate it that way as we discussed the process. During that discussion, though, and in presentations at the parks and recreation commission, Mr. Jewett agreed to relocate the pool, provide landscape buffering, signage in the parking lot and increase the size of the public parking lot for the park to better in the sense kind of separate the private area that's designed for homeowners from the public area for the park. As described in the park's action plan, a neighborhood park really is intended to be located in the center of a neighborhood to serve approximately a mile radius of that -- of that park. This -- the location of this park certainly does that. It's connected by a collector street, as well as a multi-use pathway system that goes throughout the development, as well as connects outside of this proposed development, which would provide access to public open space from users of that park area from outside of the development with a public pathway system going through the park area, then, people that are using the pathway system would, essentially, not -- unless they lived in the development not be able to use that public open space as they were using the pathway system, either for recreation or just transportation to the school, that you would be moving through that area possibly to get there. So, one of the things that exited us as we went through the process is that this particular park offered a geography that we don't have in any our parks that we currently have in the city, because of the elevation, the drop in elevation, the ponds, and just the real spectacular view from that area would really lend itself to a very pleasant, more of a passive use park, rather than the more active use parks that we currently have in the city. We felt that that would also lend itself to some other types of activities that could be developed in the park, like disk golf where changes in geography, creation of hazards for type of play would be possible where in a flat or relatively flat park it's not quite the same opportunity for those types of recreational pursuits and there is apparently a very active disk golf community in the Treasure Valley that is looking for new places to play and this would certainly lend itself to that. As we propose donations, the proposed donation of the park acreage and the green up certainly is a fiscal advantage for the department to continue to add to our public open space with less fiscal impact than the actual development and creation of park space. We would be left to providing the restroom, playground facilities, tennis court, if that's provided were the hard-scape features of the park. We wouldn't -- we wouldn't need to purchase the land and green up the land, provide the irrigation system and those elements. So, it certainly cuts the cost of developing the park almost in half. And, then, lastly, I guess, if the decision to keep it a homeowners park really hinges on the location of the clubhouse and swimming pool -- and I have not talked to Mr. Jewett about this yet, but it would be my recommendation that we ask that the swimming pool and clubhouse be moved to a different location in the subdivision and maintain this park acreage as public park open Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 25 of 72 space. So, I'll conclude with that and certainly would respond to any questions that you may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the donation of the park, is not -- is the park impact fees being considered in the donation of this park? No paybacks? Strong: No. There has been no request for a park impact fee, reimbursement, or any of that. The land donation and the green up and development of the water features, the irrigation ponds, would all be donated by the developer. Bird: And we maintain it -- Strong: And we would maintain, yes. Bird: -- if we were to take it. Strong: There would be a pump station located in the park that would serve just the park, not the development. And that's provided by the developer as well. Bird: Thank you, Doug. De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you. Strong: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. The developer. Jewett: Madam Mayor, Council, for the record Jim Jewett, 1560 Carol Street in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Jewett: Again, I would commend staffs efforts in not only this, but all the previous reports I have done. This has been a complicated application and they have done a very diligent job in trying to understand it, maybe sometimes more than me. So, I don't really think I have anything to add, other than I would agree with all their comments that they have offered to you in their memo. I have provided them three additional slides on my PowerPoint that two of them address the Tasa connection that were provided to me by the ITD representative. If you want to view that we can pull that up. And, then, one other slide which would show the elevation of the library showing that it's a single story, Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 26 of 72 addressing the single story -two story, which really wasn't part of the memo, but I thought I would offer that, so hope that Anna pulls that up. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm sorry, I forgot to address that issue in my presentation. One of the items that staff had requested was to keep the two story requirement within TN-C. Mr. Jewett spoke to the need to maintain the one story for the library. This is the conceptual rendering of the library at this time. Also of discussion by the public at that hearing -- although it isn't part of this application, so I didn't necessarily want to confuse the issue, but there was some question about the Tasa connection. Jim, I'm not sure you included that one. Oh, there it is. And we have two slides showing how Tasa could be I believe relocated under the Ten Mile facility. Jewett: This one actually shows how if Overland remains in its current location or slightly moved to the north, how Tasa would be connected with Overland in a cross intersection. This illustration shows still they were unaware of any relocation of Overland, so they show -- still show Overland, but bringing Tasa under Ten Mile and connecting it back to Overland. And I show this slide because if Overland is relocated here, the road simply connects back to Overland right here and ITD would facilitate that project. And for the Council's information, I am the owner of this property, so ITD had a question as if the developer had the ability to grant that right of way and I do and I will be working with ITD if this is their desired way to work with Tasa. So, I just wanted to offer those two up, so that the Council fully had understood how Tasa could be dealt with. And these two slides came from H.W. -- no, they came from Lochner, the representative of ITD. Canning: And, again, these are not on the can-ent project site. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: The subject of the co-location of the park and the homeowners association, when it -- when the discussion was leaning towards leaving the public park as a private park I didn't chime in, because I wanted to hear the rest of it. The issue was actually raised during public testimony of somebody who felt it would be difficult to separate the two and you gave us some comments last time about how you had redesigned it and those were repeated by the parks director now. In addition to that, were you also not planning asubstantial -- not loud enough. Okay. A substantial fence around it and my question about that would be could you add signage to the fence that says private property, no trespassing or -- Jewett: Obviously. I think what our commitment to the parks department was is that we would -- we would strive to create some sort of screening that would clearly make it invisible from people using the park or some way to denote it as private, so that there Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 27 of 72 wouldn't be that confusion. And we can accomplish that through the design review of that clubhouse and the park to make sure that the staff is adequately convinced that we have screened that. Zaremba: Thank you. I'm betraying my opinion that I believe that would be an excellent place for a public park. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Gorton: Mr. Jewett, you had indicated that you're in agreement with the amended comments or recommendations of staff, specifically with regards to the open space in the CN-R -- Jewett: Yeah. Gorton: -- the 10,000 square foot, including parking area. That particular language, is that -- does that seem sufficient? Jewett: Yes. Gorton: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Council, we will seek any public comment. There are some people who have signed up, again, to indicate for, against, or neutrality. Testimony is limited specifically to the items that have been discussed. So, if when I read your name you have testimony you would like to provide, please, come forward at that time. Lucy Lavelle signed up neutral. Okay. Steve -- and, I'm sorry, I messed it up last week, you know, so I will just let you say it. Presbus: Steve Presbus, 2530 South Del Rey. De Weerd: Thank you. Presbus: When I left the meeting last week I was under the assumption that everybody was kind of in agreement to move the stub road down. Now, we come back and now there is two stub roads. I mean this is getting crazy. Every time we come there is something new. I was under the assumption that everybody talked about moving it down and now, like I said, there is two. We talked about the rear setbacks of 50 and Mr. Jewett said it's possible to do it. Somebody said 40. Somebody said 35. Now it's 30. Can we compromise and go 40? I mean that would work for me and I'm sure it would work for him. We have -- we have a height limit they said of 22 feet, but where is that from? Is one lot going to be raised up and 22 feet from that and the next one raised Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 28 of 72 up a little higher or is it going to be from the base line of the road. The base line of the road gives you 22 foot. The other way it could be ended up 25, 26, 28, who knows. I mean there is no -- each lot is going to be different. I don't think these lots are going to be perfectly level. On -- I know -- I know the parks representative said that at the park there is going to be a spectacular view. Well, right now I have a spectacular view and I don't -- I don't understand -- I won't be able to keep it all, but I would like to keep some of it, because I mean, you know, there needs to be some kind of consideration. So, I think the 22 foot should be from base line of the road, so they all are the same and the further the setback, the rear yard setback, it pushes the house peak further away for a little bit better view. And last week on this park, I understood that Jim said it was going for 50 cents on a dollar and I guess now it's being donated. And, then, last, the Overland Road realignment. There has been no study. I have talked to ACHD personally. There has been no study. The only other study that was Jim and a few people working at the charrette thing. Okay. I think there should be more input, more studying. There is -- that's a great impact, not only to our life, but when you drive it it's going to be a big impact. That's all I have to say. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Sheny Fawcett. Fawcett: Sheny Fawcett. I live at 2755 West Val Vista Court. I have more -- two questions. One is on -- it's -- there is a statement that says that area cannot be developed until such time as Ten Mile area specific plan is adopted by the city and approved. My question is that still has to go through public hearings when those mega lots are developed; is that correct? And also Ada County Highway District approval of that road system, whatever it may be. I just want to verify that we are not saying city says, yeah, go and all of a sudden he's given approval to develop those lots. Mega lots. And, then, the other one is on the stub road into Val Vista. There is an agreement on the fence along the property line. Where that stub road is will the fence be across that stub road or is that an open area, because it is a stub road. And if it is an open area, obviously, the homeowner that backs up to that now has an open area where that road is. Is there restrictions on putting landscaping buffers as a homeowners association or the homeowners themselves. So, those are my questions. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Mel Shoemaker against. Shoemaker: My name is Mel Shoemaker. 1620 South Ten Mile. De Weerd: Thank you. Shoemaker: And last week I did talk about the alignment of the Overland Road and also the freeway interchange and with the amount of stuff that's come up on the roads -- I'd like to approach the board and put -- De Weerd: Okay. Sir, if you would just take that microphone. Shoemaker: And I would also like to have that south alternate photo put up. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 29 of 72 Canning: Is this the Tasa property that we are referring to? De Weerd: Mr. Shoemaker, which south -- Canning: Sir? Shoemaker: South alternate four. South alternate four that you had up a little while ago. I have said this before and I will say it again. I think there is a major overlook being done here by not considering -- first I'm going to say that the Karcher Road interchange was moved off of Karcher Road for a reason, because of existing development. De Weerd: Okay. Now, sir -- Shoemaker: And Ithink -- De Weerd: Mr. Shoemaker, I'm sorry, but testimony is very specific on three different items or the items that were detailed. Shoemaker: The road I'd like to talk about. De Weerd: And this on Ten Mile interchange. Shoemaker: Yes. De Weerd: And at this time that testimony is not appropriate. Shoemaker: I do not agree with you, ma'am. De Weerd: We are limiting testimony specifically to the items that this hearing was continued for. Shoemaker: I understand that, but there has been a lot of discussion about tying into Ten Mile with 1,253 residences. So, I do not agree with you in any way, shape, or form. Nary: But, sir, the limitation on the testimony was already stated before the public testimony and the testimony that was already done by you and others regarding the Ten Mile interchange and that connection are already part of the record. Shoemaker: Okay. Would you like me to leave the room? Is that what you -- Nary: No. You just can't testify about the same thing you have already done. Shoemaker: So, the interchange is a done deal? ~ ~ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 30 of 72 De Weerd: No. Nary: No. The discussion about it was already done prior to tonight. De Weerd: The testimony on Ten Mile interchange, those public hearings are not had yet. Those will be forthcoming when that is the item. Shoemaker: Okay. But it has an impact of where Overland Road ties in, ma'am. You both -- both of us know that. De Weerd: Okay. Again, I can only accept testimony on what this was continued for. Shoemaker: Would you like me to stop? Nary: Yes. De Weerd: If the testimony you choose to provide is not on those items, yes, please. Shoemaker: I think it's a miscarriage of justice, but I will stop. I do have one more thing to say. Is it appropriate for the same person to vote on two boards, Planning and Zoning and City Council? De Weerd: Sir, yes. Shoemaker: Okay. De Weerd: The Planning and Zoning Commission is a recommending body. Okay. Wayne Amend. Okay. Christine Apostolou. I'm sorry, you will have to -- please give your name and address. Apostolou: Yeah. I'm Christine Apostolou. 2360 South Ten Mile Road. De Weerd: Thank you. Apostolou: Madam Mayor, Council, thank you for giving me the opportunity to voice a couple of concems and ask a few questions. I do apologize, I may be a little behind, because I missed the last meeting, but I actually own the property that is directly across from Lamont. Right here. So, I have been trying to be really concerned and keep up on what's going on as much has changed. Mostly just -- I just have some concems about the size of the subdivision and not having the infrastructure in place and having so many different theories on where the roads are going to go and how they are going to flow for the amount of potential traffic impact, not only with the homes, but if we do also tie in and consider this to be -- to this public park, which I have a two year old, so I can see the benefits of having that there, although from an objectionable standpoint I kind of question the actual area and how useful it will be for all the citizens of Meridian, for their taxpayer money to go into it, because it really is a bit off the beaten path and, again, it's ~ ~ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 31 of 72 also going to increase some traffic flow into that area over and above just the residents that are going to be in there and that raises some further concerns about the things that we talk about. I'm wondering how it's going to work if Overland does go with the realignment that we are talking about, because it would position itself so closely to my property and affect me getting in and out and all these areas here and in Lamont and, then, talking about putting in a park and ride there and things like that, I'd like to see the actual layout of that before it's finalized to how that's going to impact and I question Overland Road coming in and dumping into Ten Mile. There is a statement that said that Lamont can't handle the traffic coming in there, but how much better is it going to be to dump a four lane road into Ten Mile, which is now two lanes, and has a hard time bearing the traffic that it has also. Sometimes it's hard to get out of my driveway now and I can only imagine that it would exacerbate things further with the additional homes being proposed to be put in there. And, then, I'm a little confused on the other -- there was mention of a second stub road on the southwest comer and I'd like to have that pointed out what that was in reference. I was having a hard time putting my finger on it, so I'm just listening and it wasn't really pointed out clearly during this meeting, anyway, so if there was maybe a slide I'd like to see that if it's possible. And I think that's -- I think that's pretty much all. I thank you for your time to listen to me and -- and hear my concerns and, hopefully, I could have a few more questions answered on that. De Weerd: Thank you. James Prather. Prather. I'm sorry. Prather: Madam Mayor, James Prather, Council. 707 East United Heritage Parkway. And it's Prather. De Weerd: Thank you. Prather: Just one point of clarity concerning -- Mrs. Canning, if you would put up a slide that would show where the proposed alignment of Overland hits Ten Mile. I control the property to the west of Ten Mile where this proposed new alignment will strike and I have talked to the applicant Mr. Jewett prior to the meeting and it's my understanding from him that the current alignment, if approved, the center line of Overland will hit this -- exactly the center line -- or, excuse me, not the center line, but it would be the south portion of my property. One, I would like that to be substantiated on the record. And, two, I'm a little confused now, because in staffs comments they had made mention that perhaps the extension of Overland west would not be asked for. And if that is the case, I'd also like some clarity on if it is not, then, I think ACHD may limit my access across the street. Or restrict it. So, I'd like some clarity brought to that, please. De Weerd: Okay. Prather: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. And Max Vandenberg. Thank you, sir. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Again, for limited testimony regarding the items as specified by Council. Is there any additional testimony? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 32 of 72 Stone: I'm Susan Stone. I live at 2530 South Del Rey Lane. And I'm not certain with -- the conflicting about the parks. What is the story? Is it a private park, as the proposal said and by Mrs. Canning, or is it going to remain a public park with the border as Mr. Zaremba suggested? De Weerd: There is no decision made. It's still one of those items being discussed. Council has indicated certainly some questions and so that's what's being discussed tonight as well. Stone: Okay. I still look for it to be separate or same. So, separate the park and the pool if they are going to be private and public -- or public and private. Or both be public or both be private, but not be together if they are the same -- De Weerd: Thank you. Stone: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony? Sir. Elton: Curtis Elton. 2906 West Val Vista. Last -- at the last meeting Mr. Jewett and the subdivision agreed on 50 feet setback and now I believe it has arbitrarily been changed. Correct or not? De Weerd: No. There are no decisions that have been. Elton: No decisions made? De Weerd: No. Elton: Well, I would just like reinforce -- Mr. Jewett said that 50 feet was workable and we were asking 50 feet. I would definitely back 50 feet if at all possible, especially for the three and a half lots that it affects -- it affects our view and changes our view substantially if it's a shorter setback. And, secondly, we are asking for a barrier that would stand up in a length of time and one that would possibly be fire proof or fire retardant at least and a plastic fence is really quite fragile. If you look around town, the wind has taken some of those -- those down. We are completely in the open there and we would like something that would withstand a little bit of test of time, because, otherwise, that fence is going to go down or be damaged very easily sitting out there in the open and the wind. Also, it's very vulnerable to any type of grass fires, small ones, and so forth and we would like some type of a barrier there that would look decent over time. Definitely not wood, because that's just a matter of one or two years and it's sustained differently in different places and, likewise, it could be tom apart very easily and wind, likewise, can damage it. We have large gusts of wind that comes through there and I would like something substantial that's a fire retardant and afire -- probably a barrier between the two subdivisions, because we are, basically, kind of a small Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 33 of 72 agricultural horse area and we all have pastures along there and there is, likewise, water -- water rights going down there for irrigation, which leaves weeds and growth substantially there all summer long and it dries out and it is a fire hazard. So, I think we look into that. And, likewise, no more than one stub road into our subdivision. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Okay. Any additional testimony? I'm song, ma'am, we can't catch you on the record. You need to provide it in the microphone. Apostolou: I won't take very long. De Weerd: If you will just restate your name, please. Apostolou: Christina Apostolou. De Weerd: Thank you. Apostolou: For the record. I just -- I had put against on the paper. I'm not really against this subdivision in its entirety; I'm just against putting it forward without some thought in infrastructure. I am actually neutral on the concept of it. I understand that it's good for the development of Meridian and I just wanted to quality that. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further comment? Mr. Jewett, would you like to respond? Perhaps, Mr. Jewett, before we ask for your response, we let -- let we have a comment. I'm sorry, I really have a headache tonight and so it's distorting my thinking. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I just wanted to comment on the stub street, because I'm sure I wasn't clear. I didn't point to it on a map, so I need to do that for you all. As requested by Council in response to the folks that live along Val Vista, we did require that the stub street to the south be moved to the furthest west point possible. When Mr. Hood was looking at that, we didn't address all the stub streets in the -- for the mega blocks. With that mega block there appears to be another stub street necessary and since we were pointing out one stub street for that mega block, we felt we should put out the other one just to inform the applicant that there is an issue here of providing a stub street to this land locked parcel. So, the way the condition reads, though, is that there be a stub street to one of these two properties. The idea is not to get traffic from within the development out to Ten Mile, it's just the opposite. That as traffic increases and these folks are not able to get out safely on Ten Mile, that they could come back through the development and have safe travel through that light if they need to make a left. So, again, it was -- the idea was to provide an alternate means for that -- particularly this land locked parcel here. You can see there is some access to it and an access easement across that other property, but it is land locked, it doesn't have frontage. So, that's what the stub street was about. And, truly, this conversation is premature. It should occur with the other mega block, but since we were discussing one of the stub streets and it was of such concern, we felt we better identify the other Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 34 of 72 stub street necessary in that mega block. I don't believe -- oh, shall I address some of the other comments -- De Weerd: Yes, please. Canning: -- that were addressed to me? Mr. Prather asked us to substantiate where the center line will be. The applicant will have to do that. With regard to the clarity on the extension, this is -- that extension is still being considered as part of the south Meridian transportation plan and as part of the Ten Mile. We have -- there seems to be some discussion about not extending that at this time, but we have no definitive answer for you in any way. I cannot speak to ACHD's restrictions that they have if you're immediately across the street from a signalized intersection. I don't know those. So, basically, I can't answer Mr. Prather's question on those two. I believe that was it. The stub street seemed to be of particular concem and I did need to clarify that. De Weerd: Okay. Anna, I guess also the 22 feet, measure between average finish ground level of the lot to the average height of the highest roof surface. Canning: The direction I had given Mr. Hood was to talk with the building department on how they measure things and to put that in here. So, I assume that that's what that is is how the building department measures. That's my general understanding of how they measure, but our UDC refers to the building code. It says however the building department is going to measure a building is how we should measure a building and not have two different standards between the two organizations. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree a hundred percent that's how they measure. But when we are setting a limit of 22, you have got to have a point to come off from. Not per lot, but for all the lots. What the gentleman explained up here going off the center elevation of the road is your ideal one, because you can put in basements or something and build it up three to four foot, then, you're 25 or 26 foot with the roof height. So, on a development agreement or something like this, I personally feel that we need to have a point of reference, not per lot. It's the center point of the road or center point of something that they are measured off from. I realize in building you do measure off of the finished level, but this is a condition that the people are quite concerned with and I am, too. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: There is another concem that was raised a couple of times and one it relates to the staff comment and the same section number 22 in regards to the building setback and I have the luxury of having the minutes in front of me, but the discussion in regards Meridian City Council • January 23, 2007 Page 35 of 72 to the building setback on page 63 of the minutes from last week, Mr. Jewett only agreed to the 30 foot setback, not a 50 foot setback. So, that wasn't changed by the staff that was what was discussed. There was testimony requesting a 50 foot setback, but what was at least agreed to, again, that's, obviously, not the final decision of this Council, but that's the basis of the staffs recommendation to the language was the agreement of a 30 foot setback and part of that relates to the -- again, what Mr. Bird has raised, the building height, the depth of the lot, the build-able property that's remaining and that was where the 30 foot consent was given by Mr. Jewett. So, it wasn't either a change, as some of the testimony was, or some disagreement between what Mr. Jewett said at one point and what was agreed to by the staff, that's what's in the minutes. So, I just wanted to make that clarification as well. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anything further, Anna? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are just debating on how to achieve asuitable -- a suitable height restriction. You could measure it from the crown of the road -- center line of the road or crown of the road and, then, the building department will somehow just have to run measurements back to that roadway. There is still a possibility that the road could be cut, that they would have to do a cut in the road and so they are losing potential height that they would have normally been able to gain or there is potential that they could raise the crown of the road above the existing grade, so I don't know if you wanted it -- you will need to provide a little more information if you want it based on the existing natural grade or as it's undeveloped or where you want that to go. If you want us to review a grading plan and specify some maximum tolerances for the grading of the lots in that area, then, maybe we could take it from the finished grade elevation of the lots, so that the building department is just measuring from the lots might be another opportunity. Do you understand my concern about -- I was just --okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: This is probably going to be eventually a question for Mr. Jewett, but these lots most likely have a pretty good slope to them, I believe. They are not level lots and I think that's why we are struggling with using the street as the point of reference. They are flat? De Weerd: We will ask the developer. Zaremba: I would direct that question to Mr. Jewett as to whether the elevation changes or the -- if there is a contour to the lots or whether they are flat. De Weerd: Okay. Council, did you want testimony from ACRD? • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 36 of 72 Bird: You know, Madam Mayor, I do have some questions, because even though we got this -- and Anna did a great job and her staff did a great job of getting answers, I still haven't figured out if they know exactly if that's really going to happen. If they have made a final decision -- if their commission has said, you know, we are going to move the road. Where are we going to put the drains in and all this stuff, because you have got a lot of property owners laying below you that your runoff could affect. Inselman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Gary Inselman representing ACRD. 3775 North Adams, Garden City. No, ACHD has not made a final decision on the realignment of Overland Road. The E-mail Anna read from me was sent last week, so our public information meeting is actually Thursday of this week for our south Meridian transportation plan and is -- would be our staffs recommendation that we allow that planning process to continue and that our commission action be taken at the conclusion of that planning effort. If I might, while I'm here, I could address one of the issues on the stub street. We do allow fences to cross the end of the stub street, so it's not an eye sore for the neighbors. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any specific questions? Bird: He answered mine. He answered my mine. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Gary, while you're here is there anything that you can provide that responds to Mr. Prather's concerns? Inselman: Councilman Borton, we -- ACHD does have access -- access management standards regardless of where Overland would align that would possibly restrict access to Ten Mile from his property. We do require that -- we try to consolidate access points, not wind up with multiple access points on the arterial roadway system. With an intersection proposed there -- actually, when we looked at this before we had recommended that it align where the road could be offset of his property line a little bit. So, it wasn't exactly dead center. When a stub street hits a property line dead center, then, it can't be built without both properties north and south of it developing at the same time. If it were a signalized intersection in the future that would require certain offsets from that intersection before his first access point would be allowed, but we would still require that he try to consolidate access points and he currently has an application in with the private road. We require or request that all his access come off of that road and not consider multiple access points up and down Ten Mile. De Weerd: I don't know if that really answers that. I don't know. Okay. Mr. Jewett. • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 37 of 72 Jewett: Thank you, again, Madam Mayor and Council. The issue of the 22-foot height setback, I would actually have to write something in the CC&Rs and the guidelines to make sure that we maintain it internally, as well as externally. So, my suggestion would be that we measure it 22 feet from the mid point of the lot, top back of curb, but in no event higher than 22 feet from the rear lot line at mid point. That protects the neighbors knowing that for some reason the road is higher, it's not going to be more than 22 feet above the rear property lines at mid point, but to be measured 22 feet from the mid point of the lot at top back of curb. So, that's the language that I would propose to use. On the setback, your attorney had addressed the issue of what I had stated at the previous Council regarding the 30 foot setback. I thought 50 foot was going to limit our building envelope slightly, that 30 foot might be appropriate and I'm still open if the Council would like to discuss that further, but my offer was to make that a 30 foot setback. I do have some of the same issues with vinyl fences that was spoken -- I'm not really that much of a proponent of vinyl fences. My idea was to have an open fence, a wrought iron fence. If it's the Council's desire that it be a solid fence, like I spoke last -- last week, I will gladly put a solid fence in and it most likely will be that I will probably put a solid concrete fence in, because I'm not a proponent of vinyl. I think long term with their uses backing up to it, the farm uses, the vinyl fence probably won't have a long enough life that we would want. So, I would offer that comment. As far as the stub street, we met with Anna and staff early on kind of about those stub streets going that way and, again, the staff at that point indicated that would be an issue that would come with future preliminary plats, but with the issue coming up of how to address the stub street to Val Vista, it is appropriate and I am agreeable that some stub street needs to be addressed to the west. It has been discussed with staff in the past, so it's very appropriate and we are agreeable to that. I think the last issue that I'm going to talk about, I guess, is the process and my support of the process, not only at P&Z, but here, but at ACHD, at Ten Mile charrette and the Ten Mile planning area. And I don't think anything we are doing here short changes that. A condition that was placed on it at P&Z, which I'm agreeable to, is that no construction or no development of the westerly half of this property will occur until the Ten Mile area plan has been approved. So, basically, what we are asking for, if we set out what the land use is going to be and let the process continue. What our desire is to move forward on the east half, with a preliminary plat that actually is being submitted. And so it -- I don't think that it's our intent or the staffs intent or the P&Z's intent to short change any process or make it hinder, I think it's just to enhance it and to layout this land use and let that process continue and so with that I would stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Can you speak to the issue that Mr. Prather brought up? Apparently you have had a conversation, so -- Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 38 of 72 Jewett: With the -- Anna, I think there might be a plan that shows his lot lines over there. One of those plans. But when ACHD looked --did look at the realignment in one -- I think the aerial. When they looked at the realignment of -- yeah. That one will work. ACHD -- their staff did make a recommendation in the staff report and it was for approval of the realignment with one modification, that we split this south property line of the Prather property, split it with Overland Road. And that we were agreeable to. And so the information I have is what was generated by the ACHD staff report, which had recommended aligning the center line with that property, which to my understanding is to Mr. Prather's south property line. And that's what I indicated to Mr. Prather this evening when he asked me the question. It's my belief and it's our intention to follow that guideline, but, again, you know, the process still has some more processes to go through and we are supportive of that and I think with that will be that final final determination, but I think it's in everybody's best interest to locate it where he has indicated he wishes to have it and where ACHD staff indicated would be the best place for it. I hope that answers your question. Rountree: So -- Madam Mayor. If I might rephrase what you said. It's flexible and you will do what will accommodate ACHD's desires and Mr. Prather's desires. Jewett: That's correct. De Weerd: So, basically, you're willing to take the risk? Jewett: There is a risk with everything we do. Obviously, there is elevated risk, but I'm assuming you say by the risk by moving forward with this project? De Weerd: That's correct. Because there are some pretty large issues transportation related with all these other plans in the process. Jewett: And that's why I'm eager for those processes to go forward and be a part of those and I don't think anything that we are proposing or doing would hinder that, nor hurt it. I think what we want to do is be part of it and what we are asking for is what's contained within your approval, which says let us move forward on the east half with our development, understanding that this is the land use, but if for some reason the Ten Mile area plan modifies that, that we have to come back in and modify that part of our preliminary plat and we are agreeable to that. So, if that means taking that risk, yes. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Jim, as I understand it, then, your -- the only development that you are doing is basically from the east and -- Jewett: Did you see this phase one and phase two line? • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 39 of 72 Bird: Yeah. Okay. Jewett: Everything east of that line is what we are asking and I believe that's how it's worded in the -- in the staff report is that everything west of the phase line would not be constructed until such time as that Ten Mile area planning has been approved. And it sounds like ACRD is on their way. I know that your city is on the way. I believe those applications have all been started through the process. So, it's there. And I think we are more than willing to be a part of that and eager to be a part of that. All we are asking is that we get our plat approved, so that we can move forward on that -- that east half, which in no plan, either prior or current, modifies that area to the east. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Follow up, Mayor. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Jewett, you're -- but you're asking us on our preliminary plat to approve the whole 290 acres, which -- Jewett: That's correct. Bird: And, you know, there is no guarantee that that Over -- that Overland Road is going to go there. Jewett: That's correct. Bird: So, I -- and don't get me wrong, I like having 290 acres being -- you know, it's better than having five acres at a shot, but I -- I have some very much concems for the people that are the neighbors -- that's your neighbors and I know you want to do -- we want to do right with them, but I have some -- I have some real concems on that road going -- I think the road going through like you proposed is ideal, but I think drainage and stuff, you -- the lower level people have some real concems about where is the runoff on that road going to be. Your crown in your road is usually the high point, so they do run. That's why I say, you want to go from -- at the mid point of the lot. Well, most lots will run from the mid point out to the back and to the front so they drain and you have the other come -- the roads drain off to the -- to the sides, so, anyway, I -- I see that you are not asking for more. Jewett: Let me address that. The road that we are talking about that would be located along here when a preliminary plat comes through, the grade is fairly flat in here and, then, starts falling this way. So, it's very very flat up in here. As it gets over here it will fall away, so the road will definitely be below the lots. In this area it will be very level. What my proposal would be is simply that you measure up in this point in the lot, but not to exceed mid point of the rear lot. That would protect them knowing that they can balance it from theirs, but most likely it will be lower than that. So, I'm just trying to Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 40 of 72 answer that. As far as the drainage -- the drainage issue that came up at the previous hearing was generally over in this area for this individual, Mr. Amend. And I think that probably the answer is we have to submit a drainage plan that not only ACHD reviews, but the city staff reviews and, of course, my engineering must stamp. So, you have three levels of review of that. And, again, the other issue is as far as Overland. If for some reason Overland doesn't go here, then, we have to come back and tell you how we are going to service and for illustration purposes we showed -- the original road that we proposed in here is this road. These are two collector roads that we propose. Those are those light hatched areas. With the Ten Mile charrette we modified it and put this road in. So, we show that and I show you how the options -- that we already had a transportation plan in place that had a full traffic study on it. If we have to come back, that will be part of any preliminary plats over there. What we are saying is, though, we believe -- I believe that the city does want Overland relocated because of the problems where it currently exists. My engineers did a lot of work in looking at it and saying there really isn't a lot of options and this is a good option. We took a lead, we put it in there, we have got it actually all designed and it does work. It works as good as any road could work under the circumstances of that grade. So, it's our endeavor to work through the city, ACRD, and ITD to make sure that all the components that happen in the Ten Mile interchange area work and are in harmony. I think you will see from Sue Sullivan's comments there can be some benefit from working ahead on this aspect of realignment, rather than working it behind. Bird: True. Canning: Madam Mayor, there was question about the conditions of approval. I did want to show those to you. It does state that all mega lots shown on the master concept plan west of the first phase shall be annexed and recorded as mega lots with the first final plat, but no home or road construction shall occur in this area until such time as the Ten Mile area specific plan is adopted by the city. So, we did try -- we have made every attempt to let this go forward, because it does seem to facilitate all the other things that are important to the city in this area, but to make sure that we do address the specific needs of this property. De Weerd: And that Ten Mile -- just for clarification, Anna, the Ten Mile area specific plan is tied to the design approved through the public hearings for the Ten Mile interchange design. Canning: Yes, ma'am. As you are aware, those public processes -- we have done every effort we can to coordinate with Lochner through Rosemary Curtin's efforts primarily and those have been well integrated plans, with both the interchange design and the area plan. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Jewett, I guess there is still the question as to the park. Jewett: Could I leave that to you guys? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 41 of 72 De Weerd: You can leave it to the Council -- Jewett: Thank you. De Weerd: -- for discussion. But I guess there was a question that was raised is relocating the pool to another location if you desired to have that as a city park. Jewett: Okay. Let me take my developer hat off and put my citizen hat on. I believe that the park brings a benefit to the city as a whole. So, I would be supportive of making it a public park and if that means relocating a private facility away from that, I'm assuming we could accommodate that. And we chose that location because of the recreational addition to that -- that facility that would add. Also, because -- oh, it changed on me. The centralized nature of the park also facilitated the centralized nature of the pool and clubhouse. So, they kind of go in harmony. But I'm assuming we can find another location that's very close to this and relocate it. We would like to keep it on the pathway system. That was another reason we located it there. I think it's important that the kids can walk through a pathway system to that facility and not have to take the streets all the time, so -- but I'm assuming that we could go down that route. De Weerd: Council, any further questions from Mr. Jewett? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Mr. Jewett, any further comments? Jewett: No. Thank you for your time. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: There are a lot of elements to this that I believe that are attractive to the city of Meridian. There are quite a number of elements that I believe are attractive to the City of Meridian in this project. As for the park, I personally would like to see the majority of the park be a public park, city park. I was reasonably comfortable with the applicant's plan to visually separate it. I could also be more comfortable with the homeowners park portion of it being relocated nearby. I think that's probably a better idea. It would also maintain the public park where it is. The two stub streets, along with some of the audience testimony, I misunderstood where the second stub street on the mega lot was supposed to go. There are not two aimed at Val Vista, there is only the one that was talked about. And I think it's reasonable to provide for the other properties eventually not to access Ten Mile. The alignment of Overland I'm very much in favor of. As somebody who uses Black Cat Road frequently, I'm a little disturbed by the first time I'm hearing that it may be thought about not to connect over to Black Cat eventually. I Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 42 of 72 think that raises the same issue that if Overland were realigned and, then, aligned with Lamont, it would turn Lamont into a collector or an arterial. I think the same thing would happen. If Overland is realigned, which I believe it should be into this configuration, but, then, does not continue over to Black Cat, you end up with the same problem on Lamont you would have if they were aligned, except that now you have two turns to make in order to use Lamont to continue Overland. I know that will all come out in the south Meridian area plan, but I, for one, feel that Overland needs to continue and eventually connect to the other Overland at Black Cat. I think the importance of that will be even greater once the interchange is there and very possibly when Highway 16 and McDermott are aligned -- it hasn't been decided whether that would be a T interchange only going north or whether McDermott to the south would be accessed as well. But connecting this portion of Overland at least over to Black Cat and, therefore, onto McDermott, even if it ends at McDermott, improves the circulation of this area of Meridian for the future and I base that on my work with city infrastructure all over the country and feeling that such interconnections are important, that in our case it's a relief valve for the interstate. It also will be accessed to this interchange when it's there. So, I'm very much in support of this realignment. It's off the subject, but I also support continuing that over to Black Cat. The one thought that I have is that we have a number of studies going on and a number of agencies involved in those studies, they all seem to be either leaning in or accepting the possibility of this realignment and we seem to all be sitting around staring at each other wondering who is going to blink first. My feeling is that Meridian needs to the take lead. I'm not taking anything away from ITD and ACHD, they are the roadway departments, they make the final decisions, but I have no problem making a firm statement that Meridian would like this to happen and I feel that the issues that needed to be resolved are being resolved. There are some -- the mega lots will have their own hearing as they come through again, and I, for one, am in favor of this. I think it's good for the city. De Weerd: Thank-you. Other comments? Okay. What would be the desire of Council at this time? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we close the public hearings for items nine and ten. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'm not sure we have every question asked or every question answered, but I think we have gotten some degree of guidance from the public and the applicant on this. Some of the notes that I have that speak specifically to the times we Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 43 of 72 were talking about after the last hearing was there is some indication on the part of the developer to entertain a solid masonry fence. There is an indication to accept the stub street from the mega lot to the furthest western point and also to the one land locked parcel further west that currently provides -- gets access from Ten Mile via a lane. That the applicant is willing to entertain moving or relocating the public -- or the private clubhouse and swimming pool. Willing to entertain and work with ACRD and the private property owner across Ten Mile in terms of access there. Has offered what I feel is probably the only way to pin down a solution for a height restriction on the lots. There has been an offering of everything from 30 to 50 feet setback. Scientifically I'm going to say 40. De Weerd: That was scientifically? Rountree: Yeah. Just offering these for consideration. Those are the more specific comments that I believe I heard for consideration. And either addressing moving forward or addressing either rehearing or holding over this particular application. So, I don't know if there is any other comments. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Just my comments. The applicant on the setback agreed to 30 feet and I feel those are -- you know, they are not the deepest lots, they are only ahundred -- and I think about 130 feet he says when he addressed us last week in the minutes. I have no problem with a 30 foot setback, so the houses can be -- because we are putting a restriction on the height of it, so to get any kind of square footage back there you're going to have to have it longer and wide. Anyway, I -- on the pool and the park, I think they should both stay private. If they don't, if they want to put the park public, I think they can stay together, because 95 percent or more of your use of the park is going to be from within the subdivision, so they can use the pool, too. I believe the park is a very nice amenity for the subdivision and whether -- the way the motion is made will -- I will be -- guide my vote. And so, anyway, I think it is -- I think staff and the applicant has done a great great for this job large of a project, with the problems that have come along with it. I, too, agree with Councilman Zaremba that Overland Road coming up is the only smart way to do it, but, you know, that's not for us to make the final decision on. I think that lays with the five commissioners at ACRD. De Weerd: You're mumbling again. Bird: It don't hurt us -- it don't hurt us to give them a direction that we would like to see it go. So, anyway, that's my thought on the project. I just as well say whichever way I vote is the applicant and the staff have done a great job and I appreciate it. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comments? L_ Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 44 of 72 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. ~I Borton: See if I can muddy the waters a little bit more perhaps with my comments, for what it's worth. I echo the sentiments of Council and I appreciate the comments and the hard work of staff, Anna and Caleb and everyone that helped answer a lot of our questions that we had I believe in the last hearing and I appreciate Mr. Jewett and his cooperation and confession, his involvement of the neighbors and, as well, the neighbors that have come last week and this week to participate. I don't think there is ever an application where each and every element is clear as a bell and we all necessarily agree on any one, so this one has even more variables that make forming a consensus difficult. For what it's worth, I'll let you know my thoughts on some of the areas that were addressed that we might disagree on and I'll start with the setback and this might be my muddiest opinion is I have no problem holding Mr. Jewett's feet to the fire on the 50 feet. I'm extremely sensitive to the comments of the neighbors in the Val Vista area and there is one area that is of particular concem is that -- and I don't think -- and Ithink Mr. Jewett's remarks -- and I credit him for it -- aren't one that that's a deal breaker. Ithink it -- and recognize the fact that it limits what his opportunities are on those parcels, but from his testimony in both hearings, I gamer the impression that he could make that work and to me that's an important aspect of what the public's concem was. I agree with Councilman Bird on the park and I appreciate Director Strong coming forward and fighting like a wounded steer for more public park land. Keep doing it. I think that's great, whether we agree or disagree with you. I disagree with you on this particular one. Ithink Mrs. Stone's comments from a week ago and at the parks and rec commission and, again, today are indicative of good rational thought. Ithink Mrs. Apostolou brought up additional comments about this neighborhood park being a private park will serve a lot of the functions of a neighborhood park, as Mr. Bird said, most of the use will be from within this development, if not all. The neighborhood park definition is trying to serve those needs within a square mile, give or take, and within this development the cost benefit to the city and the taxpayers and the expense to complete development, restrooms, play fields -- or excuse me -- tennis court or basketball court, continued maintenance -- those types of costs outweigh the benefits to the citizens of Meridian as a whole. Ithink it does provide a benefit to those within the area and it's going to be a fantastic asset to this region. I don't think the -- in my opinion the cost benefit supports it being a city park and it will be a great private park and a clubhouse and the pool will be a wonderful amenity for all those within the area. I appreciate the applicant agreeing to -- I presume he agreed. He didn't object to the school district's request to the the imgation on their northern property boundary between the elementary school and the public library. That was a concem I brought up and had a question about last time and I brought up that safety concem to the district before on another application at least one other that I can think of and I think the safety concerns for me are satisfied with that imgation canal being tiled. I appreciate the applicant's remedy on the fly with regards to the height restriction. I didn't have as much heartburn as others might have with regards to the ability to mound your home and sneak passed the 22 foot height requirement. Nonetheless, I think the applicant's concessions are Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 45 of 72 • i maybe a safe way to protect the interest of those to the south and I appreciate that and would agree with those. I asked staff -- and, again, Anna and Caleb, thanks to you both for getting some of these questions answered. My concem or question about the transit stop -- I understand and I know services are and are not available. My concem with the transit stop is somewhat analogous to my concem about a private pool near a public park and Ijust -- it's going to be a great asset to the community. My concem is whether or not upon what week will we get the call from an individual sitting at a bus stop waiting for the bus to arrive when there is no bus service. So, I know Boise feels that those infamous benches that people wait on indefinitely where there is not a bus in the area. So, that was my concem with that. I think it's going to be a great amenity down the road, I just know we are going to be faced with challenges for those that wait and wait and wait for the bus. I think that covers the majority of my concerns. The application as a whole, phase two being required to comply with the Ten Mile specific area plan and the critical part, to my mind, of this application going forward, nonetheless, whatever that plan sets forth, to my mind, doesn't necessarily mean that compliance with that specific area plan qualifies as a satisfactory product in certain mega lots of phase two. I think it's an obvious condition to go forward, but it's not a per se acceptance of what's going to go in there. There is my sufficiently vague standing of where I am. I was concerned last week with the application. The public has echoed some of my sentiments with regards to the ability to serve this particular area, from educating the kids, transporting the individuals, providing park space, fire, police protection, every aspect of the city services is challenged with something of this magnitude and what I wrestle with and is probably my own fault, is the chicken and the egg timing that goes with these types of things, where you love to have all of the amenities from transportation on available prior to the development, but that's not a realistic process in this region. What Mr. Jewett has done, in my mind, is provide as much as we can reasonably expect to further those from his generosity, whether that's the right word or not, his desire to help that along in roadway improvements and the sale of assets to -- for alibrary -- public library, public education opportunities, which, by the way, provide some open space my understanding a few acres larger than normal an elementary school site to provide some open space opportunities for the city in a sufficient extension of our partnerships with the district and use of their facilities, might provide the city some additional opportunities. I appreciate and respect what Mr. Jewett is trying to do here and there is unanswered questions, but for this councilman the questions have been satisfactorily answered and I'm comfortable going forward with the inclusion of all of the public's comments and applicant's comments, staffs comments, and the items that I have remarked upon. De Weerd: I'm glad to hear you're a proponent of public transportation, Mr. Borton. Borton: I'll direct the call to you. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: That's on the record I think. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 46 of 72 De Weerd: Thought I'd point that out in that dialogue. Okay. Rountree: I was going to say, if Mr. Borton would like to put that particular argument in the form of a motion -- Bird: We can go from there. Rountree: -- we can go from there. Borton: If it's possible to do it without having to say it all over again, I would incorporate my comments, the requirements, concessions, restrictions that I stated, into a motion to approve Item No. 9, AZ 06-031. Rountree: I'll second that. Bird: Question. De Weerd: Okay. Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we vote. Does that include a private park? Borton: Correct. Bird: Okay. Then I'm for it. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. Discussion as well. That also leaves the rear setback at 30 feet and the measuring as stated in Item 22. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: The motion would incorporate a 50 foot rear setback along the southern boundary. Zaremba: And measuring of the average height, the 22 feet. Borton: The measuring of the average height -- basically that the terms of the motion were the elements set forth in what I had just referenced, so there were some amendments to the actual staff report, one being the 50 foot. The average height would incorporate the applicant's comments, which I probably couldn't articulate as well as he had with regards to measuring the house height, but it does provide I think better protection for the residents. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 47 of 72 De Weerd: And that noted the fencing type as concrete -- stamped concrete with the fence through the stub street? Borton: Correct. De Weerd: Staff, any further clarification on the motion? Canning: Let me write down that note for a second. Zaremba: To -- I'm song, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: On the subject of the fence, he -- the applicant said that required to build a solid fence he may, in fact, make it a masonry one. Do we want to leave that available by eliminating the word vinyl. We already say solid six foot tall fence. De Weerd: No. Bird: I think Joe meant a concrete or block fence. Zaremba: This is -- Borton: The intent was a solid masonry. Bird: Solid masonry. Yeah. Zaremba: A solid six foot tall vinyl fence at the moment, but do we want to eliminate the word vinyl or specify something else? De Weerd: I think that was -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: The intent was to install a masonry, durability, and fire hazard as discussed by the public. They made a request for solid masonry. Canning: Madam Mayor, if I could get clarification on two items and, then, just to make sure there is one additional one you addressed that we haven't spoken of that we would add a final provision that states that the applicant shall work with ACHD to align Overland Road to accommodate development of the Prather property. Is that what was intended? Borton: Yes. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 48 of 72 Canning: Okay. Rountree: That's an applicant comment. Canning: Okay. Thank you. Okay. With regard to the measurement of the height and perhaps Mr. Jewett can nod if I understand this correctly, but I just want to make sure I have got this right, it's either the mid point of the front of the lot or the mid point of the rear of the lot, which ever is more restrictive. Okay. That's the way we will word it, then. And I did understand the stamped concrete vinyl fence, the Mayor just now mentioned putting it across the stub street. I'm not -- there may be a concern there, because I'm not sure how you take it down once the stub street needs to be continued, so I don't know if that's ever been done before, but -- Bird: Just knock it out. De Weerd: Yeah. I think ACHD will worry about that. Canning: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: It probably seems obvious, but they probably want to include the language that in the findings that they will still mark that this street may be extended in the future and the fence removed, so that it's clear that it will come down at some point, so -- De Weerd: I would hope that's -- Nary: Or could come down at some point. De Weerd: -- a requirement in any regard. Nary: It normally is, but it's not normally a stone wall that's across the road at the time, so that's why. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, it probably could be designed -- De Weerd: You mean there is a mote with that? Zaremba: It probably could be designed with some kind of a pillar right at the end of the right of way, so that the section that's between -- the section that actually crosses the roadway could be taken out without looking ugly. Just a thought. De Weerd: Okay. Any other help with the motion? • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 49 of 72 Canning: The way I would propose to address the elementary school site, just for clarification, is to state -- to add a statement to provision number 16 saying the applicant shall the the drainage facility on the northern boundary of the elementary school site. Borton: Correct. Canning: I have had my questions answered. Thank you, Council, for that clarification. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council? Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would comment that as I -- my vote has been noted, I'm very much in favor of the project. I still feel that the park should have been public. De Weerd: Thank you for that on the record. Okay. Item 10. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: And I move we approve Item PP 06-031, to include staff, applicant, and Council comments. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second on Item 10 to approve. Bird: Question. What's the date on the preliminary plat for the record that we are approving? De Weerd: Anna, can you give us a date? Bird: Is it this one? Canning: Madam Mayor, the one in the staff report should still be accurate. We have not gotten a new revised -- oh, you did get a new one? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 50 of 72 Rountree: No, it's the same one you've got. Bird: It's the same one we've had, Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the staff report, to my knowledge, indicates the correct preliminary plat date. I will have to look it up, but -- Bird: Does 11/28/06 sound right, Anna? Borton: Madam Mayor? Bird: We have got 12/14 -- De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Bird: -- landscape. Borton: I have a December 7th revised -- Bird: Revised plat? Preliminary plat? Borton: Yes. Bird: I just want to make sure we have it on the record. Canning: Madam Mayor, the applicant has indicated that his stamp should say the 7th, I believe. Berg: Madam Mayor, in the staff report it does refer to a December 7th preliminary plat as a revised plat. Bird: 12/7/06? Okay. Canning: Thank you, Mr. Bird. Bird: Would add that to your motion? Borton: Done. Rountree: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Just further discussion. Last week we did ask to tie in the elevations until the design criteria is submitted by Mr. Jewett and that's certainly probably more relevant to the development agreement and annexation, but did want to at least note that for the record. Okay. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 51 of 72 Rountree: That's a condition. Bird: That's a condition. That's right. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. • Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And since most of the people are gone, we appreciate all of the help and certainly, Mr. Shoemaker, that the process for public input will still go forward on the transportation plan. That is not a done deal. Item 11: Public Dearing: MI 06-011 Request for a Miscellaneous application to amend the previously approved Development Agreement by including a provision to permit the installation of a double wide mobile office on the property at 4740 W. Chinden Boulevard for The Tree Farm Annexation (AZ 06-004) by Treehaven, LLC -north side of Chinden Boulevard on both sides of Black Cat Road: De Weerd: So, Item 11 is a Public Hearing on MI 06-011. I will open this Public Hearing on Item 11 with staff comments. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Burton. Burton: Due to a conflict I'm going to recuse myself from Item No. 11. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Tree Farm project. It's located on the north side of Chinden Boulevard between Ten Mile and Black Cat and this is the second modification to the development agreement. The applicant is proposing to amend section five, conditions governing development of subject property of the DA. And staff is recommending the following amendment. It's a little bit long, as is everything tonight, so -- but I will read it for you. All future development of the property shall be constructed in accord with the UDC as it exists on the date of this Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 52 of 72 agreement, provided, however, the uses may be expanded, but not limited by any future amendment to the UDC and the existing Tree Farm nursery may continue to operate as it presently exists on the property, including all existing structures and access points. That portion is currently in the development agreement. We are asking for you to consider the following additional information or provision. In addition, the existing Tree Farm nursery will be allowed to relocate its offices from their current location at 4042 West Chinden Boulevard to a mobile office building to be located at 4740 West Chinden Boulevard. In association with this relocation the applicant may install a new septic system at 4740 West Chinden Boulevard to serve the mobile office building until gravity sewer becomes available. At such time the applicant shall remove the septic system and connect to the city sewer. The septic system shall be removed and the office shall be connected to the city within 60 days of the date of sewer being available, which shall be prior to issuance of building permits in the first phase of the Tree Farm development. Furthermore, within five years of the date of this amendment to the development agreement all uses and structures on this property associated with the Tree Farm nursery shall be abandoned. So, as I pointed out when I was reading that, the existing development agreement clearly states that the existing Tree Farm nursery may continue to operate as it presently does, but with development on the east side of the property, they are finding that they need to relocate the office. There is currently a house located where they are moving it to and they will use the access for that house. Unfortunately, they can't use the septic system, it won't accommodate the office. So, they need to replace the septic system. The owners of the property, Tree Haven, LLC, have agreed to lease the new property for five years. At that time the nursery will vacate the property to a more permanent location. As I mentioned before, they will just use the current access, temporarily extend that until such time as the western end of the property redevelops. That's as it stands right now with staff. The applicant is opposed to the requirement to hook up to city sewer and I believe you should have received a comment from him. They are asking to just have the septic system for the five years or whenever they vacate the property, whichever is first. So, there is that additional testimony from the applicant with regard to this application. Just as a little background, that's not in the staff report. We looked at how we could possibly do this as a temporary use, but it doesn't meet the purpose statements of a temporary use, so this development agreement modification did seem to be the appropriate mechanism for getting this approved. With that I will answer any questions you may have. Rountree: Oh, all the wheels are gone. Bird: Mr. Vice-President, I had no -- Rountree: Any questions? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: I do have one, if I may. There was an issue about the existing red bam. Is that what we are talking about moving or can you identify where the red bam is? As I • . Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 53 of 72 recall, they intended to continue using it and the issue was they got a landscape buffer variance around it, but is that moving? Canning: Vice-President Rountree, Councilmember Bird, Councilmember Zaremba, since there are three of you up there, I know their existing offices are in the red bam. I thought they were keeping that facility, but I'm not sure -- I believe they are moving offices out of there. I will have to let the applicant actually answer that. Zaremba: Thank you. Rountree: Any further questions of staff? This is a Public Hearing. Anybody -- does the applicant wish to provide some information? State your name and address for the record. Carter: Yes. Joe Carter, Jayker Wholesale Nursery, 25455 North Lansing, Middleton, Idaho. I come before you as a representative of the nursery, the occupant of the red bam, and I will address that first if I may. My staff and I do currently occupy the red bam and that building is intended to remain, I believe, for some period of time during the development process, but the preliminary road that cuts into the development will cut right through our operation and so we are moving our staff to the west to that existing house and which is not big enough for all of us and, therefore, the reason for our request to put some additional space there. Beyond that, I think the staff report and Anna's comments are right on target and pretty well cover the situation. The one thing I would add is that I represent a business that's in transition and I want to emphasize the temporary nature of this. I have been, basically, displaced out of a very nice building and I'm putting my staff into something that is far less than that. We are in the process of looking for a permanent site and it is my hope -- it's my hope that we can find something and move very quickly, because I would like to replicate that and, then, have the continuity for my business. To that end -- and, then, as really the nature of my request, additional request to enable us to use the septic tank that we are to install and use for at least a year. It's a system that's designed for longer term use and although I do understand it is not in complete compliance with the city ordinance regarding temporary use, I do believe that the wording would enable plenty of opportunity to see that that is rectified in the future. We will vacate, our lease will terminate, there will be ample opportunity for this Council to review any additional requests on development of that property and, again, I think ample opportunity to see that that temporary use is, in fact, terminated and any additional buildings be tied to city sewer. De Weerd: Mr. Carter, I can say that your business is a welcome site to certainly these eyes. You have taken very good care of your facility and we hope you find a relocation in our community. Carter: Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Council, any questions for the applicant? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 54 of 72 L~ Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have a question. Mr. Carter, are you a partner in the Tree Haven, LLC, or do you just have a lease with that particular group? Carter: Councilman Rountree, I am not a partner in Tree Haven. I am an employee of the Camahans who are part owners in Tree Haven. I represent the nursery as an employee, but I am also president and CEO of that corporation. Rountree: So, I take it to understand you're also representing the desires of Tree Haven, LLC, as well? Carter: Well, we are in close contact. They are my landlord and Derek O'Neil is here if there are more direct questions of Tree Haven. I do not represent them directly, no. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Len, given that Public Works has expressed an opposition to this particular waiver. Could you expound on that? Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I think it's just the principle of the application, that, you know, when an annexation takes place and eventually sewer does come, that they hook up. A temporary being one year we don't have as much concem. Five years we have quite a bit more concem. You know, if you wanted to provide wording to the effect of one year renewable at the city engineer's discretion -- you know, for example, if they were one year and six months, we could go ahead and extend it, but I just -- I just don't like these things carrying on for extended periods. So, it's just literally that. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess to cant' that further, would language to the effect: Until services are available -- Grady: Yes. Very much so. Rountree: And no more than five years? Grady: Pertect. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Are you mumbling over there, Anna? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 55 of 72 Grady: Just to make sure lunderstand -- De Weerd: I think this hearing has made us all start mumbling. Uh, Mr. Bird? Bird: Yes. Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, so once services are available, they would hook up, unless, through Public Works' discretion, we extend it; is that what you're saying? And limited by five years. Rountree: And limited to five years. Grady: Perfect. Rountree: I have a question to the applicant. Is that language -- De Weerd: Yes, please. Carter: Allow me to clarify a little bit. There is a septic system there with the house, I think that's been made clear. It's not adequate for the office. We have asked for permission from Central District Health to install a new septic system and they have agreed. The issue of the city ordinance has come up and we are fully prepared to comply with the wishes of Council here, but all I'm asking is that having installed a new system that will be in place for roughly a year and, then, tear it out, just enabled me to use it for a longer period and I did a-mail late today -- I realize it's the 11th hour, but I did e-mail some wording and I have put a date to it as well, that I would like to see in the conditions that -- and we be able to use the septic system until development of the property on which that office is located or until January 1st of 2012, whichever comes first. At that point we would remove this new septic system and any later connections or any other later building permits on that property would be contingent upon connecting to sewer. I do wish to -- Rountree: I think that's what I said. Carter: Okay. Okay. I wanted that clarification. We do want to comply with the ordinance, we are just asking for a variance in time. De Weerd: Len, do you feel comfortable with that? Grady: Just want to make one final clarification. So, once sewer is available they would hook up? Bird: That's not what he said. Grady: No? • Meridian Ciiy Council January 23, 2007 Page 56 of 72 Rountree: I thought that's what he said Bird: No. He said once they decide to develop the property, the sewer could be available before they decide to -- Grady: Right. That's what they are saying and that could be up to 2012. Carter: That does look like it, yes. Rountree: You would make it green, so I can't read it. Carter: My apologies. I have a blue one. Rountree: Oh, I can read that one. Carter: Derek's pointed out another -- another point there that if we do connect to sewer when it's available and whether that be in a year or a year and a half, that connection will have to be, basically, tom out again when we move and that's another disruption to that system. We would like, from a practical standpoint, to, yes, leave it longer, but with full agreement that when we vacate our system will be removed as well. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have a question for the applicant. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: I have a blue highlighted area, which I believe is what you just said, and in pink -- is that pink or green? Pink, I think. De Weerd: It's gray. Rountree: Is it gray? Okay. Whatever. I'm color challenged. Carter: I understand. Zaremba: I knew we could get along. So am I. Carter: If I may, Council -- Rountree: Is one built on the other? Carter: What I'm asking is to replace the -- the lower shaded area, regardless of its color, with the upper shaded one. Rountree: Okay. I believe what you're proposing gets to the issue. I don't -- until you develop the property, you're telling us that until the property is developed the sewer is not going to be extended and available anyway. So, once the property is developed, i • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 57 of 72 then, the sewer would be available, then, you would connect. I believe that's what that says. Development of the property upon which the mobile office is to be located or until January 1st. Carter: If I may, the first phase in Tree Farm development will take place on the eastern part of the property, which is over here. That's the construction of which will cut through and interrupt our operations. My understanding is that sewer will come up Black Cat and take some route to the east, which I don't know if that's been decided as of yet, and I think that's what staff is refemng to is sewer will come through here relatively soon, possibly within a year, and they are asking that we connect at that point, within 60 days of the time that that is there. Because we are putting a -- or asking to put a building here and a new septic system per Central District Health requirements, it just seems unnecessary to tear it out in a year to connect when, in fact, Iwill -- I'm asking to make a condition of further development of this and the Tree Haven -- the owners have agreed with that, to make a condition of that continuance, being that it -- we will take ours out. So, again, the difference is one of timing. It looks like sewer will be available in the near term and we are asking to be connected to or using an old fashioned septic system, albeit brand new, for a little bit longer period. De Weerd: No longer than five years. Carter: And per my wording no longer than January 1st, 2012, or at which time we can find a permanent location and move out, whichever is first. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: But, sir, didn't you say the developer wanted to add something to that? Did I -- Carter: He just pointed out to me that the later development of the property where we want to put this mobile office may or may not involve a sewer connection and when we tear ours out, if we are, in fact -- if we leave, there is an open connection there and I think that was his point is that they would probably have to remove that or relocate it in some way to accommodate the development that would replace us. Rountree: Thank you. Sorry for all the confusion. Carter: It's all in the interest of understanding. De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony? Questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 58 of 72 • Bird: Len, is language, in reality, is kind of worded like Charlie's statement, but in understanding is a lot different. What can you live with? Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, Ithink -- to me it looks like either one or the other. There is probably not much middle ground. I suppose the only middle ground would be the five year period, you know, if we were to -- it just sets wrong that we run sewer right by there and, then, have a septic tank for five years. We are willing to -- Rountree: You're an optimist. Grady: Pardon me? Rountree: You're an optimist. Grady: Yeah. I have to be, but -- De Weerd: He gets paid to be. Grady: So, really, I'm just bringing it to your attention. I can live with either one. I really can. I just feel it's appropriate to bring it to your attention and I can go either way. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Follow up. And I appreciate that, Len, because I think you can understand from their viewpoint is when they develop and need the sewer it's probably not going to be at this location. I mean, you know, there is no guarantee that they will want it run right where that temporary office building is. So, if you can live with that, I certainly can. De Weerd: So, what I hear is he is -- Len is okay with living with no longer than five years. Bottom line? Grady: Correct. Yes. Unless you wanted to cut it to three. Rountree: Madam Mayor, this is not for this particular application, but it is a subject that is of issue for the city in terms of the Black Cat trunk and I think that Mr. O'Neil and the city and some other folks that are looking at developing out there, we need to get together in order make that happen. So, hopefully, if that hasn't been set up, it will be soon. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 59 of 72 Zaremba: I was just going to ask if it would be appropriate for the eventual maker of the motion to add something that says that nobody should construe this as establishing a precedence. I think that is part of the concern of Public Works is people will think, oh, we are making an exemption. Bird: I agree with you. Rountree: It's your turn for a motion. Zaremba: All right. First motion, Madam Mayor, I move we close the Public Hearing on MI 06-011, Item 11. Rountree Second. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded 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. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve MI 06-011, to include all staff comments, with the following change and that is to accept the applicant's wording that the septic tank will be abandoned when they relocate or on January 1st, 2012, whichever is first and that nobody should take this as being a precedent for future exceptions. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Motion and a second to approve Item 11 with the added comments as stated. Any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. i ~ Meridian Ciiy Council January 23, 2007 Page 60 of 72 Item 12: Public Hearing: RZ 06-008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: Item 13: Public Hearing: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41- 45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Office / Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Linder Road: De Weerd: Items 12 and 13 have been asked to continue to February 6th. I will open these two public hearings on AZ 06-008 and MCU 06-002 and ask for a motion from Council. Zaremba: So moved. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. Bird: That was to February 6; right? De Weerd: That's correct. Was that your aye as well, to continue Items 12 and 13 to -- Gorton: Aye. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 06-052 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.17 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road: Item 15: Public Hearing: PP 06-053 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 26 single-family residential building lots and 3 common /other lots on 5.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision by Portico, LLC -1780 E. McMillan Road: De Weerd: Okay. Public Hearing on 14 and 15, AZ 06-052 and PP 06-053. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Portico Place project. It's located at 1780 East McMillan Road. It's on the north side of McMillan Road just east of Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 61 of 72 C, J the intersection of Locust Grove and McMillan Road as shown here. The applications are for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and altemative compliance. The applicant has addressed this issue in his preliminary plat. The proposed development includes the request to annex and zone 5.17 acres to R-8 and a preliminary plat approval of 26 single family residential and townhouse building lots. The altemative compliance is with regard to the street buffer along McMillan. They are asking to reduce it in some portions from 35 feet to 25 feet around an existing home. You can see it here on the site plan before you. The dark area shows the buffer. You see how it kind of cuts in and that is near the existing home. The building lots consist of 20 attached units, five detached units, and one existing detached home. The applicant has proposed a gazebo, pathway, and parking areas and common lot located centrally. The gross residential density is 5.03 dwelling units per acre. The net density is 6.98. Here are some of the townhouse elevations. You have seen photographs of several of these before also. There are currently two development agreement provisions that were added by the Planning Commission. One is to state that if Lot 17, Block 1, redevelops, re-subdivides or if any other modifications to the lot are made that require the city to issue a building permit, at that time a new plat will be required that complies with the 35 foot wide landscape buffer required along East McMillan Road. And that Lot 17, Block 1, is the existing house lot. The second provision would be that the existing direct access to East McMillan Road from the existing house shall be terminated and access to the house shall be taken internally from North Beethoven Avenue. That was a -- well, I'll move on to the Commission's recommendation. The Commission did recommend approval at their December 21st, 2006, Public Hearing. Ron Sargent, the applicant and owner, spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition or commented. The key issue of discussion by the Commission was the retention of the existing access to McMillan Road for the resident of the existing house and the associated landscape buffer. The key Commission change to staffs initial recommendation was to require the development agreement provisions that I detailed previously. The applicant -- that's, really, the only two issues we have had. They have worked out another minor issue with regard to one of the common drives, but those two points, the existing access to McMillan Road and the DA provisions, are still outstanding issues according to the applicant's response letter. The applicant's response letter I feel I should discuss briefly with you and I believe you all received a copy of this from the clerk's office. And Mr. Sargent articulates his particular concerns with the -- what I'm sure are the unintended consequences of the development agreements that were added. They, basically, say that if you have to pull a building permit, then, you have to plat that lot. And, then, the other one says you have to pull a building permit to move that access. So, his argument is that to meet our conditions of approval he's got to pull a building permit to change the garage doors on the house, so that the house no longer has to take access from McMillan Road. To be able to pull the building permit he has to go through the plat and provide the 35 foot landscape buffer. So, I'm sure that -- you know, that sequence of events was not anticipated by the Planning and Zoning Commission and particularly by the maker of the motion who is now sitting on the end of the City Council, so -- but this is one -- we have worked hard with Mr. Sargent to provide the altemative compliance. We have trimmed it down, the area where they are providing the 25 foot buffer to the minimum that we thought was necessary to accommodate that house and Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 62 of 72 we have worked with him on specifying exactly how much vegetation will go in there and really providing that altemative to providing the 35 foot compliance, so -- and although we very much appreciated the Commission's attempt to get a consistent 35 foot landscape buffer along there, I do believe that the way the condition was originally written with the altemative compliance will probably suffice for the city. We are very much opposed to that access remaining, so we have insisted and implored and coerced the developer at every stage to move that internally and not maintain the McMillan access. To do that he feels that it's necessary to reduce the buffer somewhat. I guess that's staff presentation and I'll answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Anna, I don't see any elevations in here. I see a lot of black slides that maybe they are elevations, but I don't see anything in here. Oh. Thanks. I was looking through my things for -- Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Mr. Sargent has also provided photographs of these units in I think three other developments that we have seen. So, he can speak to those as well. De Weerd: That would be great. Well, I see this in front of us are really more on the pathway from what I can tell, so --okay. Thank you. Any questions from Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a comment. It was well explained by Director Canning, but as the applicant will point out, there is a reason why they are asking for a variance from the 35 foot landscape buffer. I know he's going to say it, but the current resident of the house, who is, I believe, selling the rest of the property, but not the house, is legally blind, is very familiar with the setup the way it is, and would be greatly inconvenienced to have things change when she's familiar with how everything is. In order for her to use her front access and her garage door the direction it is -- not for her own driving, but for people who come and pick her up and apparently use her car as well -- De Weerd: Thank you for clarifying that. Zaremba: The 35-foot landscape buffer would -- would be too wide. It would, apparently, come right up to her doorstep. So, the dance that we were doing at the Commission hearings was that we all had sympathy for her need and desire that during her life time or her use of that house that we could waive the 35 foot landscape buffer. Where I was trying to get it to was that that was not a forever exception. We were trying to find a way to have that waiver sunset, so that some day the city does have a 35 foot landscape buffer there and that's where we were going. We may have gotten the word wrong or there may be better wording that needs to be discussed, but there is a good reason for waiving it. I feel there is a good reason not to make that waiver forever. End of my comment. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 63 of 72 De Weerd: I appreciate the clarification. Any questions for staff, Council? Okay. Mr. Sargent. Sargent: Ron Sargent. 1883 North Wildwood Street, Boise, Idaho. Madam Mayor, Council members, to begin with, just to clarify; we do actually own the house. We bought the entire property, including the house, so -- but as part of that agreement we have allowed her to remain living in the home for the -- as long as she's able to continue to live there. So, we are the owners of the house and I guess as Anna explained, what we are very concerned with is this issue with the building permit, that if it remains as a development agreement as is written, we will not be able to get insurance for the house, because the house sits 35 feet and a few inches from the right of way, which means that it would be a nonconforming use, because it doesn't meet any of the setback. So, if there was some damage to a house, if one of our backhoes accidentally hit the side of the house, we couldn°t even get a building permit to do the repairs on it, because it would kick in -- the development agreement would kick in, the landscape buffer would have to go to 35 feet, it's a nonconforming use, so is what we think would happen, the building department wouldn't be able to issue us a building permit. So, I guess our feeling is that we are at considerable risk with the development agreement written as it is, is that it just would not -- you know, would really put us in a very awkward situation. Secondly, I guess feel that the landscape buffer being narrower at that point isn't necessarily forever, because we really feel that the UDC and the city code, that if the house is tom down and redeveloped for that area, that that, then, gives the city the opportunity to put into place whatever the code requirement is at that point in time. So, I guess we feel that the UDC is a very good code in being able to deal with any redevelopments and future uses of that particular lot at this time. So, we don't feel at this -- our feeling is that the development agreement is not a necessary part of the approval and also puts a considerable burden on us, because we'd also be in a situation, because we couldn't get insurance for the home and we are allowing Mrs. Buckley to continue to live there indefinitely, we really couldn't do the development of the subdivision until she was no longer living there and if it's beyond two years, then, we would have to come back through for another application for the subdivision. So, we are kind of in a real difficult situation with the development agreement as it is. So, we would ask that the City Council approve it without the development agreement. I guess we had agreed with Mrs. Buckley and the family that we would ask for a continuation of direct access to McMillan, but the staff, ACHD, the police department have all recommended against that. I think we are going to request it, because that's what we said we would do with the family and Mrs. Buckley when we purchased the property. So, I guess we are requesting that, but we realize that that probably is not going to be successful given the opposition that there is to it. So, I guess I'd stand to answer any questions. De Weerd: Council, questions? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 64 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Ralph, this is a Public Hearing, would you like to provide testimony? Okay. Staff, any further comments? Okay. Council? You know, I guess I do. Those sketches on what the elevations look like, I didn't see pictures. I have pictures in front of me on -- of the house and the sidewalk, but I'm sure there is pictures in this file, but they must be the black pictures that are on my computer screen. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what I meant was that in previous applications we have seen these pictures before. What I was trying to say was it's the same unit that Mr. -- name just zoomed right out of my head. Sargent. Thank you. I've just been blanking out. It's the same unit Mr. Sargent's been working with for a number of years. So, you have seen it before. That's all I was trying to say. That we are familiar with it. De Weerd: I thought -- yeah. We would love to see the color. Canning: Sony, Ron. Sargent: We understand. What we do is as we go through the various subdivisions we like to change the elevations and the colors, change the rock, make modifications, change the look of the doorways and the windows, to add a variety and within a given subdivision we like to see a variety of different styles in units, so we are not building the same unit side by side, try to break them up with a combination of different color and change in architectural features and rough lines, et cetera. De Weerd: So, what -- your request is not to have the setback requirement in there? Sargent: The request is that -- De Weerd: And, I'm sorry, I have a headache, so I'm trying to track. Sargent: Our request is the altemative compliance that adjacent to the house we'd have a 25-foot buffer, but in altemative for that is that we'd plant an additional 44 shrubs and an additional three trees in the landscape buffer along there. So, we -- you know, that would be our altemative to having the narrower landscape buffer and we'd also request that the annexation and preliminary plat be approved without the development agreement. De Weerd: And why is that? Sargent: Because the way the development agreement says is that if we apply for a building permit, the landscape buffer would go to 35. Since the house sits 35 feet and a few inches from the right of way, it would be a nonconforming use, so the building department wouldn't be able to issue us a building permit. De Weerd: Is that correct? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 65 of 72 :7 Canning: The way the current -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the way the current provisions of the development agreement are worded he is correct. If the Council wishes to strike the development agreement provision with regard to one or both of those -- I did want to make sure you were aware that the prohibition on direct access is noted in the preliminary plat as well, so you would not be losing that. It is as shown up on the board. It's in the preliminary plat conditions of approval, number 1.2.4. So, what Mr. Sargent is asking is that until the owner of Lot 1 comes in asking for additional subdivisions or asking to subdivide that property, that the 25 foot landscape buffer would remain there. Now, if they wanted to further subdivide at some point in the future, we could request the 35 feet then, but he just wants Lot 1 to be allowed as is. De Weerd: Along with access. Canning: No. Well, he's asking for access. He knows he can't get it. But he's told the owner that he will ask for access, but we have beat it into him that -- Sargent: To honor my agreement with the owner that we bought the property from, I have to ask for access, but realizing that staff, the police department, and the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended against it, it seems unlikely that we would be able to get that. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, he did valiantly defend that in the Commission hearing as well and the Commission sided with police and staff. He did his duty. Sargent: Did that clarify? Madam Mayor, did that hopefully clarify it? De Weerd: Thank you. Councilman Rountree is color blind. I'm just a little bit -- I'm not even going there. Okay. Council, any questions? Hearing none, what would you like to do? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the public hearings on AZ 06-053 and PP 06-053. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Items 14 and 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. I'm sorry. Council, if there is no discussion, do I have a motion? Either direction. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 66 of 72 Zaremba: All right. I guess in discussion before we get to make amotion, Ijust -- I'm comfortable that if that lot were re-subdivided, the 35 foot landscape buffer would once again come into play. I guess I wont' that somebody might decide not to re-subdivide, tear down the current house and build one bigger one farther back in the lot and still have the 25-foot landscape buffer, instead of a 35. So, this is the dance that we were doing at the Commission that is considering all the possibilities that might leave that exception there. So, I am not tied to the way it was described before or the development agreement. If the other Council members are comfortable or want to make some discussion about it, I'm sure if it is subdivided, then, that's true, the 35 will happen. I guess do we want to put some other limitation on it if it's not subdivided? De Weerd: I think that's a great idea. Zaremba: Then, the question would be how do we do that. Apparently, the development agreement -- Rountree: If you can word that, that's fine. Zaremba: Uh? Rountree: If you can wordsmith that -- De Weerd: Mr. Nary, any suggestions? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, I don't. I think without a development agreement I don't know how we are going to limit the future use of that property to at least that one possibility that someone would simply redevelop that existing lot. I don't know how we could -- it's pretty unlikely -- Mrs. Canning may have a better suggestion. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant has stated that he's retaining ownership of the lot, so we could tie it to prior sale of the Lot 1. The applicant shall complete boundary adjustment with the homeowners association to provide the full 35 feet and, then, they could remove the existing home and presumably build something else. Nary: We would have to trust Mr. Sargent to do it. Not that I don't. I don't mean it that way. But Imean -- I don't know whether -- Canning: You could put it in the development agreement is what Iwas -- Nary: But I thought part of the discussion was to not have one? Zaremba: Well, it's to not tie it to a building permit or a repair permit. Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 67 of 72 Nary: Okay. I think we could probably fashion some language if -- and maybe -- and I guess it's my ignorance, Council. If we are going to have a development agreement, but not that building permit to that parcel to that particular structure, that's the only thing he's asking us not to do, we can probably fashion the language as Mrs. Canning stated, that any other -- whether it's redevelopment or sale of that parcel would, then, require, prior to the sale, that it be done and we have some tool to do that. We could do that. So, if that's all we are trying to do, I think we could put it in a development agreement. It's my mistake that I thought we were not going to include it at all, so -- I don't know if you probably even heard any of that, Mr. Sargent. If we tied that -- if the issue is that we have a development agreement, but not tied to the ability to reconstruct that house, but simply tied to any development of that lot or sale of that, that the requirement would be that a lot adjustment would have to be done, including the setback, then, it would still allow you to rebuild the house and get a building permit and all of those things. Would that be a problem? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, would you like to reopen the Public Hearing, by any chance? Borton: So moved. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Canning: I'm sorry I spoke before. I believe I was under the misconception that the house was not of lasting quality, but I have been told that it is a brick home, it's nicely done, it's worth keeping. So, the applicant has said that tying him to sale of that lot -- he is holding possession of it until the current owner no longer desires to live there, but he doesn't want a development agreement tied to sale of the lot either, because -- and I think, really, the basic thing is is that this lot will always have a 25 foot buffer in front of it, until that house is tom down. Now, that may be 30 years from now, but -- Bird: Madam Mayor? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, I mean this is what the Planning Commission put in onto the development agreement and I don't know which lot it is, whether it's 16, one, or 17. Mine says 17 and that says 16 and everybody keeps talking about Lot 1. So, I don't know which lot it is, but, anyway, that's neither here nor there. What was the -- what was the staffs recommendation before the Planning Commission? What was the setback you guys recommended? Twenty-five feet? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 68 of 72 Canning: Yes, sir. We worked with the applicant to get alternative compliance for the 25 feet and we narrowed it down to what we thought was the -- the minimum length. I pushed for a five foot setback for a long time, but the applicant convinced me that because it's the front door and that's the way she's used to coming and going, that they really needed a ten foot front. Bird: And I -- and follow up, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: And, Anna, I agree a hundred percent with you on this one. I think that 25 foot is sufficient. I think that if you want to know the truth, the way this home's built it's probably going to be standing when a lot of the new ones are collapsing. I think to be truthful with you, Mr. Sargent, as soon as this lady moves out or is no longer able to live there, he will sell it as a complete package. He's not going to retain it and live in it. I think 25 foot is sufficient, in my mind, and I think it's the something -- it's too nice of house to see tore out, to be truthful with you. That's my opinion. And while I do believe we need a development agreement, I think that that -- and what lot is it, Anna? Is it 16, 17, or one? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, the home is on Lot 17. The open space is Lot 16. I think that's where the confusion is. Bird: Okay. Okay. Common lot. Yeah. Okay. That's right in between whether I can see with my glasses or without or whether I can read with it or without, so, anyway, I understand now. That would be my preference, Council, and you can jump in here and tell me I'm wet behind the ears, but I would just -- I'd like to keep the development agreement, but I think we strike that Lot 17, Block 1, and go back to staff recommendation of 25 feet. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would move that we close -- reclose -- again close Public Hearing on Item 14 and Item 15. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 14 and 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borton: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 69 of 72 De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Not a motion, just a comment, that the situation's very difficult to put the -- one of the solutions not discussed, somewhat easier for me, and it's not to go forward with this particular application. I know access to McMillan and the 35 foot right of way, is, in my mind, a paramount consideration and if we are going to try and gerrymander around a brick house with some unique needs at the present time, at least not ready in terms of joining the City of Meridian in its apparent condition -- at any rate, that's my two bits is I'm not necessarily comfortable going forward with those types of concessions. De Weerd: Thank you. I agree. Any further discussion from Council? Okay. Do I have a motion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would move that we deny Item 14, AZ 06-052. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Motion and a second to deny Item 14. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Item 15 is immaterial, because Item 14 was not approved. Nary: You still need to take action, Madam Mayor. Bird: Yeah. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move that we deny Item 15, PP 06-053. Rountree: Second. • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 70 of 72 De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to deny Item 15. All those -- I'm song. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1282 A: AZ 06-042 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.18 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Cottswold Village Subdivision by Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust - 2180 East Amity Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1282 on AZ 06-042. Staff, any comment necessary on this? Mr. Nary? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think this is a return from the Tax Commission. There was just some errors in the legal, so we just cleaned it up. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read this ordinance -- you don't have to? Berg: No. Madam Mayor, the reason this is being amended is because the zoning was incorrect on the original ordinance and so we corrected it. De Weerd: Okay. Berg: Unlike what normally happens. Nary: Normally it's the Tax Commission that -- Berg: This one happens to be an amendment to the zoning description. De Weerd: Okay. Berg: Ordinance 07-1282A, an amendment to the zoning description for ordinance for annexation of property being a portion of the west half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and temtories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to R-4 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. • . Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 71 of 72 De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance Item 16 read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Hearing none, do I have a motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 16. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 17: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(fi) - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation); De Weerd: Item 17 is an Executive Session. Do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f). Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Bird: Madame Mayor I move we come out of Executive Session. • Meridian City Council January 23, 2007 Page 72 of 72 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:50 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPRO 0e\~\e\~~~~r io a ~~ii~~`of°° ~ ~~ ',,'r a~ `~ ~'® aka ~ - "` `i w° ~~P® MAYOR E WEERD ~ T ~~+~' ,o .~~ r°°°0°<i~~asie~~ os~~,~~` 2 ~~~~ DATE APPROVED G. BERG JF~C(al"Y CLERK January 18, 2007 AZ Ob-056 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Mike Hill ITEM NO. S-C REQUEST Findings for Approval -Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Clearsprings Subdivision - 1035 East McMillan Road 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 Attached Findings Contacted:~~ j~ Date: ~ `~' d 7 Phone: ~~~~ ~` S~ Emailed: (dSS P ~~. ~~' ~on~i y i I ~~~''~ S aff Inifials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the CHy of Meridian. .J CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~i k'~ efQ1° ~kF ,~ ~ 1 I~ Se}~ . ~a k~, 4 ~~:c ~~~ ~J`f,~ In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 11 single family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres, for Clearsprings Subdivision, by Mike Hill. Case No(s). AZ-06-056, PP-06-054 For the City Council Hearing Date of: January 9, 2007 (Findings approved on January 23, 2007) A. Findings. of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 1 of 4) 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, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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 October 4, 2006, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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 record a 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 may be 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 2 of 4) 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 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 may be 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 January 9, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 3 of 4) 4 O By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the Z 3 ~ day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_ ~~`_~• COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED_ ~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~~/ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_~~ TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED ~+ ~~~~ MAY~~o ' ~ ode WEERD ATTEST: t , ~ ` ~ ~~ ~~' ® ~~ ,ftiy u,~ ~ a .~~ `~ ~~ f"9}y ~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., C CL R~£ ~ ~,~ d~ ~ ~ C~ J ~oa'1 Copy served upon: ~ Applicant ~'~°p/s~aaes aa~~4~''A~' ~~ Planning Department ~ ublic Works Department City Attorney BY~ Dated: ~-a~ -Q-] Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 4 of 4) CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 1/9/2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Justin Lucas Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 208-884-5533 E •~ ~~° ~ f ~~ - rmr ~,~ ~+~t1-~~ ~ n ~i~ ~ ~~ ~, ~a~~ ~, QU~'t SUBJECT: Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056 Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential). PP-06-054 Preliminary Plat approval of 11 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots in the proposed R-4 zone, by Mike Hill. 1. SUIVIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Mike Hill, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to R-4 (Medium Low- Density Residential) for 5.2 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located on the south side of E. McMillan Road approximately 3,300 feet east of N. Meridian Road. There is one existing home on this site that will be retained. The subject property is located within the Urban Service Planning Area and the City's Area of Impact. 2. SUIVIMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ and PP) 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, Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Clearsprings Subdivision (A~06-056 and PP-06- 054) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 7. 2006. At the public hearinsi they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearin i. In favor: Ross Erickson ii. In opposition: None iii. Commentin~• None iv. Staff presenting application: Justin Lucas v. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. -Future development of existing home site: ii. -Development of neighboring parcels c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. -None d. Outstanding Issue(s) for Citv Council: i. -None a. ummarv of itv ounc'1 P ~blic Aea__rin Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN• DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE I • G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 i. In favor: Zach Sidalow ii. In onnosition: None iii. Commentine: Joe Burton. Rvan Burkhart iv. Written testimony None v. Staff presentine annlication: Anna Cann~e vi. Other staff commentine on apnlication• None ji, jay Issues of Discussion by C~1: i. None ~. Icy Council Changes to Commission Recommendation: i, one 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 AZ- 06-056 and PP-06-054 as presented in staff report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007 with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-06- 056 and PP-06-054 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 9, 2006 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-06-056 and PP-06-054 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: 1035 E. McMillan Road; on the south side of E. McMillan Road and east of N. Meridian Road in Section 31, Township 4 North, Range 1 East. b. Owner: Boyd Hill 1035 E. McMillan Road Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Mike Hill 496 E. Redrock Drive Meridian, ID 83642 d. Representative: Ross Erickson, Erickson Civil, Inc. e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Annexation and Zoning of the subject 5.2 acres to R-4, and Preliminary Plat approval of 11 single-family buildable lots and 2 common lots. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family detached. The average lot size in the proposed development is 13,688 square feet (including the large lot that retains the existing home). The gross density of the project is 2.23 dwelling units per acre. Approximately 9.41 percent of the site is being set aside for open space. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 10/4/06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 10/4/06 5. PROCESS FACT5 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 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 City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: November 20~' and December 4`", 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 18U'' 2006 and January l st, 2007 City Council) d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: November 9~', 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 15~' 2006 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: November 27`x, 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 30`~ 2006 City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): There is one existing house on this 5-acre site. The existing home is to be retained and connected to City water and sewer services. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This area is rapidly transitioning from rural to urban. Various subdivisions have been previously approved in the vicinity including the Silversprings Subdivision to the west and the Harpe Subdivision to the east. A few five acre parcels zoned RUT still remain in this area that have yet to redevelop. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single family homes, Larkwood Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County) 2. South: Single family homes, Havasu Creek Subdivision No. 3, zoned R-4 3. East: Single family home on 5-acres, Crestwood Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Future single family homes in the proposed Silversprings Subdivision, zoned R-4 d. History of Previous Actions: None e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 3 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Location of sewer: There is sewer planned to the west in Silversprings Subdivision, and an existing sewer stub in N. Mooney Falls Way to the south east corner of this property. Location of water: There is a water stub planned to the west in Silversprings Subdivision, and an existing water stub in N. Mooney Falls Way to the southeast corner of this property. Issues or concerns: 1.) The need for a second water connection for redundancy. 2.) The need for a sewer easement to ensure adequate protection for the sewer main in N. Mooney Falls Way. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: N/A 3. Hazards: No hazards have been identified on this site. 4. Proposed Zoning: R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) 5. Size of Property: 4.94 acres (excluding right-of--way) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 11 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 11 4. Common Lots: 2 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 13 7. Gross Density: 2.23 units per acre (net density is 2.79 d.u./acre) 8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 square feet (per UDC) g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): A 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along E. McMillan Road, an arterial street ((JDC 11-2A-5). 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.47 acres/9.41% 4. Other landscaping standards: Parkway areas are to be 8-feet wide and contain Class II trees to be counted as common open space (UDC 11-3A-17E). h. Amenities: Parkways with detached sidewalks and 1 open space lot i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached dwellings to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: The applicant is proposing to construct public streets, E. Copper Ridge Street and N. Clearfalls Place within this development. Copper Ridge Street is stubbed to the subject property at the west property line. Along with these streets the applicant is proposing to partially connect to the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way that is provided from the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. The applicant can only partially connect to this stub street because the existing stub street is stubbed to both this property and the off-site property to the east. As a condition of this development, ACHD is requiring the Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE d • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 applicant to construct their portion of the street (approximately 25-feet wide, up to the eastern property line) with a barricade that will not allow entry on to the unfinished street. It will be the responsibility of the property owner/developer to the east to complete the construction of this stub street when that parcel develops in the City. All of the other internal streets are local streets with 36-feet wide street sections with rolled curb, gutter and 4-foot wide detached sidewalks. ACRD has submitted comments and conditions back to the City for this project. ACHD's conditions are included in Exhibit B. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On November 17, 2006, 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. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain up to three dwellings per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan.) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 11 single- family lots on 4.94 acres for a gross density of 2.23 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density complies substantially with the anticipated density for this area. Note: Staff recognizes the possible redevelopment potential that the Lot 6, Block 1 has due its large size (50,052 s.f.). Even with this redevelopment potential Staff is confident that the Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation combined with the proposed R-4 zoning will ensure that this lot develops similar to the other lots proposed in this subdivision. It should be made clear that no plans have been discussed about subdividing this large lot and this analysis applies only to possible future redevelopment. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (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. When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the subject property. 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. • 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 #2. This service will not change. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 5 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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 VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 3 -Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land-use decisions. This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. Sta, ff believes that the subject applications comply with the policies listed in the literature noted above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 -Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. The submitted preliminary plat proposes to provide one stub street to the east parcel that is currently zoned in Ada County RUT, which staff anticipates will re-develop in the future. The plat also shows a partial connection to a stub street to the south that will be completed when the property to the east develops. A stub street to this property was also provided with the Silversprings Subdivision to the west. The applicant is proposing to extend this stub street into the property. Staff is supportive of the proposed street connections. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13 -Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments. See analysis above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 5 -Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. The applicant is proposing to construct four foot wide, detached sidewalks adjacent to all of the proposed streets, which connect to adjacent properties. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 6 -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. See above. 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 residential zone. Staff finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west, are compatible with the proposed development. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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 (LJDC) 11-2-1 lists single-family detached homes as permitted uses in the R-4 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-4 Medium Low-Density Residential: 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: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard street frontage and lot size requirements of the R-4 zone established in the UDC. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested R-4 zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on August 28, 2006 by Clinton W. Hansen, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 2. PP Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Density/Open Space: UDC 11-3G-3A1 requires at least 5% of the total land area to be set aside for common open space in single-family developments. Parkways and street buffers as designed by the applicant do count towards the open space requirement. The applicant should provide 9.41 % (0.47 acres) open space as proposed. Landscaping: The landscape plan prepared by Erickson Civil, Inc. on 10/4/06, is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3B5, parkways that are used as common open space shall be a minimum of eight feet wide from street curb to edge of sidewalk and contain one class two tree for every 351inear feet of parkway as proposed. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The 25-foot wide landscape buffer proposed along McMillan Road should be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standazds 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). Stub Streets: The applicant should be required to extend Copper Ridge Street into the site from the west as a public stub street to the Meyers property to the east (pazcel #R1608650090). The applicant should also be required to partially extend the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way provided by the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. The existing stub street N. Mooney Falls Way straddles two property lines and can not be completely constructed with the proposed subdivision. Due to this situation ACHD is requiring the applicant to construct a partial street section for this stub street extension that matches the existing street section in the Havasu Creek Subdivision. This partial street section will only leave approximately 11 feet of driving surface which is inadequate for a safe connection to the south. ACHD is requiring a barrier to be placed across the north end of this partial street section until the other portion is completed, and meets all ACHD standazds. Staff is supportive of ACHD's requirements regazding this partial street section and stub street extension. Existing Residences/Buildings: The site currently contains residential and out- buildings. All existing buildings should be retained or removed as proposed (see Site Plan, dated October 4, 2006). Further, the existing residence should be connected to city sewer and water services. Access: As currently proposed the only full access into the site is extended from the proposed Silversprings Subdivision to the west. If for some reason the Silversprings Subdivision were not completed, the applicant would have to find a way to fully construct the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way that is extended from the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. At no point should the applicant be take access off of McMillan Road to serve the proposed subdivision. Furthermore, the existing access points to McMillan Road should be abandoned by the applicant as proposed. No direct lot access should be allowed to McMillan Road. Fencing: Although not specifically shown on the Preliminary Plat or Landscape Plan the applicant is proposing (as discussed in a phone conversation) to construct six-foot, closed-vision fencing along the east boundary of the site. An existing six-foot fence along the south perimeter will be retained and a six foot closed vision fence is proposed along the west boundary with the Silversprings Subdivision. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporazy construction fencing to contain debris must be installed azound the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path /multi-use fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE g • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas should be the responsibility of the Clearsprings Home Owners' Association. 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 subdivided should be covered. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized imgation 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 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. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Clearsprings Subdivision (A~06-056 and PP-06-054) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 7. 2006. At the uublic hearing thev moved to recommend approval. The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on January 9. 2007. At the public hearing the~pproved the subject annexation and preliminarv~plat ap~licaHons with no changes. 11. EI~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 10/4/06) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: 10/4/06} 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 8. Central District Health Department 9. Settlers' Irrigation District C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 9 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 10/4/06) 4H W W C7 Q2 Z Q OZ Na >a ^=o Nzo ~_~~ Z ~~~ y20 U UWQ N ~' z ooa ~,~o awW Z~ w W N I=- 0 ~Om ~0 a ~. 0 a Q 2 0 W Q rn ~2~j96iY tl a~ c~9 pyg "gd~$~ g ®drY~YE~l 9 tE 1 ~ `~I~ ~ 8$e E~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i i ~ .. c~ Y g 8 d d ~5~Tea~{~ q6 ~e aE ca~8 tea`" 5~ a i ~ ; o.,, ~ vo ~~ ~ ~ irY 6~ a ea ~ 8Y ~ ~ Y~gff ~ tE~ 4~ y ' i ~ I I I ~. d I; Se;~ ~Y€ i '~ 95~ E~ t zg e~ Y gt $§ ,. ~~gd?9$ge to ~ed at.; [ ~ ~~d6~ yq Y~s =z d fi dd$i ii@pYd m~4da~~alBi c4de~+dd°iett,.. ~ ~~~~:&&$i! d IPiii_~~'P~l~ A3 ~9;Yga}:p d~ i) {S~ ~~ri9 ey ~ {;[ '1 i °z ee ~ € da_,de.:_ t it7 C3~ ~ ` : E9~id ~ @r,S 5i .Y -'. I~.. ~~ -~ ~ ~y ,~i~~ S ~~ Z~~~ > ~ ~ o PP 9~i~ ~~S3~ Bx ~~'„r~ ~ ~ v ~~ ak ~°~5K fP" asirr~ ~ c y g OLL z _ ~ ~ ~~ «O S~ u g"~ ' w g g Wm ~° <u w~ ~s ~ l~_° i_ m g - '~ ii ~. _ iiNN Y~~~~ $ 4} I kf 7~ ~u ~ ~~~ ~i ~ i c~~ _ ~ ~r~ _ i : 1_~ e ~ i+ ~ . -_. ... s x ~~ idv ~~Ji ' i _~ r; ~ I ~5 N$; ~ , i Y . 6 . I _ __ _ _ f , 4'a~l i, ~~ p -'~"? ,I Ao I --ot ~~ I o4 i `I ! ~I ,a I~ d~ F.r~~ - ~- ~- ~ ` ..' ~} dad ~' ~ - - --1- ~-~ ~ r i ... .: ;e d ,_.. i i E ~ }. ~ t ~\ S 4i.! , i ~ - I .. - Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Landscape Plan (dated 10/4/06) ,. _ a~~ ~~ g~^ zeeEe wan~ve~wrew o4ePl'ueIPNeW +e wawa i ®~ .~ a °~ I aoA3~w~ ~ uolsWP9ngsBuNdsaearJ Imo.. ~~ ~) _. ~ I t .._ ~ ~ ~ i~i~l~~~I1~~a;IIE~E II I III g ~ ~ ~- a,m~ :ltd ~ ~..,-: ~' ~~ 1 Iii ,s:~ G ~ ~,a, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ @a g ~ I II T ~~j ~~~ ~ d ~ ~~3@~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ '~~~~ i? - ffi gc~55^ S - .. _. I ~a ~ ~ a~~ I ~ - ~~99 11 UUII iti18 s. ~~° ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~i'~gai a ii aaaaaa aa~aa sa~uea G. ~~ I 4 ® ~° ag @Hi a ° e a ~ IA ~¢ F i ~ ~ tl~'~A~~~y ~ @ g~ ~ 1 ~ '] 8s7~f! ~ i a/ L C ~~~~~~I~~ ~~i$.~ ~ ~ ;@ ~ ~ jt~~O~~S ~ ~ 1~~~ ~ @°D~l q ~( 1/,~'~'@@'It ~ il~ ~ L`2!Yi~`' ~ i~, ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ w@~°~' ~ @~ 0{1i~~p~ i~li~ ~i~~ 3 I ~ 1 ~ .a ~a@ $ lal1, sa '` ~ _\ ~9 i a-~ ~ s ~!~ a '$ I ` ~ ~;=gel@~~ @a 191@§ @@@@I ~i~ll~ ~ g ~ ~ I! °~ ~9 ; Q ~ , ° 1 v ~ °~ t @ ~~ p ° 1I ~ ~s ~~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~al~`-° ~ ~I: la ' ~ aa9,a~~ i9~'i ~ ~ ~ ~~ iii, 6~~ # ~ .. o ., ~ ~:~,~ ~ 9i@IS o~~I~i~ ~ z~'Y~l~ 9! ~~al m ,ann L: g$e~~i4ft3:::9ila~ _ K'~ a .. ~ % mma aam.ea ~ , N 0 z z~ o° Nz >~ a oi0 ~za ~oZ z ~M~ yz0 Q~QOU UWQ~ yZ LLLL D~Q ~a~ aZf QCQwy ZFO ~p,m 0 a~ a Q 2 :: V' r ~~ og'~ 9~ a g ~@ 19°°, ~' t, J. 9 a 7'r F• !s~ 90 @ a ~tl S'~ i'. $ to @i, ~ ., a` ~ a Cpl a: @ ~ ~ 3 'i~ iIF:~. °a 1 w ~ @ of ( 9 ~''~?~ 1 Bia ;Y.?y! B~ - ... g ;~B ~,., `I r ~ da 1 t.l F .~ ~ '~ Oa ~ 66 _ - ~,' 1~1 1~ A.~12@4W-uPSev~T~ ~ 'u i ~ ~5 ~~ O, i~ O@ $~ a p6 I ~i 1Y. ~ _._.- a°isn~oenss°wee:~nnvs ossoe°aa \ - '~ (~' F i j ~2~~• ~ Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 STTE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-054) 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as PP-1, prepared by Erickson Civil, Inc., dated October 4, 2006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-06-056) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-06-054) 1.1.2 The landscape plan prepazed by Erickson Civil, Inc. dated October 4, 2006 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3B5, pazkways that aze used as common open space shall be a minimum of eight feet wide from street curb to edge of sidewalk and contain one class two tree for every 351ineaz feet of parkway. • 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. • The 25-foot wide landscape buffer proposed along McMillan Road shall be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepazed by the landscape azchitect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standazds 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 should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.1.3 Extend the stub street from Silversprings Subdivision (Copper Ridge Drive) from the west as a public stub street to the Meyers property to the east (pazcel #81608650090) and partially extend the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way provided by the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south as proposed. 1.1.4 At no point shall the applicant take access off of McMillan Road to serve the proposed subdivision. The existing access points to McMillan Road shall be abandoned by the applicant as proposed, and access shall be taken from the internal public streets. No direct lot access shall be allowed to McMillan Road; place a note prohibiting direct lot access to McMillan Road on the face of the final plat. 1.1.5 All buildings that span across proposed lot lines, or do not conform to the dimensional standards (setbacks, height, etc.) of the UDC shall be removed, relocated or made to conform to city code, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.1.6 The existing house that is to remain shall be required to connect to City services, the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of assessments and the actual physical connection to the services. 1.1.7 Provide asix-foot tall fence along the east perimeter of the development, as proposed. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris Exhibit B -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. 1.1.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Clearsprings Home Owners' Association. 1.1.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, but exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. 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 construction plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 1.1.10 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMIlVARY PLAT (PP-06-054) 1.2.1 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). 1.2.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.2.3 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- 3A-18 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. 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. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, 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. 1.2.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.2.5 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation and conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.2.6 Preliminary 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. Mooney Falls. There is only 5-feet from the centerline of the main to the boundary of the subject property. Public Works requires a minimum of 10-feet of easement past the centerline of pipe. Prior to construction plan approval the applicant shall provide an easement that is sufficient in width to cover the sewer main in N. Mooney Falls. 2.2 The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIlVG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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. 2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Silversprings Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.4 This development is proposing water service to Silversprings Subdivision to the west which has only one water feed. Due to Public Works concern of the growing number of houses on one water connection this development shall be required to have a second water main connection. If it is to mains stubbed in N.Mooney Falls, the applicant shall provide a signed easement prior to construction plan approval. 2.5 The existing house that is to remain shall be required to connect to City services, the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of assessments and the actual physical connection to the services. The payment of assessments shall be required prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer, the actual physical connection shall be accomplished prior to Certificates of Occupancy being issued. 2.6 The easement depicted on the plat, that was created with the Crestwood Subdivision is an irrigation and utility easement. The applicant shall vacate the easement prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. 2.8 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). 2.9 The applicant has indicated Settler will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development. Therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 2.10 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. Z.11 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.12 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. 2.13 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. 2.14 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from Exhibit B -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells maybe used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.15 1'er 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 irtigation/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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 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. 2.20 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. 2.21 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.22 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.23 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. 2.24 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. 2.25 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. 2.26 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 Exhibit B -Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story family dwellings will require a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 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 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 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. 3.5 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). For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 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 did not submit any comment on this application. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company Exhibit B -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 6.1 SSC has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Site Specific Conditions ofAppYOVaI 7.1.1 Construct the site's internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, 8-foot planter strips and 5-foot detached concrete sidewalks. All roadway improvements are to be located within the right-of--way (50-feet), with the exception of the detached concrete sidewalk, which should have a public access easement. 7.1.2 Construct a stub street to the east approximately 120-feet north of the south property line as a 36- foot street section with rolled curb, gutter, and a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk. All roadway improvements should be located within the right-of--way with the exception of the detached sidewalk which maybe in an easement. This street should be signed as follows: "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7.1.3 Construct a 5-foot concrete sidewalk no closer than 38-feet from the centerline of McMillan Road to match improvements to the west (Silversprings Subdivision). If the sidewalk is located outside of the right-of--way, the applicant should provide a sidewalk easement. 7.1.4 Dedicate either 35-feet or 45-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of McMillan Road abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. A dedication of 35-feet will facilitate roadway improvements noted in the Capital Improvements Plan, leaving the sidewalk within an easement. The 45-foot right-of--way dedication would facilitate all roadway improvements, including sidewalk. 7.1.5 Construct the half street section to the south with matching improvements to those existing in the Havasu Falls Subdivision. Given the fact that the half street pavement width for Moon Falls Way will be less than 24-feet, a connection may not be opened for this section until such time that a full local roadway is constructed. A barricade should be installed at the intersection of Moon Falls Way and E. Copper Ridge Street with signage stating "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7.1.6 Obtain fire department approval to not provide a temporary turnaround at the eastern terminus of E. Copper Ridge Street (stubbing to the property line). 7.7.7 Construct the traditional cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of N. Clearsprings Place with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 7.1.8 Any existing driveway access to McMillan Road should be relocated to the internal streets; thereby restricting all access to McMillan Road. A notation of all access restrictions should be made on the fmal plat. 7.1.9 The applicant should EITHER: • Obtain access from the proposed stub street to the west (extended from Silversprings Subdivision). No access will be allowed to McMillan Road; so the final plat may not be signed until a connection to the noted stub is provided. The applicant should coordinate the timeframe for such a connection with the adjacent property owner/applicant. • OR: Obtain access to the site with a connection to the existing stub street extended north from Havasu Falls (Moon Falls Way). In order to open this connection, the applicant will need to Exhibit B -Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 provide a minimum pavement width of 24-feet (within 40-feet ofright-of--way), which will require acquiring access from the adjacent parcel to the east. This is due to the fact that the stub street from Havasu Falls was originally platted on the property line. Again, no access will be allowed to McMillan Road, so the applicant should coordinate all access/connections with the adjacent property owners. 7.1.10 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 ACHD 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 may be 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. 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 is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 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 ACRD 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. 7.2.12 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 Exhibit B -Page 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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. 8. Central District Health Department 8.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this 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. 9. Settlers' Irrigation District 9.1 All irrigation /drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facilities involved are the Starkey Lateral (20' easement) and the Parkins-Nourse Lateral (20'easement). Contact SID for additional irrigation requirements. 9.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 9.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.I.D. facilities. 9.4 Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 9.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 9.6 A pressure irrigation system must be provided to all lots with irrigation water. Exhibit B -Page 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN• DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ ARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 C. Legal Description ,L~g I Desc ~p 'on Clearsprings Annexation Boundary A parcel for annexation purposes being located in the N ~/z of the NE ~/s of Section 31, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a Railroad Spike monument marking the northwest comer of said N ~/z of the NE Ya (~/d Corner), from which a Brass Cap monument marking the northeast corner of said Section 31 bears N 89°46'54" E a distance of 2632.45 feet; Thence N 89°46'54" E along the northerly boundary of said N ~/z of the NE '/a a distance of 680.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;; Thence continuing N 89°46'54" E along said northerly boundary a distance of 340.33 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0°06'26" W along the prolongation of and the easterly boundary of Lot 3 of Crestwood Subdivision No. t as shown in Book 28 of Plats on Pages 1757- 1758, Records of Ada County, Idaho, a distance of 664.75 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the southeast comer of said Lot 3; Thence S 89~5'OS" W along the southerly boundary of said Crestwood Subdivision No. 1 a distance of 34.38 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin; Thence continuing along said southerly boundary S 89°47'33" W a distance of 306.12 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the southwest comer of said Lot 3; Thence N 0°07'17" E along the westerly boundary and the prolongation thereof of said Lot 3 a distance of 664.81 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 5.20 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC August 28, 2006 REV A~AROVAL EY +CFR{C'iiAi~ PU5UC ~rrn~r K,j DE?T. ~~c~l L~7ons ~.°°~~ Clearsprings Subdivision Job No. 06-50 Exhibit C -Page I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE I-IEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 CLEARSPRINGS ANNEXATION BOUNDARY LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 31, T4N, R 1 E, BM, ADA OUNTY, IDAHO. BA575 OF BEAR/NG 2006 ~ wsses v~ofl£nc 8£AR/ND lei _ N 89%16'54' E E AIaVQLAN ROAD aarl~s' JJ .~, wr 6gp.lY J4D.7.7' l6/l. N G9I63,~ E POINT OF ns ^^° .Ha.7r~ na°'~/a~ BEOYNN/NG 6• tim w m OR£STWOIX7 S!/8D/V1570N NO. 1 AREA = 520 AGWES R760B650060 W 3 O ~ ^ O ~ h b O b O 2 v, RE FROVG.(. BY F~:IniknE PU~~IG v~,":l= DEFT. I ~' OI ti 2 O ~ppg,,• ,,, ,,,,, N B9:TSQ5" £ JAJB' N B9'iYJJ' E .TO411' a~mw ns ® Baal' resew 6Ia6Y ~wuv a®r sa mr caamr w.t z+zn' ^Q •~ e2io' ~ m+ .r euaeu xar~w m~ ~'t°~ m HA VA57/ CIPEEK SU80/V/90N NQ J ~ NAVASU G4EEK 5'UBO1V/570N NO. 2 HAVASTJ CREEK 57lBD/1951ON N4 4 ~ ~ ~.~~ ir, ~1~ ~1 ! l rl ~r~.; ~,~~" Land Surveying and Consuiting Q SO ~ 00 2OO 231E 5TH sT sTE A MERlDlAN,87 83642 ~208~ 288.2040 ~Z08J 288.2557 tvt ewuNlarr W Sol~dinru.b¢ Exhibit C -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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. l:n order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. 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-4. 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. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the R-4 zone. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfaze. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that maybe provided when determining this fording. 4. 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, 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. 5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-SB-3.E). The R-4 zoning amendment will provide lots that aze similaz in nature to existing subdivisions in the neaz vicinity, and transitions well to the existing rural lots in the vicinity. City Council fords that all essential services aze 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 fordings listed above, City Council fords that Annexation and Zoning of this property to R-4 would be in the best interest of the City. 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: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; City Council fords that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 adopted Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; City Council fords that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. 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, City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. 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.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and City Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. City Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, the Commission 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. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of maj or importance of which staff is unaware. Exhibit D -Page 2 January 18, 2007 PP 06-054 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Mike HIII ITEM NO. 5-~ REQUEST Findings for Approval --Preliminary Plat approval of 11 residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres in the propsed R-4 zone for Clearsprings Subdhrision - 1035 East McMillan 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 Attached Findings OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Mcteriats presented at public meeHnps shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER r ~_ ~~~ ... ~. ~. ~.~ ~~~~ ~ = In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT to R-4 AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 11 single family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.2 acres, for Clearsprings Subdivision, by Mike Hill. Case No(s). AZ-06-056, PP-06-054 For the City Council Hearing Date of: January 9, 2007 (Findings approved on January 23, 2007) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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. 02-3 82 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-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE I of 4) • • 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 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, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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 October 4, 2006, is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007, 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 record a 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 may be 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 2 of 4) • • 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 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 may be 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 January 9, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 3 of 4) By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ 3 ~ day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED-~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_z~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_ ~y~ TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD ATTEST: ~ / WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., Copy served upon: VOTED MAYOR ~ ' ° kIe,WEERD ~,~ ,e ~ ~, ~. ~I'3 Ea 1y. `~ ss ~' P~~ 48~~'®~`~°fo'rrrrroo i~eeet, o@~q a ~~~~~® Applicant ° Planning Department Public Works Department ('.itv Attnrnev B Dated: ~' 24 ~d~ i Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-056 and PP-06-054 (PAGE 4 of 4) CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 1/9/2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Justin Lucas Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 208-884-5533 t~° ~-'~?, °g'~ ~,~ y~`~~ ~r q «rc~ ,~ ~r"~ ```F +~ ~ ~P SUBJECT: Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056 Annexation and Zoning of 5.2 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential). PP-06-054 Preliminary Plat approval of 11 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots in the proposed R-4 zone, by Mike Hill. 1. SUIVIMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Mike Hill, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to R-4 (Medium Low- Density Residential) for 5.2 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located on the south side of E. McMillan Road approximately 3,300 feet east of N. Meridian Road. There is one existing home on this site that will be retained. The subject property is located within the Urban Service Planning Area and the City's Area of Impact. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ and PP) 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, Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Clearsprings Subdivision (A~06-056 and PP-06- 054) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 7. 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearin i. In favor: Ross Erickson ii. In opposition: None iii. Commentin~• None iv. Staff presentine application: Justin Lucas v. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. -Future development of existing home site: ii. -Development of nei~hborine parcels c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. -None d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. -None ~. ummarv of itv o ~n '1 ~b is Hea 'n Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 i. In favor Zach Sidalow ii. In opnosition• None iii. Commenting• Joe B rro Rvan Burkhart iv. Written testimon • None v. Staffpresenti_na application: Anna Canning vi. Other staff comment'ng on application• None 1Z. ev iccuec of icc ~ssion by ouncil: i. on &. Kev Council Changes to Commission Recnmmendatinn~ i. on 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 AZ- 06-056 and PP-06-054 as presented in staff report for the hearing date of January 9, 2007 with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-06- 056 and PP-06-054 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 9, 2006 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-06-056 and PP-06-054 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: 1035 E. McMillan Road; on the south side of E. McMillan Road and east of N. Meridian Road in Section 31, Township 4 North, Range 1 East. b. Owner: Boyd Hill 1035 E. McMillan Road Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Mike Hill 496 E. Redrock Drive Meridian, ID 83642 d. Representative: Ross Erickson, Erickson Civil, Inc. e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Annexation and Zoning of the subject 5.2 acres to R-4, and Preliminary Plat approval of 11 single-family buildable lots and Z common lots. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family detached. The average lot size in the proposed development is 13,688 square feet (including the large lot that retains the existing home). The gross density of the project is 2.23 dwelling units per acre. Approximately 9.41 percent of the site is being set aside for open space. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 10/4/06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 10/4/06 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 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 City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: November 20th and December 4`h, 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 18t`'' 2006 and January 1St, 2007 (City Council) d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: November 9th, 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 15th. 2006 (City Councill e. Applicant posted notice on site by: November 27th, 2006 (Planning Commission) and December 30th 2006 (City Councill 6. LAND U5E a. Existing Land Use(s): There is one existing house on this 5-acre site. The existing home is to be retained and connected to City water and sewer services. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This area is rapidly transitioning from rural to urban. Various subdivisions have been previously approved in the vicinity including the Silversprings Subdivision to the west and the Harpe Subdivision to the east. A few five acre parcels zoned RUT still remain in this area that have yet to redevelop. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single family homes, Larkwood Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County) 2. South: Single family homes, Havasu Creek Subdivision No. 3, zoned R-4 3. East: Single family home on 5-acres, Crestwood Subdivision, zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Future single family homes in the proposed Silversprings Subdivision, zoned R-4 d. History of Previous Actions: None e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Location of sewer: There is sewer planned to the west in Silversprings Subdivision, and an existing sewer stub in N. Mooney Falls Way to the south east corner of this property. Location of water: There is a water stub planned to the west in Silversprings Subdivision, and an existing water stub in N. Mooney Falls Way to the southeast corner of this property. Issues or concerns: 1.) The need for a second water connection for redundancy. 2.) The need for a sewer easement to ensure adequate protection for the sewer main in N. Mooney Falls Way. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: N/A 3. Hazazds: No hazards have been identified on this site. 4. Proposed Zoning: R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) 5. Size of Property: 4.94 acres (excluding right-of--way) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 11 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 11 4. Common Lots: 2 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 13 7. Gross Density: 2.23 units per acre (net density is 2.79 d.u./acre) 8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 square feet (per UDC) g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): A 25-foot wide landscape street buffer is required along E. McMillan Road, an arterial street (UDC 11-2A-5). 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.47 acres/9.41% 4. Other landscaping standazds: Pazkway azeas are to be 8-feet wide and contain Class II trees to be counted as common open space (UDC 11-3A-17E). h. Amenities: Parkways with detached sidewalks and 1 open space lot i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached dwellings to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: The applicant is proposing to construct public streets, E. Copper Ridge Street and N. Clearfalls Place within this development. Copper Ridge Street is stubbed to the subject property at the west property line. Along with these streets the applicant is proposing to partially connect to the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way that is provided from the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. The applicant can only partially connect to this stub street because the existing stub street is stubbed to both this property and the off-site property to the east. As a condition of this development, ACRD is requiring the Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE t} CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 applicant to construct their portion of the street (approximately 25-feet wide, up to the eastern property line) with a barricade that will not allow entry on to the unfinished street. It will be the responsibility of the property owner/developer to the east to complete the construction of this stub street when that parcel develops in the City. All of the other internal streets are local streets with 36-feet wide street sections with rolled curb, gutter and 4-foot wide detached sidewalks. ACRD has submitted comments and conditions back to the City for this project. ACHD's conditions are included in Exhibit B. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On November 17, 2006, 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. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain up to three dwellings per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan.) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 11 single- family lots on 4.94 acres for a gross density of 2.23 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density complies substantially with the anticipated density for this area. Note: Staff recognizes the possible redevelopment potential that the Lot 6, Block 1 has due its large size (50,052 s.f.). Even with this redevelopment potential Staff is confident that the Low Density Comprehensive Plan designation combined with the proposed R-4 zoning will ensure that this lot develops similar to the other lots proposed in this subdivision. It should be made clear that no plans have been discussed about subdividing this large lot and this analysis applies only to possible future redevelopment. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (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. When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the subject property. 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. • 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 (NIPD). • 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. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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 VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 3 -Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land-use decisions. This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. Staff believes that the subject applications comply with the policies listed in the literature noted above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 -Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. The submitted preliminary plat proposes to provide one stub street to the east parcel that is currently zoned in Ada County RUT, which staff anticipates will re-develop in the future. The plat also shows a partial connection to a stub street to the south that will be completed when the properly to the east develops. A stub street to this property was also provided with the Silversprings Subdivision to the west. The applicant is proposing to extend this stub street into the property. Staff is supportive of the proposed street connections. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13 -Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments. See analysis above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 5 -Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. The applicant is proposing to construct four foot wide, detached sidewalks adjacent to all of the proposed streets, which connect to adjacent properties. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 6 -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. See above. 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 residential zone. Staff finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west, are compatible with the proposed development. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN•DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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 (iIDC) 11-2-1 lists single-family detached homes as permitted uses in the R-4 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-4 Medium Low-Density Residential: 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 aze 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: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard street frontage and lot size requirements of the R-4 zone established in the UDC. No dimensional modifications aze being requested for the proposed development. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested R-4 zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on August 28, 2006 by Clinton W. Hansen, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 2. PP Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Density/Open Space: UDC 11-3G-3A1 requires at least 5% of the total land azea to be set aside for common open space in single-family developments. Pazkways and street buffers as designed by the applicant do count towazds the open space requirement. The applicant should provide 9.41 % (0.47 acres) open space as proposed. Landscaping: The landscape plan prepazed by Erickson Civil, Inc. on 10/4/06, is approved with the following modifications/notes: o Per UDC 11-3G-3B5, parkways that are used as common open space shall be a minimum of eight feet wide from street curb to edge of sidewalk and contain one class two tree for every 35 lineaz feet of pazkway as proposed. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. The 25-foot wide landscape buffer proposed along McMillan Road should be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. 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). Stub Streets: The applicant should be required to extend Copper Ridge Street into the site from the west as a public stub street to the Meyers property to the east (parcel #R1608650090). The applicant should also be required to partially extend the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way provided by the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. The existing stub street N. Mooney Falls Way straddles two property lines and can not be completely constructed with the proposed subdivision. Due to this situation ACHD is requiring the applicant to construct a partial street section for this stub street extension that matches the existing street section in the Havasu Creek Subdivision. This partial street section will only leave approximately 11 feet of driving surface which is inadequate for a safe connection to the south. ACHD is requiring a barrier to be placed across the north end of this partial street section until the other portion is completed, and meets all ACHD standards. Staff is supportive of ACHD's requirements regarding this partial street section and stub street extension. Existing Residences/Buildings: The site currently contains residential and out- buildings. All existing buildings should be retained or removed as proposed (see Site Plan, dated October 4, 2006). Further, the existing residence should be connected to city sewer and water services. Access: As currently proposed the only full access into the site is extended from the proposed Silversprings Subdivision to the west. If for some reason the Silversprings Subdivision were not completed, the applicant would have to fmd a way to fully construct the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way that is extended from the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south. At no point should the applicant be take access off of McNJ[illan Road to serve the proposed subdivision. Furthermore, the existing access points to McMillan Road should be abandoned by the applicant as proposed. No direct lot access should be allowed to McMillan Road. Fencing: Although not specifically shown on the Preliminary Plat or Landscape Plan the applicant is proposing (as discussed in a phone conversation) to construct six-foot, closed-vision fencing along the east boundary of the site. An existing six-foot fence along the south perimeter will be retained and a six foot closed vision fence is proposed along the west boundary with the Silversprings Subdivision. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path /multi-use fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE g i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas should be the responsibility of the Cleazsprings Home Owners' Association. 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 subdivided should be covered. 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 azeas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape azeas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 15 and MCC 9-1-28. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Clearsprings Subdivision (A~06-056 and PP-06-054) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 7. 2006. At the uublic hearins: they moved to recommend aaproval. The Meridian Citv Council heard these items on January 9 2007 At the uublic hearing they approved the subject annexation and nreliminarv plat aunlications with no changes. 11. EI~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 10/4/06) Z. Landscape Plan (dated: 10/4/06) 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 8. Central District Health Department 9. Settlers' Irrigation District C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Clearsprings Subdivision AZ-06-056/PP-06-054 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 10/4/06) QF W W QZ K Zo oZ ~~ ?a o=o ~zQ ~o~ z ~~~ yzo U UUac~v NZ LLLL OQQ ~a~ aZ~ ~wW a~ zoo tom J W2 ~0 aF 0 a z w Q N ~~d ~ ~'::~- va'm°a,, zoseeweni•uawmw o4ePi'uBIPPeN ~eowcw~ ~ , ,. wemwxaasm~ uoislNP9oSs6uNdareui~ w .spa i ~, ®;• g mw CSOaie+nw °°°~° :oreo~. .ampwsoo~cmu l-q~n ~~ ~~s ~+o a, ~p Yq ~@e~6~Eal B °~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a`q gz f ~ ~ &9,~ a ~ H A i i ~ ~ ~' :' I e~~ g~+f~ ~ ~4~~ "~~ ~ ~ 3 ~~me'~ ~~5~c ~ 31 ,"~ ^ g p pyp ~€~a6 p0 qi q ca ~ ~ ~ 8~ ~ ~ E . e 6 SI i@ ~ ~@ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ° °a 6 ig8a 8+~9 i iaP ~a ~ ~ 5€~ y ~P _ ~ I I <~ V O '. i ' ~~a~ p &E@~K d~~9'~ E y d i a yy y~ tt3 g spp 9g~e;~€~r~ca~a 'g~~gae~ Y @ ~9 @ 'p si.~u°'cE s e'a: ggggaa= 5V~@~ 4 9 pppapp ~ - ~t~~¢a ` @ a .~ pp qq €I6 ~'A~'@l~a~@ '~ rc~ ~ rc w i° ~~°-~ c o ~ ~ ~o o Z ee ~ ~ ~' a: gg;;~ a ~S@ b!~ 3@.9 : ~~~€1 ~ ~8 41 @a ~ ~ g ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ : ~,..i .,.o 3 ~ ~ a ~ ' _ _ H ~~r~{, I1 ~_ , T O` 1 `j9i. . :~_~~ r ~ ~~~!~ g g ~' ~g9 •!~ ~J f ~8 a~ -' ~~m §~ ~ i ~- ~ ~~a .. _` ;~ ~ ~4 1~ ~~ ~ ! Bid ~ i' i js~ ~.~4 m w ~° ~ g ~ ~~~ ~ ~e~'~ 3 Z • 'I ~. 9- ~11 LL Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN • EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 Landscape Plan (dated 10/4/06) BWB~I :Ql pond 1 f 9 ~ ~ aems weo~•ueiw+aW oyepl'ueIPNeW w, ~eo~ -- ` 3• ~ b ,z 3 m ae ~mmw a sem ~lslMP9ng sBuuds~eulJ I ~" `@ ""'b I _ - ~ ml vwa ~ enw BD>~r .wep ummeeap omo ' wa~w. a ~ wu,no ~ ~.:.~,~, ~ ~ ~~ ~ , . , ~~ ~ ~- °~~° ~ z 15~ I'i ~ €':~ ~i '$ ~,~ ~ ,~~~~ ~~iF ~ ~ g~~;gaj C~ ~ ~;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g j,.~llt, ~ ~;g; ~ ae ~ a ~I ` ` ~§ ~~~'I'~i ae ~j~~ ~~~H ~ ~ ~Iq<a~ ~ p ~• ~ ~ Bla ;~ ~i~ $~~ ~!~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ $'Id'1 F w (7 Z Z~ o° Nz ?a ~=0 pia ~o~ z ~~~ ~zo U ~VaO mm e UWQ 8 NZ LL w m DOQ Fap aZ~ ~wW QQ N_ Z@=-0 ~p,m J~ WZ a~ rc 0 a a z 0 w r- Q H N ~@(@ElaE59@~ldfg~9gep9gft ~~i nfR1c v "'6 4 p~Gc- ($s@{€~-(i19 `EtIIE ~~~ .~ - eerie ~ ~G~~ gR~si si? se a i~ i€el, - ~ -s a~ ° a B~s`~ @$. 2a'e , @ II:I III & a' II g g ~`~ t g ~~ ~ ~ ~ I I i I ~ 1®if ; 5 " ~ ~ ~Ss~'; ~ ~ ~o ~ '~~ dy ~4 A II 1@i@@1 1111! ks @ g 'si iaiaai iaaaa ~aeaaae ,~, k I i 1 ' ' I~i .., 111 @@ >ii '= s 6 ~ 111 ~ ~ iQ I~a~~ sii~f li~~I ~ ~ ~ a YI Q ~,;9~ l ; ~ ~ , i ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~i = a r q @ ~@ #~ ~_ I: r~ ~ qq ~,Q,q~q ei~'iti n~ ~ ~` ~ ~4 it 1' " _ o ~ .. 11 .e .enso nmt oem.u L; g B sQ a~ i@~ a m s 6 : ! ~; Bi .,99~9~ Isa 01 ~ 6~ ~ `-~ yid ~' i;. 5a% ~~ ia`ia 6 ~. 4~ ! j ~ Y~( .. 3 o-t a> a ! i,., v ~ ~ .le ~l'S~. tlla .. :9(S'rF~ .. '. k ~ 5 F S Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-054) 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as PP-1, prepared by Erickson Civil, Inc., dated October 4, 2006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-06-056) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-06-054) 1.1.2 The landscape plan prepared by Erickson Civil, Inc. dated October 4, 2006 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3B5, parkways that are used as common open space shall be a minimum of eight feet wide from street curb to edge of sidewalk and contain one class two tree for every 35 linear feet of parkway. • 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. • The 25-foot wide landscape buffer proposed along McMillan Road shall be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. • 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 should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.1.3 Extend the stub street from Silversprings Subdivision (Copper Ridge Drive) from the west as a public stub street to the Meyers property to the east (parcel #81608650090) and partially extend the stub street N. Mooney Falls Way provided by the Havasu Creek Subdivision to the south as proposed. 1.1.4 At no point shall the applicant take access off of McMillan Road to serve the proposed subdivision. The existing access points to McMillan Road shall be abandoned by the applicant as proposed, and access shall be taken from the internal public streets. No direct lot access shall be allowed to McMillan Road; place a note prohibiting direct lot access to McMillan Road on the face of the final plat. 1.1.5 All buildings that span across proposed lot lines, or do not conform to the dimensional standards (setbacks, height, etc.) of the UDC shall be removed, relocated or made to conform to city code, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 1.1.6 The existing house that is to remain shall be required to connect to City services, the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of assessments and the actual physical connection to the services. 1.1.7 Provide asix-foot tall fence along the east perimeter of the development, as proposed. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris Exhibit B -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI• EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. 1.1.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Clearsprings Home Owners' Association. 1.1.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, but exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. 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 construction plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 1.1.10 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-054) 1.2.1 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). 1.2.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.2.3 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- 3A-18 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. 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. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, 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 ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.2.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.2.5 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation and conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.2.6 Preliminary 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. Mooney Falls. There is only 5-feet from the centerline of the main to the boundary of the subject property. Public Works requires a minimum of 10-feet of easement past the centerline of pipe. Prior to construction plan approval the applicant shall provide an easement that is sufficient in width to cover the sewer main in N. Mooney Falls. 2.2 The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI~ EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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. 2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Silversprings Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.4 This development is proposing water service to Silversprings Subdivision to the west which has only one water feed. Due to Public Works concern of the growing number of houses on one water connection this development shall be required to have a second water main connection. If it is to mains stubbed in N.Mooney Falls, the applicant shall provide a signed easement prior to construction plan approval. 2.5 The existing house that is to remain shall be required to connect to City services, the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of assessments and the actual physical connection to the services. The payment of assessments shall be required prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer, the actual physical connection shall be accomplished prior to Certificates of Occupancy being issued. 2.6 The easement depicted on the plat, that was created with the Crestwood Subdivision is an irrigation and utility easement. The applicant shall vacate the easement prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. 2.8 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). 2.9 The applicant has indicated Settler will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development. Therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 2.10 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 fmal plat by the City Engineer. 2.11 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.12 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. 2.13 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. 2.14 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from Exhibit B -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.15 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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 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. 2.20 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. 2.21 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.22 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.23 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. 2.24 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. 2.25 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. 2.26 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 Exhibit B -Page 4 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story family dwellings will require a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %2" 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 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. 3.5 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). For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 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 did not submit any comment on this application. 5. Parks Deparament 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company Exhibit B -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 6.1 SSC has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Site Specific Conditions ofAppYOVaI 7.1.1 Construct the site's internal streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, 8-foot planter strips and 5-foot detached concrete sidewalks. All roadway improvements are to be located within the right-of--way (50-feet), with the exception of the detached concrete sidewalk, which should have a public access easement. 7.1.2 Construct a stub street to the east approximately 120-feet north of the south property line as a 36- foot street section with rolled curb, gutter, and a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk. All roadway improvements should be located within the right-of--way with the exception of the detached sidewalk which may be in an easement. This street should be signed as follows: "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7.1.3 Construct a 5-foot concrete sidewalk no closer than 38-feet from the centerline of McMillan Road to match improvements to the west (Silversprings Subdivision). If the sidewalk is located outside of the right-of--way, the applicant should provide a sidewalk easement. 7.1.4 Dedicate either 35-feet or 45-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of McMillan Road abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. A dedication of 35-feet will facilitate roadway improvements noted in the Capital Improvements Plan, leaving the sidewalk within an easement. The 45-foot right-of--way dedication would facilitate all roadway improvements, including sidewalk. 7.1.5 Construct the half street section to the south with matching improvements to those existing in the Havasu Falls Subdivision. Given the fact that the half street pavement width for Moon Falls Way will be less than 24-feet, a connection may not be opened for this section until such time that a full local roadway is constructed. A barricade should be installed at the intersection of Moon Falls Way and E. Copper Ridge Street with signage stating "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7.1.6 Obtain fire department approval to not provide a temporary turnaround at the eastern terminus of E. Copper Ridge Street (stubbing to the property line). 7.7.7 Construct the traditional cul-de-sac turnaround at the terminus of N. Clearsprings Place with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 7.1.8 Any existing driveway access to McMillan Road should be relocated to the internal streets; thereby restricting all access to McMillan Road. A notation of all access restrictions should be made on the final plat. 7.1.9 The applicant should EITHER: • Obtain access from the proposed stub street to the west (extended from Silversprings Subdivision). No access will be allowed to McMillan Road; so the final plat may not be signed until a connection to the noted stub is provided. The applicant should coordinate the timeframe for such a connection with the adjacent property owner/applicant. • OR: Obtain access to the site with a connection to the existing stub street extended north from Havasu Falls (Moon Falls Way). In order to open this connection, the applicant will need to Exhibit B -Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 provide a minimum pavement width of 24-feet (within 40-feet ofright-of--way), which will require acquiring access from the adjacent parcel to the east. This is due to the fact that the stub street from Havasu Falls was originally platted on the property line. Again, no access will be allowed to McMillan Road, so the applicant should coordinate all access/connections with the adjacent property owners. 7.1.10 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. 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 ACRD 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 is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 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 DIGLIlVE (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. 7.2.12 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 Exhibit B -Page 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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. 8. Central District Health Department 8.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this 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. 9. Settlers' Irrigation District 9.1 All irrigation /drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. The facilities involved are the Starkey Lateral (20' easement) and the Parkins-Nourse Lateral (20'easement). Contact SID for additional irrigation requirements. 9.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 9.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.I.D. facilities. 9.4 Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 9.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 9.6 A pressure irrigation system must be provided to all lots with irrigation water. Exhibit B -Page 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN•DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 C. Legal Description Lega! Description Clearsprings Mnexation Boundary A parcel for annexation purposes being located in the N'/z of the NE'/s of Section 31, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a Railroad Spike monument marking the northwest comer of said N '/z of the NE '/e ('/a Corner), from which a Brass Cap monument marking the northeast corner of said Section 31 bears N 89°46'54" E a distance of 2632.45 feet; Thence N 89°46'54" E along the northerly boundary of said N '/z of the NE '/a a distance of 680.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;; Thence continuing N 89°46'54" E along said northerly boundary a distance of 340.33 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 0°06'26" W along the prolongation of and the easterly boundary of Lot 3 of Crestwood Subdivision No. 1 as shown in Book 28 of Plats on Pages 1757- 1758, Records of Ada County, Idaho, a distance of 664.75 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the southeast corner of said Lot 3; Thence S 89°35'05" W along the southerly boundary of said Crestwood Subdivision No. 1 a distance of 34.38 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin; Thence continuing along said southerly boundary S 89°47'33" W a distance of 306.12 feet to a 5/8 inch diameter iron pin marking the southwest comer of said Lot 3; Thence N 0°07'17" E along the westerly boundary and the prolongation thereof of said Lot 3 a distance of 664.81 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 5.20 acres and is subject to any easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC August 28, 2006 Re/ ~ROVAL E~ +rErfCi!AP FC•5UG ~~~^rKs ae=?. LA NO a 11118 O !~ 9TF ~ F SOP 5~ tiroN W NPR ~'~S~aJutians wm xo.~m~„m c~awpq Clearsprings Subdivision Job No. 06-50 Exhibit C -Page I CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 CLEARSPRINGS ANNEXATION BOUNDARY LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 31, T4N, R 1 E, BM, ADA OUNTY, IDAHO. ~~5~~,~~,~ 2006 ~ IW584 GECU1£7!C B£AR/NC Jai _ N 89%1634" E E ARfl6.LAN ROAD ac./zu' ~ ~ n 6B¢]Y 340 JJ' /6/J. h 69~a3~' E POINT ~ ^~-* ^^~ .Na3r G7tESTWOOD SVBDI NyON NO. 7 AREA =.510 AGR£S RT608650060 RE`~i\IvFRQVa.L I 3Y ;'?ICikN PU9LIG I u~.':%: DEFT. O m b O 2 O N 89'3505" E )O?$J' 4N.b7' ....__.~nm 8/.T/' N ~~ OI ~~ 2I O N 8947'33' E 306,71' z9zn' ~'~ gx4a• su ua wcav artr .ve wu , HAVASU CHEEK ST/801V/yON NO. J HAVAST/ GP£EK SUBDIV1yON HO ? .~., ~l ~' _J ..~ ~ 1.,1.,1 ~J-11.. ~~~" Land Surveying and Consulting 23l E 5TH STS7EA MERIDIAN, m 83642 J208J 2862040 3208) 2862557 f~c Mtiwn/.IanGid~ru.b¢ HAVAy/ CREFA' ylBD1V1yON NO 4 0 50 100 200 Exhibit C -Page 2 ! • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9, 2007 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: 1. 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-4. 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. 2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; City Council finds that future development of this property will comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the R-4 zone. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; City Council fmds 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. 4. 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, 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. 5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (iJDC 11-SB-3.E). The R-4 zoning amendment will provide lots that are similar in nature to existing subdivisions in the near vicinity, and transitions well to the existing rural lots in the vicinity. City Council fmds 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, City Council fmds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to R-4 would be in the best interest of the City. 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: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; City Council fmds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 9 2007 adopted Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, and Analysis, Section 10 of the Staff Report. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; City Council fords that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. 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, City Council fmds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. 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.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and City Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. City Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, the Commission 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. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which staff is unaware. Exhibit D -Page 2 • January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Meridian Veterinary Hospital ITEM NO. 5-~ REQUEST Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Meridian V®terinary Hospital - 415 W. Franklin Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See aflached 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 meeHnga shah become property of the CHy of Meridian. ~J • DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this I ~;~"~ day of _~ir~L~cz.~- , Zs>b~l , by and Day Month' ~ Year between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and t~r~,~Ltr.~n ~ r;,~ t ~ hereinafter referred to as "LICENSING DESIGNEE," Ltcenstng Designee Name whose business address is -.-~ ~ ~ ~.,) a ~~t~.n1..1 ~ n ,Meridian, Idaho, $ 31.~~Z- Address ztp Code A. Purpose of Agreement: The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the rights and obligations of CITY and of LICENSING DESIGNEE with reference to LICENSING DESIGNEE'S issuance of dog licenses on CITY'S behalf. By entering into this agreement, both parties seek to: 1) encourage and facilitate the licensing of all dogs within the City of Meridian; and 2) implement the provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(I~. B. Time of Performance: This agreement shall be effective from January 1, ~°~ to December 31, ~~ Yea< C. Designation of authority: CITY hereby authorizes and empowers LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue dog licenses on behalf of CITY in accordance with all applicable provisions of Meridian City Code. D. Responsibilities of LICENSING DESIGNEE: 1. Issuance of dog licenses: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall issue dog licenses only after verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3, including, but not limited to: a. Verification that any dog to be licensed has a valid rabies vaccination in accordance with Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(D). DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 1 OF 7 • b. Verification that the owner of any dog to be licensed is eligible for the license fee sought to be paid, i. e., whether dog to be licensed is neutered or spayed; whether dog owner/user is visually or hearing impaired or disabled; whether dog owner is training such dog as seeing eye, hearing ear, or guide dog; and/or whether replacement license tag will indeed replace validly issued, lost tag. c. Collection of appropriate license fee. 2. Official log: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep an official, monthly, written log of all dog licenses issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE on the form provided herewith entitled, "MONTHLY LOG -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE: [MONTH & YEAR]" (hereinafter "monthly log"). If such form is lost or rendered unusable for any reason whatsoever, LICENSING DESIGNEE must keep a written record including: the serial numbers of the dog license tags provided by CITY for issuance by LICENSING DESIGNEE and shall also contain the following information as to each dog license issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE: a. date of issuance; b. dog license tag serial number; c. amount of license fee collected; d. amount of administrative fee collected; e. name, address, and telephone number of dog owner; f. description of dog to be licensed; g. verification of documentation demonstrating dog owner's compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3; and h. verification of eligibility of dog owner to pay license fee sought to be paid. 3. Administrative fee: CITY hereby authorizes LICENSING DESIGNEE to collect and keep an administrative fee often percent (10%) of the amount of each dog license fee collected on CITY's behalf. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep a record of dog license fees collected and administrative fees retained and shall report same to CITY in its annual report. 4. Monthly submission to City Clerk: At the end of each month during the term of this Agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: a. All dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf; and DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 2 OF 7 • • b. A true and correct copy of the LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly log, completed in full. Such fees and log shall be submitted to the Meridian City Clerk no later than the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the month for which the fees were collected and the monthly log completed. 5. Annual submission to City Clerk: No later than January 15, Zs~ ,LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: Ne"ty~` a. All dog license tags provided by CITY to LICENSING DESIGNEE but unissued by LICENSING DESIGNEE; and b. An annual report, by completing in full the form provided herewith entitled, "ANNUAL REPORT -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE." 6. Remission of discrepancy: If, following the Meridian City Clerk's monthly and/or annual review and accounting of LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, the Meridian City Clerk notifies LICENSING DESIGNEE of a discrepancy in fees collected and data reported by LICENSING DESIGNEE in the log or quantity of unissued tags, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of such discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE'S obligation to remit to CITY funds in an amount corresponding to the number and type of dog licenses issued and the number of unissued dog license tags returned to CITY shall not be excused for any reason, regardless of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S assertion of loss, theft, misplacement, mistake, or mismanagement of fees, tags, and/or data. E. Responsibilities of CITY: 1. Provision of dog license tags: CITY shall provide to LICENSING DESIGNEE ~t ~ ,~ ~~~r dog license tags with the following serial numbers: ~~ 3°1- 3 ~2 , which dog license tags are to be issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE only upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3. 2. Monthly accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's monthly remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on behalf of CITY and the official monthly log kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 3 OF 7 correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's log. In the event of a discrepancy between the log, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. 3. Annual accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE, all official monthly logs kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, unissued dog license tags, and LICENSING DESIGNEE'S annual report, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's logs. In the event of a discrepancy between the logs, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. F. Vicious dog licenses: This Agreement shall not authorize LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue vicious dog licenses on behalf of CITY. G. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and/or losses and expenses caused or incurred by LICENSING DESIGNEE, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and business invitees in the course of implementing the terms of this Agreement, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. H. Independent Contractor: In all matters pertaining to this agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither LICENSING DESIGNEE nor any officer, employee or agent of LICENSING DESIGNEE will be deemed an employee of CITY. The selection and designation of the personnel of CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by CITY. I. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed to CITY as follows: City Clerk, City of Meridian, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, or to LICENSING DESIGNEE as follows: c--1~.~, ~~.r~n ~I~ ~-e r ~ r•,ra.~~ 0 1--~~~~~ ~ , ~u ~-5 ~ ~~c~t..-~~1~.n ~-~I f -c ~.c~ ~ D icensing ignee Name and Address $~j1~~~- DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 4 OF 7 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this pazagraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. J. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall 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 sepazate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. K. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate, subcontract, or sell any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. L. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Services set forth herein, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. M. Reports and Information: 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 covered by this Agreement. N. Audits and Inspections: At any time during business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. O. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. P. Changes: Proposed changes to any portion of this Agreement shall be submitted in writing. The party to whom the change is proposed shall have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the proposed change. Changes which aze mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be incorporated into this Agreement by written amendment signed by both parties. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 5 OF 7 ~ i Q. Termination: 1. Written notice: If, through any cause, LICENSING DESIGNEE, its officers, employees, or agents fails 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 record 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 Meridian City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving LICENSING DESIGNEE at least fifteen (15) calendaz days written notice. LICENSING DESIGNEE may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice to CITY. 2. Remittance to CITY: In the event of any ternination of this Agreement, all finished or documents, data, and reports prepazed by LICENSING DESIGNEE pursuant to Meridian City Code and/or under this Agreement, completed or incomplete, shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY all licensing fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf and all unissued dog license tags. Upon such remittance following termination, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting(s) as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not thereby be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by LICENSING DESIGNEE. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve LICENSING DESIGNEE of its liability to the CITY for damages. R. Construction and severability: 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 Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. S. Entire agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. T. Applicable law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE t~GREEMENT ~ PAGE 6 OF 7 U. Approval required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. LICENSING DESIGNEE Attest: WII.,LIAM G. BERG, ~~ s; ~ Print e CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: TAMMY d ERD, MAYOR ' \``\ll1s1168i1f; Rt f r,~~'~°i r~. _ ~_. _ ~~4`i. .a ~(~J ~~ ~l ~ ~`°~. ~~j ~ ~1 9BBP9 9t~8 f-Z 3-~ ? DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE E~GREEMENT ~ PAGE 7 OF 7 January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Treasure Valley Vet Hospital ITEM NO. ~-F REQUEST Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Treasure Volley Vet Hospital - 2b~ S. Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See aFtached CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: ,~rl MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: i " 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: Maferlals presented at public meetings shall become properly of fhe Clay of Meridian. i DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this ~~~ day of ~ band Day Month ~ y~ y between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, herein er referr~to "CITY," 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and ereinafter referred to as "LICENSING DESIGNEE," ice mg Design Name whose business address is~(~ pE ~j. ~, ~~l f~ ~~ ,Meridian, Idaho, Address Zip e A. Purpose of Agreement: The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the rights and obligations of CITY and of LICENSING DESIGNEE with reference to LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses on CITY's behalf. By entering into this agreement, both parties seek to: 1) encourage and facilitate the licensing of all dogs within the City of Meridian; and 2) implement the provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(Ii). B. Time of Performance: This agreement shall be effective from January 1, ~Z to December 31, ~ .~s year C. Designation of authority: CITY hereby authorizes and empowers LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue dog licenses on behalf of CITY in accordance with all applicable provisions of Meridian City Code. D. Responsibilities of LICENSING DESIGNEE: 1. Issuance of dog licenses: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall issue dog licenses only after verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3, including, but not limited to: a. Verification that any dog to be licensed has a valid rabies vaccination in accordance with Meridian City Code section 6-2-3 (D). DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 1 OF 7 b. Verification that the owner of any dog to be licensed is eligible for the license fee sought to be paid, i.e., whether dog to be licensed is neutered or spayed; whether dog owner/user is visually or hearing impaired or disabled; whether dog owner is training such dog as seeing eye, hearing ear, or guide dog; and/or whether replacement license tag will indeed replace validly issued, lost tag. c. Collection of appropriate license fee. 2. Official log: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep an official, monthly, written log of all dog licenses issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE on the form provided herewith entitled, "MONTHLY LOG -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE: [MONTH & YEAR]" (hereinafter "monthly log"). If such form is lost or rendered unusable for any reason whatsoever, LICENSING DESIGNEE must keep a written record including: the serial numbers of the dog license tags provided by CITY for issuance by LICENSING DESIGNEE and shall also contain the following information as to each dog license issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE: a. date of issuance; b. dog license tag serial number; c. amount of license fee collected; d. amount of administrative fee collected; e. name, address, and telephone number of dog owner; f. description of dog to be licensed; g. verification of documentation demonstrating dog owner's compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3; and h. verification of eligibility of dog owner to pay license fee sought to be paid. 3. Administrative fee: CITY hereby authorizes LICENSING DESIGNEE to collect and keep an administrative fee often percent (10%) of the amount of each dog license fee collected on CITY's behalf. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep a record of dog license fees collected and administrative fees retained and shall report same to CITY in its annual report. 4. Monthly submission to City Clerk: At the end of each month during the term of this Agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: a. All dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf; and DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 2 OF 7 b. A true and correct copy of the LICENSING DESIGNEE's monthly log, completed in full. Such fees and log shall be submitted to the Meridian City Clerk no later than the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the month for which the fees were collected and the monthly log completed. 5. Annual submission to City Clerk: No later than January 15, ~o~, ,LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: Next year a. All dog license tags provided by CITY to LICENSING DESIGNEE but unissued by LICENSING DESIGNEE; and b. An annual report, by completing in full the form provided herewith entitled, "ANNUAL REPORT -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE." 6. Remission of discrepancy: If, following the Meridian City Clerk's monthly and/or annual review and accounting of LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, the Meridian City Clerk notifies LICENSING DESIGNEE of a discrepancy in fees collected and data reported by LICENSING DESIGNEE in the log or quantity of unissued tags, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of such discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE's obligation to remit to CITY funds in an amount corresponding to the number and type of dog licenses issued and the number of unissued dog license tags returned to CITY shall not be excused for any reason, regardless of LICENSING DESIGNEE's assertion of loss, theft, misplacement, mistake, or mismanagement of fees, tags, and/or data. E. Responsibilities of CITY: 1. Provision of dog license tags: CITY shall provide to LICENSING DESIGNEE 21 l..p ~~ri dog license tags with the following serial numbers: .L-p'~ (~ - c.~ c~ , which dog license tags are to be issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE only upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3. 2. Monthly accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on behalf of CITY and the official monthly log kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 3 OF 7 ~ i correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's log. In the event of a discrepancy between the log, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. 3. Annual accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE, all official monthly logs kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, unissued dog license tags, and LICENSING DESIGNEE's annual report, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's logs. In the event of a discrepancy between the logs, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. F. Vicious dog licenses: This Agreement shall not authorize LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue vicious dog licenses on behalf of CITY. G. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and/or losses and expenses caused or incurred by LICENSING DESIGNEE, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and business invitees in the course of implementing the terms of this Agreement, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. H. Independent Contractor: In all matters pertaining to this agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither LICENSING DESIGNEE nor any officer, employee or agent of LICENSING DESIGNEE will be deemed an employee of CITY. The selection and designation of the personnel of CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by CITY. I. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed to CITY as follows: City Clerk, City of Meridian, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, or to LICENSING DESIGNEE as follows: _~1,~i°n~I ~ ~ ~ ~(r~.~~t o. ~ '~-e ~- 1-1~~~; ~~J Z~ ~cY~, ~ ~r~1 ~ s-~1 ~ r~~ ~ ~ . L~censmg D ghee Name and Address ~~.cl~,-,, tt~ ~3L~~tZ DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 4 OF 7 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. J. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall 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 sepazate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. K. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate, subcontract, or sell any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. L. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Services set forth herein, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. M. Reports and Information: 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 covered by this Agreement. N. Audits and Inspections: At any time during business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. O. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and flocal governments. P. Changes: Proposed changes to any portion of this Agreement shall be submitted in writing. The party to whom the change is proposed shall have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the proposed change. Changes which aze mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be incorporated into this Agreement by written amendment signed by both parties. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 5 OF 7 Q. Termination: 1. Written notice: If, through any cause, LICENSING DESIGNEE, its officers, employees, or agents fails 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 record 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 Meridian City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving LICENSING DESIGNEE at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice. LICENSING DESIGNEE may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice to CITY. 2. Remittance to CITY: In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all finished or documents, data, and reports prepared by LICENSING DESIGNEE pursuant to Meridian City Code and/or under this Agreement, completed or incomplete, shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY all licensing fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf and all unissued dog license tags. Upon such remittance following termination, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting(s) as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not thereby be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by LICENSING DESIGNEE. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve LICENSING DESIGNEE of its liability to the CITY for damages. R. Construction and severability: 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 Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. S. Entire agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. T. Applicable law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 6 OF 7 • U. Approval required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: I.~~i'~" \, 4 z 4T t t,.~IMY de ERD, MAYOR Attest: ~' ~~~ ~~~~ ~~'°~ ~ ~~ ~ [.A Gr~yL. Gc.~ l ~ Z ~ - 0 7 a°;~ x~ ~, -~~ •.r~ WII.,LIAM G. BERG, JR CITY ~ ~ pL ~=' d" 1~ ~"~ t. ~~`<<litttl 441l1t\\~~' DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 7 OF 7 LICENSING DESIGNEE January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Pefi Care Clinic ITEM NO. 5-G REQUEST Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Pet Care Clinic - 1151 E. Fairview Avenue AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See attached CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: _ / MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ~ r9 ~/ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: "~ SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: 1DAH0 POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emaiied: Staff Initials: Matedgls presented aF public meetin8s shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. • • DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this i CF ~~ day of (~,,~ , ~~ by and Day Month Year between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of ,,Is~aho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and -f' ~- n ~'~ (' ~. ~ ~~ ,hereinafter referred to as "LICENSING DESIGNEE," Licensing Designee Name whose business address is ) 05 1 ~ Fr~~ rv i,e~ A~r~ ,Meridian, Idaho, ~ (~ ~ Z4 Address Zip Code A. Purpose of Agreement: The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the rights and obligations of CITY and of LICENSING DESIGNEE with reference to LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses on CITY's behalf. By entering into this agreement, both parties seek to: 1) encourage and facilitate the licensing of all dogs within the City of Meridian; and 2) implement the provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(II). B. Time of Performance: This agreement shall be effective from January 1, ~_ to December 31, Z~~~~7 Yom' Year C. Designation of authority: CITY hereby authorizes and empowers LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue dog licenses on behalf of CITY in accordance with all applicable provisions of Meridian City Code. D. Responsibilities of LICENSING DESIGNEE: 1. Issuance of dog licenses: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall issue dog licenses only after verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3, including, but not limited to: a. Verification that any dog to be licensed has a valid rabies vaccination in accordance with Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(D). DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 1 OF 7 • b. Verification that the owner of any dog to be licensed is eligible for the license fee sought to be paid, i.e., whether dog to be licensed is neutered or spayed; whether dog owner/user is visually or hearing impaired or disabled; whether dog owner is training such dog as seeing eye, hearing ear, or guide dog; and/or whether replacement license tag will indeed replace validly issued, lost tag. c. Collection of appropriate license fee. 2. Official log: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep an official, monthly, written log of all dog licenses issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE on the form provided herewith entitled, "MONTHLY LOG -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE: [MONTH & YEAR]" (hereinafter "monthly log"). If such form is lost or rendered unusable for any reason whatsoever, LICENSING DESIGNEE must keep a written record including: the serial numbers of the dog license tags provided by CITY for issuance by LICENSING DESIGNEE and shall also contain the following information as to each dog license issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE: a. date of issuance; b. dog license tag serial number; c. amount of license fee collected; d. amount of administrative fee collected; e. name, address, and telephone number of dog owner; f. description of dog to be licensed; g. verification of documentation demonstrating dog owner's compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3; and h. verification of eligibility of dog owner to pay license fee sought to be paid. 3. Administrative fee: CITY hereby authorizes LICENSING DESIGNEE to collect and keep an administrative fee often percent (10%) of the amount of each dog license fee collected on CITY's behalf. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep a record of dog license fees collected and administrative fees retained and shall report same to CITY in its annual report. 4. Monthly submission to City Clerk: At the end of each month during the term of this Agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: a. All dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf; and DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE ~IGREEMENT ~ PAGE 2 OF 7 b. A true and correct copy of the LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly log, completed in full. Such fees and log shall be submitted to the Meridian City Clerk no later than the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the month for which the fees were collected and the monthly log completed. 5. Annual submission to City Clerk: No later than January 15, Z_eA8 ,LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: x~ y~ a. All dog license tags provided by CITY to LICENSING DESIGNEE but unissued by LICENSING DESIGNEE; and b. An annual report, by completing in full the form provided herewith entitled, "ANNUAL REPORT -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE." 6. Remission of discrepancy: If, following the Meridian City Clerk's monthly and/or annual review and accounting of LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, the Meridian City Clerk notifies LICENSING DESIGNEE of a discrepancy in fees collected and data reported by LICENSING DESIGNEE in the log or quantity of unissued tags, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of such discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE's obligation to remit to CITY funds in an amount corresponding to the number and type of dog licenses issued and the number of unissued dog license tags returned to CITY shall not be excused for any reason, regardless of LICENSING DESIGNEE's assertion of loss, theft, misplacement, mistake, or mismanagement of fees, tags, and/or data. E. Responsibilities of CITY: 1. Provision of dog license tags: CITY shall provide to LICENSING DESIGNEE Z~ l.a ~ttty dog license tags with the following serial numbers: 3 ~ Zt - 3~0 31.E , which dog license tags are to be issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE only upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3. 2. Monthly accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on behalf of CITY and the official monthly log kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 3 OF 7 correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's log. In the event of a discrepancy between the log, fees remitted, andlor unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. 3. Annual accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE, all official monthly logs kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, unissued dog license tags, and LICENSING DESIGNEE's annual report, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's logs. In the event of a discrepancy between the logs, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. F. Vicious dog licenses: This Agreement shall not authorize LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue vicious dog licenses on behalf of CITY. G. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and/or losses and expenses caused or incurred by LICENSING DESIGNEE, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and business invitees in the course of implementing the terms of this Agreement, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. H. Independent Contractor: In all matters pertaining to this agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither LICENSING DESIGNEE nor any officer, employee or agent of LICENSING DESIGNEE will be deemed an employee of CITY. The selection and designation of the personnel of CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by CITY. I. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed to CITY as follows: City Clerk, City of Meridian, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, or to LICENSING DESIGNEE as follows: DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 4 OF 7 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. J. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing parry shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as maybe 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. K. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate, subcontract, or sell any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. L. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Services set forth herein, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. M. Reports and Information: 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 covered by this Agreement. N. Audits and Inspections: At any time during business hours and a.s often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. O. Compliance with ]Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. P. Changes: Proposed changes to any portion of this Agreement shall be submitted in writing. The party to whom the change is proposed shall have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the proposed change. Changes which are mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be incorporated into this Agreement by written amendment signed by both parties. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE E~GREEMENT ~ PAGE S OF ~ • i Q. Termination: 1. Written notice: If, through any cause, LICENSING DESIGNEE, its officers, employees, or agents fails 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 record 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 Meridian City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving LICENSING DESIGNEE at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice. LICENSING DESIGNEE may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice to CITY. 2. Remittance to CITY: In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all finished or documents, data, and reports prepared by LICENSING DESIGNEE pursuant to Meridian City Code and/or under this Agreement, completed or incomplete, shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY all licensing fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf and all unissued dog license tags. Upon such remittance following termination, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting(s) a.s set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not thereby be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by LICENSING DESIGNEE. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve LICENSING DESIGNEE of its liability to the CITY for damages. R. Construction and severability: 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 Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. S. Entire agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. T. Applicable law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 6 OF 7 • U. Approval required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. LICENSING DESIGNEE CITY OF MERIDIAN Attest: WII.,LIAM G. BERG, e`~,~,, ~, ~ ~ ~T~y de RD, MAYOR r, ~~~~ = as gym. ~~~ `` i~ ~ ~'9~~ 1e~ 0. ~4 /~ ,e~y4 a ',0o'of~~P191P > as a ~t naaeaa ~~Z3-D7 DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 7 OF 7 ~ ~ January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Idaho Humane Society ITEM NO. 5-H REQUEST Approve Dog Licensing Designee Agreement with Idaho Humane Society - 4775 Dorman, Boise AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See attached CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: „~t/ _ CITY PARKS DEPT: VV 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 pubNc meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. i C DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this I~ day of ~° 71jp`~ by and DaY oath y~ ' between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter refe red to ~s "CITY," 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and ~~~~ I--~t~.a~tr.~ ~~ 10~- ,hereinafter referred to as "LICENSING DESIGNEE," Licensing Designee Name ~- ~~/ ~ C~72~~ ~~' i ~~ ~ ~~ whose business address is '~ 5 M~rdiran, Idaho, BLS. Address Zip Code A. Purpose of Agreeffient: The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the rights and obligations of CITY and of LICENSING DESIGNEE with reference to LICENSING DESIGNEE's issuance of dog licenses on CITY's behalf. By entering into this agreement, both parties seek to: 1) encourage and facilitate the licensing of all dogs within the City of Meridian; and 2) implement the provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(I~. B. Time of Performance: This agreement shall be effective from January 1, to December 31, 2~p`~ . Y~r Year C. Designation of authority: CITY hereby authorizes and empowers LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue dog licenses on behalf of CITY in accordance with all applicable provisions of Meridian City Code. D. Responsibilities of l[:ICENSING DESIGNEE: 1. Issuance of dog licenses: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall issue dog licenses only after verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3, including, but not limited to: a_ Verification that any dog to be licensed has a valid rabies vaccination in accordance with Meridian City Code section 6-2-3(D). DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 1 OF 7 b. Verification that the owner of any dog to be licensed is eligible for the license fee sought to be paid, i.e., whether dog to be licensed is neutered or spayed; whether dog owner/user is visually or hearing impaired or disabled; whether dog owner is training such dog as seeing eye, hearing ear, or guide dog; and/or whether replacement license tag will indeed replace validly issued, lost tag. c. Collection of appropriate license fee. 2. Official log: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep an official, monthly, written log of all dog licenses issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE on the form provided herewith entitled, "MONTHLY LOG -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE: [MONTH & YEAR]" (hereinafter "monthly log"). If such form is lost or rendered unusable for any reason whatsoever, LICENSING DESIGNEE must keep a written record including: the serial numbers of the dog license tags provided by CITY for issuance by LICENSING DESIGNEE and shall also contain the following information as to each dog license issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE: a. date of issuance; b. dog license tag serial number; c. amount of license fee collected; d. amount of administrative fee collected; e. name, address, and telephone number of dog owner; f. description of dog to be licensed; g. verification of documentation demonstrating dog owner's compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3; and h. verification of eligibility of dog owner to pay license fee sought to be paid. 3. Administrative fee: CITY hereby authorizes LICENSING DESIGNEE to collect and keep an administrative fee often percent (10%) of the amount of each dog license fee collected on CITY's behalf. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall keep a record of dog license fees collected and administrative fees retained and shall report same to CITY in its annual report. 4. Monthly submission to City Clerk: At the end of each month during the term of this Agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: a. All dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf; and DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 2 OF 7 A ~ b. A true and correct copy of the LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly log, completed in full. Such fees and log shall be submitted to the Meridian City Clerk no later than the fifteenth (15th) day of the month following the month for which the fees were collected and the monthly log completed. 5. Annual submission to City Clerk: No later than January 15, 7~~ ,LICENSING DESIGNEE shall submit to the Meridian City Clerk: Next year a. All dog license tags provided by CITY to LICENSING DESIGNEE but unissued by LICENSING DESIGNEE; and b. An annual report, by completing in full the form provided herewith entitled, "ANNUAL REPORT -DOG LICENSES ISSUED BY LICENSING DESIGNEE." 6. Remission of discrepancy: If, following the Meridian City Clerk's monthly and/or annual review and accounting of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S issuance of dog licenses as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, the Meridian City Clerk notifies LICENSING DESIGNEE of a discrepancy in fees collected and data reported by LICENSING DESIGNEE in the log or quantity of unissued tags, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of such discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE's obligation to remit to CITY funds in an amount corresponding to the number and type of dog licenses issued and the number of unissued dog license tags returned to CITY shall not be excused for any reason, regardless of LICENSING DESIGNEE's assertion of loss, theft, misplacement, mistake, or mismanagement of fees, tags, and/or data. E. Responsibilities of CITY: 1. Provision of dog license tags: CITY shall provide to LICENSING DESIGNEE ~ I C.v 158~~ l 7 C.g ~ ~°h~' dog license tags with the following serial numbers: 3~,~3 -- ~-(p ~~ , which dog license tags are to be issued by LICENSING DESIGNEE only upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's verification of compliance with all provisions of Meridian City Code section 6-2-3. 2. Monthly accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE'S monthly remittance to the Meridian City- Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on behalf of CITY and the official monthly log kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 3 OF 7 correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's log. In the event of a discrepancy between the log, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. 3. Annual accounting: Upon LICENSING DESIGNEE's remittance to the Meridian City Clerk of all dog license fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE, all official monthly logs kept by LICENSING DESIGNEE, unissued dog license tags, and LICENSING DESIGNEE's annual report, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting to determine that the fees remitted correspond to the number and type of dog license tags issued by the designee according to the designee's logs. In the event of a discrepancy between the logs, fees remitted, and/or unissued tags, the Meridian City Clerk shall notify LICENSING DESIGNEE in writing and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. F. Vicious dog licenses: This Agreement shall not authorize LICENSING DESIGNEE to issue vicious dog licenses on behalf of CITY. G. Indemnification and Hold Harmless: LICENSING DESIGNEE shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and/or losses and expenses caused or incurred by LICENSING DESIGNEE, its servants, agents, employees, guests, and business invitees in the course of implementing the terms of this Agreement, and not caused by or arising out of the tortious conduct of CITY or its employees. H. Independent Contractor: In all matters pertaining to this agreement, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be acting as an independent contractor, and neither LICENSING DESIGNEE nor any officer, employee or agent of LICENSING DESIGNEE will be deemed an employee of CITY. The selection and designation of the personnel of CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by CITY. I. Notices: Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed in the United States mail, cerkified, return receipt requested, addressed to CITY as follows: City Clerk, City of Meridian, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, or to LICENSING~ESIG~ follows: r, 0 n l~ ~ ~ •., ~~%~ DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 4 OF 7 Either party may change its address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. J. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as maybe 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. K. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate, subcontract, or sell any of its rights or responsibilities under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. L. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Services set forth herein, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. M. Reports and Information: 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 covered by this Agreement. N. Audits and Inspections: At any time during business hours and as often as the CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the CITY for examination all of LICENSING DESIGNEE'S records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. O. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, LICENSING DESIGNEE shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. P. Changes: Proposed changes to any portion of this Agreement shall be submitted in writing. The party to whom the change is proposed shall have thirty (30) days to accept or reject the proposed change. Changes which aze mutually agreed upon by and between the CITY and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall be incorporated into this Agreement by written amendment signed by both parties. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 5 OF 7 Q. Termination: 1. Written notice: If, through any cause, LICENSING DESIGNEE, its officers, employees, or agents fails 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 record 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 Meridian City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, the CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving LICENSING DESIGNEE at least fifteen (15) calendaz days written notice. LICENSING DESIGNEE may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least fifteen (15) calendar days written notice to CITY. 2. Remittance to CITY: In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all fmished or documents, data, and reports prepazed by LICENSING DESIGNEE pursuant to Meridian City Code and/or under this Agreement, completed or incomplete, shall, at the option of the CITY, become its property, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY all licensing fees collected by LICENSING DESIGNEE on CITY's behalf and all unissued dog license tags. Upon such remittance following termination, the Meridian City Clerk shall conduct an accounting(s) as set forth in sections E(2) and E(3) of this Agreement, and LICENSING DESIGNEE shall remit to CITY funds in the amount of the discrepancy. LICENSING DESIGNEE shall not thereby be relieved of liability to the CITY for damages sustained by the CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by LICENSING DESIGNEE. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement and shall not relieve LICENSING DESIGNEE of its liability to the CITY for damages. R. Construction and severability: 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 Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. S. Entire agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral or written, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. T. Applicable law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho, and the ordinances of the City of Meridian. DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 6 OF 7 U. Approval required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. LICENSING DESIGNEE signature BY: ~ eel~y~h ~' ~1,'~s Print Name CITY OF MERIDIAN ,~~`~~~~~ h Y de RD, MAYOR .` Attest: ~ ~ ~ rv~ ~~ C~~ L~tiGc.~i ~ 23-0 7 =_ ~~~ _ i~ ~ ~~~ ®_ WII.,LIAM G. BERG, JR., I ~r ~ ~~ • ~ 0~a ®•' i~ /'s//'~~j///Il t /t 10 I111t11~4~~~t~~o DOG LICENSING DESIGNEE AGREEMENT ~ PAGE 7 OF 7 i ~ January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Rosario Pierce Limited Partnership ITEM NO. 5-I REQUEST Access Easement between the City of Meridian (Grantorjand Rosario Place Limited Partnership (Grantee] for Vehicle and Equipment Access to Grantee's Storage Yard AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See altoched 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 pubac meetinss shall become property of the City of Meridian. • . City of Meridian Public Wot~ics Dept Memo Ta Mayor De UVeerci ~ Ciiy Council From Kane Glenn CC: File t4iate: 1/182007 Re; Proposed Agenda Items for 123/07 City Councl Meeting -- a ~c o Depar'tmerrt res y requests that the following items be places on the -- 1/23l07 Cdy Councl agenda, pn the Consent agenda, for Council's oonsideratiai: 1) Access Easement between the City of Meridian tGrantor) and Rosario Place Limited Partnership (Grantee) for Vehicle an Equipment Aa~ss to Grantee's Stora a Yard. Corrected easement t2ecommended Councit action: Approve the corrected easemen as P~~d. This easement was previously approved by Council on January 9, 2x07. At that time, tits document did not have the correct owner ir~fonnation as authorized signer. Thank you for your consideration. • Page 1 • • RECORDING REQUESTED BYAND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: (Space Above For Recorder's Use) ACCESS EASEMENT This Access Easement is made effective this day of , 2007, by and between the City. of Meridian ("Grantor"), and Rosario Place Limited Partnership. ("Grantee"). The Grantor and Grantee may be collectively referred to as the parties. - _ RECITALS: WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of that certain property located at 1100 N. Hickory Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, Parcel #S 1108131213 ("Grantor's Property"); WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of that certain property located at 1097 N. Rosario Street, Meridian, Idaho, Parcel #83073780500 ("Grantee's Property"); WHEREAS, Grantor desires to grant and Grantee desires to receive an easement for ingress and egress across a portion of the Grantor's property as described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B under the terms and conditions outlined hereafter-~ AGREEMENT: NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable .consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which aze hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Grant. Grantor hereby grants anon-exclusive perpetual access easement over,.on, across, and through the Grantor's Property for ingress and egress in the location legally described in Exhibit A and generally as depicted on Exhibit B ("Easement"). 2. Purpose of Easement. The Easement shall be used for vehicle and equipment ingress. and egress to Grantee's storage yard by Grantee and its respective employees, representatives, and agents. No pazking of any vehicles shall be permitted on the Easement. 3. Binding on Successors. This Easement and the vacation of any previously existing easements shall be recorded in the official records of Ada County, Idaho, and shall be ACCESS EASEMENT Page 1 of 4 • binding on the heirs, successors, administrators, executors and assigns of all parties hereto and shall run with the land. 4. Counterparts. This Easement may be executed in counterparts, each part being considered an original document, all parts being but one document. 5. Indemnification. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the other party, and their successors, assigns, and agents harmless from any and all claims, liability, losses, costs, charges, or expense that arise from their respective use or use by their respective customers, agents, invitees, or representatives of the Easement. 6. Remedies. In the event of a breach hereunder by any parry, the non-breaching party shall have all remedies available at law or in equity, including the availability of injunctive relief. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this Easement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs incurred therein, including reasonable attorneys' fees and disbursements. 7. Easement Obstructions. No fence or other barrier shall be erected or permitted within or across the Easement which would prevent or obstruct the passage of pedestrian or vehicular travel; provided,, however, that the foregoing shall not prohibit (i) the temporary erection of barricades which are reasonably necessary for security and/or safety purposes in connection wi a construction, recons con, repair and main nance o irmpro~ements-in~ludingth~ ------ Easement, on the Grantor's Property, it being agreed by the parties however, that all such work shall be conducted in the most expeditious manner reasonably possible to minimize the interference with the use of the Easement by Grantor, and such work shall be diligently prosecuted to completion, or (ii) the construction of limited curbing or other forms of traffic controls along the outer perimeter of the Easement. Grantor reserves the right to close off the Easement for such reasonable period of time as may be legally necessary to prevent the acquisition of prescriptive rights :.by anyone; provided, however, that prior to • taking such action, Grantor shall give written notice to Grantee of its intention to do so, and to the extent reasonably possible, • the parties shall coordinate such closing so that the interruption in the use and enjoyment of the Easement is kept to a minimum. S. Notices. All notices, demands and requests required or desired to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given as of the.date such writing is (i) delivered to the party intended, (ii) delivered to the then current address .of the .party intended, or {iii) rejected at the then current address of the parry intended, provided sach writing was sent prepaid. The initial address of the signatories hereto is: Grantee: Rosario Place Limited Partnership 1097 N. Rosario Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Grantor: City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ACCESS EASEMENT Page 2 of 4 • Upon at least ten (10) days' prior written notice, each party shall have the right to change its address to any other address within the United States of America. 9e Dedications. Grantor excepts and reserves unto itself, its successors and assigns, the right to dedicate the Easement as a public street or drive at any time at its sole election. Upon any. such dedication all private rights of Grantee therein shall automatically terminate and expire. Until and unless an express dedication is made of the Easement, no use hereunder shall be deemed to constitute the Easement as a public way or a quasi-public way, but to the contrary the Easement shall constitute and remain a private way and drive. No dedication shall, however, be made of the Easement unless: A. Such Easement is accepted by the public entity for maintenance as a public street or drive; and B. The dedication does not preclude or prevent the continued use by Grantee of the entrance to and exit from the Easement then being used incident to the Grantee's Property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this Easement to be executed the day and year first written above. GRANTOR: By: Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., Ciry Clerk Approved By City Council: GRANTEE: By Jerry S. Frank ACCESS EASEMENT Page 3 of 4 STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County oaf Ada ) On this ,day of , in the yeaz 2007, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally TAMMY DE WEERD and WII.LIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respeEtively, 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 yeaz first above written. Notary Public for the State of Idaho Residing at: My commission expires: STATE OF IDAHO ) County of Ada On this i'1 } ,day of .~~~+var~, in the year 2007, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared 'Scrr~.L S . ~r4rx., known or identified to me to be~er,e,ra 1 ~r~-ln~.Y- of Rosario Place Limited Partnership, an Idaho corporation,. that executed the instrument or the person who executed the instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and yeaz first above written. ®E~~€~ ~®l~SKi ~®1°~F3Y ~U~LIC STAGE ®~ ~®AFE® ACCESS EASEMENT ~_ ~~~q. Notary Public for the State of Idaho Residing at: 'FYI ~ ~- a.1e,~ an , z~. My commission expires: 1- -5-2~ ~ 2 Page 4 of 4 r Sep. 1. ~pQ6 5;33PM~Tealey"s Landsurveying TEALEY'S LAND SURVE'Y'I.NC E.XIIIBIT A Project. No.: 2983 Date: Septemb®r 1, 2006 No:1587 P. 2 2501 Bogus Basin Rd. • Boise, Idaho 83702 (2os) 3s~-o~6 FaX (208) 38~-0696 DESCRI,PTIO(~ FOR - PETRA,INC, - AC~GfSS EASEMENT Nort-n Q~®1'4t~" East 100 feet to a Poin~f~- - - - - - Soutlt 89~°~'15" East 374.73 feet tv a point; thence Nertl't 4I~°24'4" Eas1t Z8.2~8 feet to a paimt; titenc~ SQUth ®3~ iS" East 4~O:Qtt feet to a poia~ thence South 00®Z~F'45" 1/1(~est 36.00 feet to the POINT ~I= BI=G- tl+iftt111~fP. ,; An access easement Ding in the NE 1/4 of Section 8, T.3t~., R.1 E., B.M., Meridian, Ada ~vUn#y, Idaho and more pa~o~larly described as follows; - BECiN~N~I~ art t~'te Northeast comer of Lot ~ ~oi' Bloctc 2 of Gemtarae Cent~c No. 2, a swbdnrisi@'n, as ftiec~ ft~r recd in the offcd of tfi~e Ada Coutat~ l~ecordeF, Boise, Ictah© in Book 74 c~ Plats of page7fi64; thence alc3ng the 1Varth t~undary of said Lot S anal tf~e Noi#h bevia ,' ~'Y of Lot f~ of Blot~c 2 of G+emtone Cen#er Nb. 2 - Nt~r#h 8J~°35'1~`' Vest 434 6Z feet to a point an the East right-af--way line of Norfl~ Hlc~ory Avenue .mark-ing _ tyre Norlfivvest comer oI said Lot 6; theric~a alnng =said East f~a~ Fine w~uc-~n~.a~~;a~ i ~• EXHIBIT B . ~ - _. . ~ ~ - ~. 8 ~~ ~' • 1 r r o _ '~ y y !Q1 6 ~ 'p V .. .w y j = a i ~ L .~ Q 7~ -- -- - -_ _. _ _ ----_ _ - ai ~ - - ------T---~- _ -- & ~ ~~ ~ i ~ ~~ , g • a f ~ ~~ ' y I a = ~~ ~ 1 _B { ~ ~'¢ ~ 6 • ~ ~ - - i '~-- _~~ i -"~ I ,. ~ -Gj1 ~~y . -- Y__ y_a a • T ~. ~. _ ,~,~ _ ~_ ..~_ ~ kOS~ap SFR~7 ~ ~ ~ ° ~ 8 r '~ ~ `~ ~ ~ A H €~~ ~3 H g nr}~' ~ lJ _ ~$12 ~m~ ~~ 6~ z • a' €'Z y r mo o-~. c ~N c • ~3EMEN1' E%8BT FOR - $ PETRA INC. TEALEY'S LAND SURVFYINp .. LcTS f um S BLaa(2 aLtp¢ a'ttitT M0. p.~•~~y . ~' LMC M TE ce'/` ~N7Y. mu1DR~ ~' ~"w m,~~ M . r "0~ ~,nan. saae ~" xa: zem ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 6 BOISE IDAHO 02101!07 01:43 PM + + + + I RECORDED REQUEST OF ~~~ ~~~I~~IIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi II ~~~ RECORDING REQUESTED BYAND Meridian Cite i ~7~ i SSf,~ WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: - .___. (Space Above For Recorder's Use) ACCESS EASEMENT This Access Easement is made effective this, day of , 20(}7, by and between the City of Meridian ("Grantor"), and Rosario Place 'ted P ership. ("Grantee"). The Grantor and Grantee may be collectively referred to as the parties. RECITALS: WI~REAS, Grantor is the owner of that certain property located at 1100 N. Hickory Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, Parcel #S 1108131213 ("Grantor's Property"); WHEREAS, Grantee is the owner of that certain property located at 1097 N. Rosario Street, Meridian, Idaho, Parcel #83073780500 ("Grantee's Property"); WHEREAS, Grantor desires to grant and Grantee desires to receive an easement for ingress and egress across a portion of the Grantor's property as described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B under the terms and conditions outlined hereafter. AGREEMENT: NOW, THEREFORE, far good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Grant. Grantor hereby grants anon-exclusive perpetual access easement over, on, across, and through the Grantor's Property for ingress and egress in the location legally described in Exhibit A and generally as depicted on Exhibit B ("Easement"). 2. Purpose of Easement. The Easement shall be used for vehicle and equipment ingress and egress to Grantee's storage yazd by Grantee and its respective employees, representatives, and agents. No pazking of any vehicles shall be permitted on the Easement. 3. Binding on Successors. This Easement and the vacation of any previously existing easements shall be recorded in the official records of Ada County, Idaho, and shall be ACCESS EASEMENT Page 1 of 4 binding on the heirs, successors, administrators, executors and assigns of all parties hereto and shall run with the land. 4. Counterparts. This Easement may be executed in counterparts, each part being considered an original document, all parts being but one document. 5. Indemnification. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the other party, and their successors, assigns, and agents harmless from any and all claims, liability, losses, costs, charges, or expense that arise from their respective use or use by their respective customers, agents, invitees, or representatives of the Easement. 6. Remedies. In the event of a breach hereunder by any party, the non-breaching party shall have all remedies available at law or in equity, including the availability of injunctive relief. In any suit, action or appeal therefrom to enforce or interpret this Easement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs incurred therein, includvng reasonable attorneys' fees and disbursements. 7. Easement Obstuuctions. No fence or other barrier shall be erected or permitted within or across the Easement which would prevent or obstruct the passage of pedestrian or vehicular travel; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not prohibit (i) the temporary erection of barricades which are reasonably necessary for security and/or safety purposes in connection with the construction, reconstruction, repair and maintenance of improvements, including the Easement, on the Grantor's Property, it being agreed by the parties however, that all such work shall be conducted in the most expeditious manner reasonably possible to minimize the interference with the use of the Easement by Grantor, and such work shall be diligently prosecuted to completion, or (ii) the construction of limited curbing or other forms of traffic controls along the outer perimeter of the Easement. Grantor reserves the right to close off the Easement for such reasonable period of time as may be legally necessary to prevent the acquisition of prescriptive rights by anyone; provided, however, that prior to taking such action, Grantor shall give written notice to Grantee of its intention to do so, and to the extent reasonably possible, • the parties shall coordinate such closing so that the interruption in the use and enjoyment of the Easement is kept to a minimum. 8. Notices. All notices, demands and requests required or desired to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given as of the date such writing is (i) delivered to the party intended, (ii) delivered to the then current address of the party intended, or (iii) rejected at the then current address of the party intended, provided such writing was sent prepaid. The initial address of the signatories hereto is: Grantee: Rosario Place Limited Partnership 1097 N. Rosario Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Grantor: City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ACCESS EASEMEN'T' Page 2 of 4 Upon at least ten (10) days' prior written notice, each party shall have the right to change its address to any other address within the United States of America. 9, Dedlcatlons. Grantor excepts and reserves unto itself, its successors and assigns, the right to dedicate the Easement as a public street or drive at any time at its sole election. Upon any such dedication all private rights, of Grantee therein shall automatically terminate and expire. Until and unless an express dedication is made of the Easement, no use hereunder shall be deemed to constitute the Easement as a public way or aquasi-public way, but to the contrary the Easement shhall constitute and remain a private way and drive. No dedication shall, however, be made of the Easement unless: A. Such Easement is accepted by the public entity for maintenance as a public street or drive; and B. T`he dedication does not preclude or prevent the continued use by Grantee of the entrance to and exit from the Easement then being used incident to the Grantee's Property. IN WI'1'NF.SS WHL'REOF, the undersigned have caused this Easement to be executed the day and year first written above. GRANTOR: f' By: -., . ~ ~ .- .~, _ Tammy d W d, Mayo ~~~' ~ •~ _ as<.._~::~ - Attest: '~''~'G"', `' William G. Berg, Jr., Ci ~,~C ~ ~T ~ ~.~ , '` ~~*~` Approved By City Council: IlI ~i q~ttN ~ GRANTEE: ACCESS EASEMENT Page 3 of 4 STATE OF IDAHO ) } ss. County of Ada ) r~ On this ~,"day of ~~' , in the year 20(?7, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally AMMY DE WEERD anal 'WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., 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 first above written. Notary Public for the S to of I~ Residing at• ~ ~h~c. My commission expires: /~' J i S= l l STATE OF IDA1-iw County of Ada } S5. } On this i "I } ,day of =5.~. in the year 2007, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Idaho, personally appeared r S . ~'r4.,x. known or identified to me to beC~-~~••eYu \ ~r"~y+e.~- of Rosario Place Limited Partnership, an Idaho cormsration, that executed the instrument or the person who executed the instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. 4• Notary Public for the State of Idaho Residing at:~ ~ a ~Q.~ ~ *+ . ~~. My commission expires: ~ r ~ "~ ~ ~' DEBBIE GORSKi NOTARY RUBLIC STATE OF IDAHO ACCESS EASEMENT Page 4 of 4 Sep. i. 2006 5: ~3PM Teal ey's Landsu rvey i ng No: i 5B7 P. 2 TEALEY°S LAIVD_ 2501 Bogus t3asin Rd. • Boise, id~ha 83702 SURVEYIIVC (zos) 3e5-o~6 Fax (208) 385-066 EXHIBIT A - ProJeGt. Na.: 2993 Date: September 1, 2006 DESCRIPTIOAI FUR l~ETRA, INC. - ACCESS EASEMENT ' An access easement lying in the N~ 1/4 of Section 8, T.31~1., R.9E.., B.M., _ ' Meridian, Ada County, ldah© and more par#ic~larly desaii~ed as follcw~~ B~E~1NtY~~ at ttte NorQheast tamer of Lot 5 wf Block 2 of Gerritane Cent6r No. _ 2, a subdhitstc~n, as f~1ed for record in the o~c® of the Ada Couf+iry Redder', Boise, _ Idai~a In Bc~olc 74 cif Plats of page76S4; thence along the iVorth bo~and2~ry of said Lot 5 and the North t~rxdery of Lot 8 of Blc~dc 2 of Ger~tan~a Cerrielr Wo. 2 Worth t~35'9~" Wes# 434.62 feet to a path on the East right-of~y line of North . H&~tary ~lverrue marking _tfre Warthwest comer of said Lot B; tFierire along .said East right-afa~t line _ - --- - -~ ~ Nar6t'ifQ°~1i~8"E~~feet to a pry e~ae -- South 89'°3x'15" bast 374.73 fit to a paint; thence Alvrth 4f3~~4S" t 28.2.8 to a point; thence South R9®35'95" East 4Q.QtJ feet to a pviait: ttierrre ' youth 00®24'45" West 36.Od feet to the ~l~'OINT C~ BEGfI~Ntt~. ' F ,r,~ct~.ac~.am~~ EDIT ~ ---~--a r a r~i M q`+ ~J ~ z g~ ~ y ~ ~ t~7 ~~~ @~~ z" ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ o~. !' ~r POR PEIRA llVC. TBALEI^S LANp SURYEYINA faros um a s ~nac card ^a s °"•"••°' pa...o ~tyC N ~ 1 @LTR! 4 TM. RQ !.~ tlwea •P1 COltllr, cuo ..... ~~.+~ ao~ o on aeie y,~ ~ • January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT January 23, 2007 ITEM NO. Jr-.I REQUEST Public Works Change Order No. 1 of the Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water 8~ Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACRD Eagle, Victory to Ridenbaugh Canal Project for a Cost of $3,982.75 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CfTY 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 Memo /Change Order Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetUtgs shall become properly of the CHy of Meridian. RECEIVED FEB 0 5 2007 City of Mez i.dian City Clerk Office Memo Ta W{I{ Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer ~~- C~: File Date: 2/2/07 Re: Change order #1 of contract for Professional Services with Civil Survey Consultants {nc. for design of water and sewer improvements associated with the Eagle Road, Victory to Ridenbaugh Canal Project (project #0600). o-e.-, Attached is the original above referenoed~gt~eerrtent+for your flies. • Page 1 CHANt3E ORDER NO. 1 DATE OF ISSUANCE ~/-~o: EFFECTIVE DATE /~~ C~ No. 1 OWNER City of Meridian _ CONSULTANT Civil Survex Inc. ~ '~ CONTRACT: Eagle Road. Victopv to Ridenbauah Canal. Design, ENGINEER ,may of Meridian Description: This change order consists of the following work: Supplemental request covers additianal work of: • Revisions to plans requested by Public Works. Revisions to plans necessary to adjust to change in plan for ACRD storm sewer. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: Original Contract Price $ 25020 Net Increase (Decrease) from previous Change Orders No. 0 to 0 $ 0.00 Contract Price prior to this Change Order: $ 25020 Net increase (decrease) of this Change Order: S 3982.75 Contract Price with all approved Change Orders: $ 29002.75 RECOMMENDED APPROVED K e adek, PE Staff Engineer Tammy E Date: /fig O ? Dat Approved by City Council: ~-?~~` 7 CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days or dates) Net change from previous Change Orders No. _ to No. _ Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days) Contract Times prior to this Change Order: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days or dates) Net increase (decrease) this Change Order: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days) Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Compleflon: Ready for final payment: (days or dates) ,``I1,11~111~11_~ Mayor ~ William G. rg, ~., C ~.~ ~~ l! ~ ~~~~ " 7 `~t~~~ ~Q -~ _ -,,~~~ ~Q.````. ~~~~~~111111 Itllll,`\` EJCDC 1910-8-B (1998 Edition) Prepared by the En®ineers Joint Contract Doaaments Committee and endon3ed by The Associated General Contractors of America and the Construction Specifications institute. • JAN 9 ~ 2007 61TY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE Memo To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer ~~2 CC: File, Len Grady, Keith Watts Date: 1/18/07 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for January 23, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the January 23 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Change Order Number 1. of Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD Eaclle, Victory to I~idenbaugh Canal Project: This change order of $3982.75 covers the extra work of revising plans due to changes requested by Public Works and Changes in ACHD storm drain design. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Change Order Number 1 of Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and Sewer Improvements in Contuncti®n with ACRD Eagle, Victory to Ridenbaugh Canal Protect: for a cost of $3982.75 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 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 No. 1 DATE OF ISSUANCE f~ EFFECTIVE DA' OWNER Citv of Meridian CONSULTANT Civil Survev Inc. ~ . CONTRACT: Eagle Road. Victory to Ridenbauah Canal Design ENGINEER City of Meridian Description: This change order consists of the following work: Supplemental request covers additional work of: • Revisions to plans requested by Public Works. • Revisions to plans necessary to adjust to change in plan for ACRD storm sewer. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: Original Contract Price $ 25020 Net Increase (Decrease) from previous Change Orders Ito. 0 - to - 0- _ - _ _ - _ - - - $ 0.00 - - ------ - - ---- ----- Contract Price prior to this Change Order: $ 25020 Net increase (decrease) of this Change Order: $ 3982.75 Contract Price with all approved Change Orders: 29002.75 RECOMMENDED ~7 d~ Ky a adek, PE Staff Engineer Date: ~~ o T Approved by City Council: APPROVED CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Times: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days or dates) Net change from previous Change Orders No. to Rto:--- - - - - - - - Substantial Completion: _ Ready for final payment: (days) Contract Times prior to this Change Order. Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days or dates). Net increase (decrease) this Change Order: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment: (days) Contract Times with all approved Change Orders: Substantial Completion: Ready for final payment:- (days or dates) Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Date: ATTEST William G. Berg; Jr., City Clerk Date: EJCDC 1910-8-B (1996 Edition) Prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee and endorsed by The Associated General Contractors of America and the Construction Specifications Institute. January 18, 2~7 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2(~7 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-K REQUEST Public Works Budget Amendment for Full Time Person for Environmental Specialist AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached 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 DISTRIGT 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 meettnps shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. CJ Tara Green From: Brad Watson Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:59 PM To: Tara Green; Sharon Smith; Will Berg Subject: 1/23 Council Agenda Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Green Attachments: amendment form env spec.xls For 1/23 Council agenda, consent agenda for now. It is: Public Works Department Budget Amendment Stacy has approved via email and I am meeting with the Mayor tomorrow to discuss. Thanks, BRW ~r~ ~,~~~ amendment i env spec.xls CITY of MERIDIAN Use This Form for Appropriation Changes and BUDGET Descriptive Title: AMENDMENT Account Proposed Code Descri tion of Ex enditure Amount Personnel Costs: 41300 Wa es $ 61,636 41300 Wa es - FSLA Fire onl 41210 Overtime $ 30,000 41304 Uniform Allowance if a livable 42021 FICA $ 2,420 42022 PERSI 42023 Workers Com $ 247 42025 Em to ee Insurance $ - TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $ 34,303 Salary Savings DO NOT ENTER IN BLUE CELLS THEY CONTAIN FORMULAS O erating Ex enditures: 1 time Expenditures Yr to Yr Ex enditures 54130 furniture and equipment $ 1,500 56101 telephone $ 300 51300 office expense $ 500.:. 57200 employee seminars $ 500` 54120 electronics;expense $ 500 69900 miscellaneous expense $ 50 84100 employee incentlve awards $ 85 TOTAL OPERATI NG COSTS $ 1,135 $ 2,300 Ca ital Outla : 1 time Expenditures 94300 9431Q computer software $ 1,000 $ 2,500 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS $ 1,000 $ 2,500 GRAND TOTAL of REQUEST $ 38,738 APPROVALS: Pre-Council Stacy Kilchenmann 1/18/2007 Financial Management & Planning Date Pre-Council Mayor Date Date of Council Approval Clerks Office SIGNED COPY MUST BE RETURNED TO OFFICE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CHECK MONTHLY BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT TO ENSURE APPROVED AMf 1 Budget Transfers Fiscal Year: ~ 2007. Department: Public Works Expand Text Boxes and Use Extra Pages If Necessary 1. Describe what is being requested and why. If the request includes employees provide a basic explanation of job functions. If the request includes consulting or contracting fees include a description of the scope of work. If the request includes equipment include a description of what the equipment will be used for. If the request includes construction describe the service result of the finished project. Position will coordinate the management of the City of Meridian's environmental pertormance. Responsibilities include regulatory compliance evaluation and coordinating the management of the City's environmental performance. Will perform a variety of tasks relating to the principles, theories, and practices of environmental and physical science, maintain industry standards and practices, and manage budgets; plus, related and assigned tasks, as required to fulfill the goals, structure, and mission of the City. 2. What unexpected event or situation requires appropriation outside of the annual budget and appropriation process. This position was listed as a "future position" in the 2004 Public Works reorganization approved by City Council. New or pending rules and regulations require in-house expertise on these matters. 3. Describe the proposed method of financing this request, include the fund (s), and any expected revenues or funding sources outside the City. Enterprise fund. Note: Salary savings in PW-Engineering through the end of January will cover approximately half the cost of this position in FY 2007. The amount of this budget amendment for FY 2007 is $36,000. ENDMENT HAS BEEN ADDED O N ~~ ~ N N ~ ~ t ?g ~ a } ~~ 'LW m m ~ LL ~ c N 0 m H Z W 0 ~ Z W f~ W O W a O ~ ~ m C>mcF • • ~~ C y U C ~ C 'nom-° C N ~ m v ° ~ ~ U C ~ y W m O C ~ d C N O C 7 C m?m~a~ N N j d..~ y N N m ~ m m ~ m f_CO O .O ~ g~a~>rnm O ~ ~ ~ U~'td°m,E~ m O ~ U ~ m C1 C es'J 7 ~ ~ ~ 1~~0 C ~ m O. y O) m m ~ ~ ~ m c m~~m~- wn~ya l9 41 ~ C C IEmyg~o« m ~ U ~ ~ m m p co m m ~ Q C N C 'V ~ W ~~m°'m~+ '~ ~ ~ Q C .~ D o m c m ~- o E a c rn N y ~L m ~ y 3 j O'~ O O m .y ~ C a ppy C O O ~ 3 ~ a U U O. W C U a y m ~ m ~'p ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ C >. ~ = C y m a ~ O C C 3 cc'mE~~ m o m a m m rn °~ ,~ ~ m l0 C N m g m ~ ~ v ~ ~-$.. m ~ ~ c ~ m ~ (0 O m ~,m~~ ~ m>? ~'_~ Z 3 O y m C y a m ~$ E$ .~ c v Y ~.~ ^ a? ~ ~° V m N P roS O~'~O m 0 a a~. a w ~Wafn n IW-w~g zm~,~ n o?~° m L O m ,v_ O C 0 m O. 0 a N m 3 c 0 C N a O = e n 0 m a ma x m ~~ L W C C y L O C m i~ ~ 3 ~ V O a~ 7 a~ o m O N C ~ ° C G1 O O) 'o~z C a ~ m ~ ~ `o ~ m N Z m v m NU ~ ~a m 3 U ~ oa c 0 ~~~ n O cq~ N C x W ' « i ~ ~~ ® ~ c~ ~ a~ ~ ~ - ~ .- 'O c x W E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m 3 m m ~ ~ ~ ~ c m , ~ IP O ~ T C '~ T ~~a E~go N O V ~ . ~~omm~m Z C °m _o ~ g °N °o °o ~ x ~ ~~au~i~~~ Q W c O Of O O 1- 9+ C l9 v C .y.. C w m ti- m 7 U C m 7 m C ~U C c 0 p~ O a m ;~ m Ol a a O H 3 3 ° ~ ~ W O LLm ~ F c m ~ °o N s~ w ~ ~ s ~~Oo w~ o W O ~ U m a o' m O c `o m C ~ ~ (q c ~ i. mo C ~ N ~ ~~ ~ T O ~ ~ ~ W C E e W 0 O `- tttttttl{Illlllrfrrr~f W ``at` 01,E ei f ' `dJ~ o ~ T_ ~/~~ ' ~ i T ~O /, / // !tl U ~t~ Ott`®` ~ ~ w 0 -~ m o ~ z 0 1. U W bo ~ O ~ LL ~ va a LL W ~r O ~ J C ~ ~w "~ m O ~ U W Z Z c ' W c c m ~ Q .~~ ~~ ~ c ~. m m O c o F- m r° m , Q ~ • L ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ 7 ~ Z o U ~ X U A O c `o ~ ' o Z U M W ~ c ~ ~ ~ d 7 ti O cq U N c O 3 ~ U d ~ Q a • January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-L REQUEST Addendum to Joint Powers Agreement for Meridian Rural Fre Protection District Firefighter and Life Preservation Service Controct AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See aMached 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. • • Page 1 of 1 Will Berg From: Ron Anderson Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 4:39 PM To: Bill Nary Cc: Will Berg Subject: FW: Draft Agenda for 1/23 C/C Meeting Attachments: 07Jan23precouncil.doc; 07Jan23.doc Bill Have you had a chance to review the proposed changes to the joint powers agreement between the City & Rural District? and if you're O.K. with the changes can this go on the City Counci I Agenda f or next week? Ron L Anderson Fire Chief Meridian Fire Department (208) 888-1234 From: Tara Green Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:18 AM To: (kanee@meridiancity.org); (watterss@meridiancity.org); Abram Antonucci (antonuca@meridiancity.org); Amanda Hess (hessa@meridiancity.org); Anna Canning (canninga@meridiancity.org); Barb Shiffer (E-mail); Bill Musser (E-mail); Bill Nary (E-mail); Brad Watson (E-mail); Bruce Freckleton (E-mail); Craig Hood (E-mail); David Zaremba (zarembad@meridiancity.org); Diane Stewart (E-mail); Doug Strong (E-mail); Elroy Huff (E-mail); Jennifer Veatch (veatchj@meridiancity.org); Joe Borton (jwborton@foleyfreeman.com); Justin Lucas (lucasj@meridiancity.org); Karie Glenn (E-mail); Kenny Bowers (E-mail); Kristy Vigil (E-mail); Len Grady (E-mail); Machelle Hill (E-mail); Michelle Albertson (E-mail); Peter Friedman; Reta Cunningham (E-mail); Rick Clinton (E- mail); Ron Anderson (andersor@meridiancity.org); smiths@meridiancity.org; Stacy Kilchenmann (E-mail); Tammy de Weerd (deweerdt@meridiancity.org); Ted Baird (E-mail); Will Berg (E-mail) Subject: Draft Agenda for 1/23 C/C Meeting Comments /Additions /Recommendations? Deadline is Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 5:00 PM. Thanks! Tara Green Deputy City Clerk City of Meridian City Clerk's Office 208-888-4433 Ext. 210 1/18/2007 ADDENDU1Vi TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on September 22, 1998, the Meridian Rural Fire Protection District (the "Fire District") and the City of Meridian ("Meridian") entered, effective October 1, 1998, into a certain joint powers agreement, as authorized under Idaho law, entitled "City of Meridian/Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighting and Life Preservation Service Contract and Joint Exercise of Power Agreement" (the "Joint Powers Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement memorializes the working and financial relationships that existed between the Fire District and Meridian, and under which the Fire District and Meridian operated for decades prior to October 1, 1998; and WHEREAS, since October 1, 1998 the Fire District and Meridian have continued their working and financial relationships, under the Joint Powers Agreement, to their mutual benefit, providing cost effective, efficient and timely services for the protection of their respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 67-2326 through 67-2333, Meridian possesses the power to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of the Fire District, to include, not byway of limitation, entering into an infra-agency agreement with the Fire District to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code § 31-1430, the Fire District possesses the power given to political subdivisions of the state of Idaho, as set forth in Idaho Code §§ 67-2326 through 67-2333, to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of Meridian, to include, not by way of limitation, entering into anin~ra-agency agreement with Meridian for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the constitution and the laws of the state of Idaho, Meridian possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of Meridian; and ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 1 of 4 ~ r WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho's Fire Protection District Law, Idaho Code § § 31- 1401 et seq., the Fare District possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of the Fire District; and WHEREAS, as authorized and permitted under Idaho law, specifically including Idaho Code §§ 31-1430 and 67-2332, the Fire District and Meridian contract, under the Joint Powers Agreement, specifically Section 10.1 thereof, for Meridian to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" as that phrase is defined in the Joint Powers Agreement; and WHEREAS, integral to Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, is Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District and Meridian desire to acknowledge, confirm and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian and the Fire District determine it appropriate to enter into this addendum to the Joint Powers Agreement to acknowledge, confirm and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contractual duties and obligations to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, and otherwise confirm and affirm between Meridian and the Fire District the Joint Powers Agreement, including all such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, considerations and purposes, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 2 of 4 • acknowledged by the Fire District and Meridian, the Fire District and Meridian hereby acknowledge, confirm, affirm and agree as follows. 1. Fire and Life Protection Services. Pursuant to Section 2.9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" means and refers to: [T]he protection of property both real and personal against fire and the preservation of life and shall include those services which a Fire Protection District is authorized to and does perform for residents residing within the boundaries and persons or entities that own property and otherwise for persons and property found within the boundaries of the "Fire District". For purposes of this addendum and the Joint Powers Agreement, and the power and authority respectively possessed by the Fire District and Meridian to provide services to protect its respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life, inclusive of their authority and power to enforce any of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code and to enter into an infra-agency agreement for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life, the above quoted meaning and reference of the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" is hereby supplemented to mean and refer to all the services Meridian provides, and may hereafter provide, to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian, for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, including, not by way of limitation, ambulance service, emergency medical treatment, and the enforcement of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code. The Fire District and Meridian expressly and specifically intend the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" in the Joint Powers Agreement to mean and refer to the exercise, presently and hereafter, of any and all powers, privileges and authorities granted by Idaho law to both the Fire District and Meridian to provide governmental services and functions to protect and for the protection of property against fire and to preserve and for the preservation of life. 2. Contract Services. Section 10.1 of the Joint Powers Agreement is hereby supplemented to provide that during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall provide to the Fire District's residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the boundaries of the Fire District, all the Fire and Life Protection Services Meridian provides to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian. Further, during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall also provide all such Fire and Life Protection Services to all persons and entities with whom the Fire District has agreed to provide ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 3 of 4 such services by mutual aid agreement, or by contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District; provided, however, such mutual aid agreement or contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District has been approved by both the Fire District and Meridian. 3. Confirmation and Affirmation of the Joint Powers Agreement. All terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement shall remain and be the same, except for the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore and hereafter made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. The Fire District and Meridian confirm and affirm all terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement as modified by the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the pa2rties have herein executed this addendum. DATED AND SIGNED this 2a ~ day of ~ 2007. ~. ®,4`\~A,~tit,,,uiri~,,,,~~~~~'City of Meridian ®p ~1 r. m ~~® =~ Mayor Attest: ppri~ved by Council /-2 3 - 0 7 By: s~-: c City Clerk J ~ !'''!l~`~8¢tPfl~t &fiS4~q~4~®®~dian Rural Fire Protection District Attest: By: Secretary By Resolution No.: By: Chairman ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 4 of 4 ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on September 22, 1998, the Meridian Rural Fire Protection District (the "Fire District") and the City of Meridian ("Meridian") entered, effective October 1, 1998, into a certain joint powers agreement, as authorized under Idaho law, entitled "City of Meridian/Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighting and Life Preservation Service Contract and Joint Exercise of Power Agreement" (the "Joint Powers Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement memorializes the working and fmancial relationships that existed between the Fire District and Meridian, and under which the Fire District and Meridian operated for decades prior to October 1, 1998; and WHEREAS, since October 1, 1998 the Fire District and Meridian have continued their working and financial relationships, under the Joint Powers Agreement, to their mutual benefit, providing cost effective, efficient and timely services for the protection of their respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code § § 67-2326 through 67-2333, Meridian possesses the power to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of the Fire District, to include, not byway of limitation, entering into an infra-agency agreement with the Fire District to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code § 31-1430, the Fire District possesses the power given to political subdivisions of the state of Idaho, as set forth in Idaho Code §§ 67-2326 through 67-2333, to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of Meridian, to include, not by way of limitation, entering into anin~ra-agency agreement with Meridian for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the constitution and the laws of the state of Idaho, Meridian possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of Meridian; and ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page -1- ~ Q~ ~ ~ WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho's Fire Protection District Law, Idaho Code §§ 31- 1401 et seq., the Fire District possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of the Fire District; and WHEREAS, as authorized and permitted under Idaho law, specifically including Idaho Code §§ 31-1430 and 67-2332, the Fire District and Meridian contract, under the Joint Powers Agreement, specifically Section 10.1 thereof, for Meridian to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" as that phrase is defined in the Joint Powers Agreement; and WHEREAS, integral to Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and fmancial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, is Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District and Meridian desire to acknowledge, confirm and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian and the Fire District determine it appropriate to enter into this addendum to the Joint Powers Agreement to acknowledge, confum and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contractual duties and obligations to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and fmancial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, and otherwise confum and affirm between Meridian and the Fire District the Joint Powers Agreement, including all such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, considerations and purposes, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by the Fire District and Meridian, the Fire District and Meridian hereby acknowledge, confirm, affum and agree as follows. ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FII2E PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page -2- o¢' ~ 1. Fire and Life Protection Services. Pursuant to Section 2.9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" means and refers to: [T]he protection of property both real and personal against fire and the preservation of life and shall include those services which a Fire Protection District is authorized to and does perform for residents residing within the boundaries and persons or entities that own property and otherwise for persons and property found within the boundaries of the "Fire District". For purposes of this addendum and the Joint Powers Agreement, and the power and authority respectively possessed by the Fire District and Meridian to provide services to protect its respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life, inclusive of their authority and power to enforce any of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code and to enter into an infra-agency agreement for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life, the above quoted meaning and reference of the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" is hereby supplemented to mean and refer to all the services Meridian provides, and may hereafter provide, to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian, for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, including, not by way of limitation, ambulance service, emergency medical treatment, and the enforcement of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code. The Fire District and Meridian expressly and specifically intend the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" in the Joint Powers Agreement to mean and refer to the exercise, presently and hereafter, of any and all powers, privileges and authorities granted by Idaho law to both the Fire District and Meridian to provide governmental services and functions to protect and for the protection of property against fire and to preserve and for the preservation of life. 2. Contract Services. Section 10.1 of the Joint Powers Agreement is hereby supplemented to provide that during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall provide to the Fire District's residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the boundaries of the Fire District, all the Fire and Life Protection Services Meridian provides to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian. Further, during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall also provide all such Fire and Life Protection Services to all persons and entities with whom the Fire District has agreed to provide such services by mutual aid agreement, or by contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District; provided, however, such mutual aid agreement or ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page -3- ~~ ¢ • i contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District has been approved by both the Fire District and Meridian. 3. Confirmation and Affirmation of the Joint Powers Agreement. All terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement shall remain and be the same, except for the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore and hereafter made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. The Fire District and Meridian confirm and affirm all terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement as modified by the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this addendum. DATED AND SIGNED this Z3~day of ~ , 2007. City of Meridian Attest: Byc%ii~---~/vim ~'c~ City Clerk By Council P~~i~~- err`'°0-°°h~s~clf~~lRural Fire Protection District By: Chairman ~~-oo j ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page -4- off' ¢ ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on September 22, 1998, the Meridian Rural Fire Protection District (the "Fire District") and the City of Meridian ("Meridian") entered, effective October 1, 1998, into a certain joint powers agreement, as authorized under Idaho law, entitled "City of Meridian/Meridian Rural Fire Protection District Firefighting and Life Preservation Service Contract and Joint Exercise of Power Agreement" (the "Joint Powers Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement memorializes the working and financial relationships that existed between the Fire District and Meridian, and under which the Fire District and Meridian operated for decades prior to October 1, 1998; and WHEREAS, since October 1, 1998 the Fire District and Meridian have continued their working and financial relationships, under the Joint Powers Agreement, to their mutual benefit, providing cost effective, efficient and timely services for the protection of their respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code § § 67-2326 through 67-2333, Meridian possesses the power to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of the Fire District, to include, not by way of limitation, entering into aninfra-agency agreement with the Fire District to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho Code § 31-1430, the Fire District possesses the power given to political subdivisions of the state of Idaho, as set forth in Idaho Code §§ 67-2326 through 67-2333, to exercise and enjoy jointly its powers, privileges and authority corresponding to the powers, privileges and authority of Meridian, to include, not by way of limitation, entering into aninfra-agency agreement with Meridian for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the constitution and the laws of the state of Idaho, Meridian possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of Meridian; and ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 1 of 4 • WHEREAS, pursuant to Idaho's Fire Protection District Law, Idaho Code § § 31- 1401 et seq., the Fire District possesses the power and authority to provide services to protect its residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District's power and authority to provide services for the preservation of life includes, not by way of limitation, the right to provide ambulance service and emergency medical treatment to the residents of the Fire District; and WHEREAS, as authorized and permitted under Idaho law, specifically including Idaho Code §§ 31-1430 and 67-2332, the Fire District and Meridian contract, under the Joint Powers Agreement, specifically Section 10.1 thereof, for Meridian to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" as that phrase is defined in the Joint Powers Agreement; and WHEREAS, integral to Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, is Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, the Fire District and Meridian desire to acknowledge, confirm and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contract to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life; and WHEREAS, Meridian and the Fire District determine it appropriate to enter into this addendum to the Joint Powers Agreement to acknowledge, confirm and memorialize clearly that Meridian's contractual duties and obligations to provide to the Fire District's residents "Fire and Life Protection Services" under the Joint Powers Agreement, inclusive of the working and financial relationships of the Fire District and Meridian, specifically includes Meridian providing to the Fire District's residents all the services Meridian provides to its residents for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, and otherwise confirm and affirm between Meridian and the Fire District the Joint Powers Agreement, including all such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, considerations and purposes, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIlZEFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOIl~T EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 2 of 4 ~ ~ acknowledged by the Fire District and Meridian, the Fire District and Meridian hereby acknowledge, confirm, affirm and agree as follows. 1. Fire and Life Protection Services. Pursuant to Section 2.9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" means and refers to: [T]he protection of property both real and personal against fire and the preservation of life and shall include those services which a Fire Protection District is authorized to and does perform for residents residing within the boundaries and persons or entities that own property and otherwise for persons and property found within the boundaries of the "Fire District". For purposes of this addendum and the Joint Powers Agreement, and the power and authority respectively possessed by the Fire District and Meridian to provide services to protect its respective residents' property against fire and for the preservation of life, inclusive of their authority and power to enforce any of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code and to enter into an infra-agency agreement for Meridian to provide the Fire District's residents services to protect property against loss by fire and to protect life, the above quoted meaning and reference of the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" is hereby supplemented to mean and refer to all the services Meridian provides, and may hereafter provide, to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian, for the protection of property against fire and for the preservation of life, including, not by way of limitation, ambulance service, emergency medical treatment, and the enforcement of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 41, Idaho Code. The Fire District and Meridian expressly and specifically intend the phrase "Fire and Life Protection Services" in the Joint Powers Agreement to mean and refer to the exercise, presently and hereafter, of any and all powers, privileges and authorities granted by Idaho law to both the Fire District and Meridian to provide governmental services and functions to protect and for the protection of property against fire and to preserve and for the preservation of life. 2. Contract Services. Section 10.1 of the Joint Powers Agreement is hereby supplemented to provide that during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall provide to the Fire District's residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the boundaries of the Fire District, all the Fire and Life Protection Services Meridian provides to its residents, including all residences, property, persons and entities found within the city limits of Meridian. Further, during the term of the Joint Powers Agreement, Meridian shall also provide all such Fire and Life Protection Services to all persons and entities with whom the Fire District has agreed to provide ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIlZEFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page 3 of 4 • • such services by mutual aid agreement, or by contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District; provided, however, such mutual aid agreement or contract between another fire protection district, municipality or individual property owner outside the city limits of Meridian and the boundaries of the Fire District has been approved by both the Fire District and Meridian. 3. Confirmation and Affirmation of the Joint Powers Agreement. All terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement shall remain and be the same, except for the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore and hereafter made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. The Fire District and Meridian confirm and affirm all terms, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement as modified by the supplementations made by the terms and provisions of this addendum and such other duly executed addenda, amendments and modifications heretofore made to the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the Fire District and Meridian. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this addendum. DATED AND SIGNED this 23~ day of ~l~i~-a~v~r~-,..~., , 2007. City of Meridian Attest: By:~ City Clerk CJ~..~ r, Council l- 2 3 - ~ 7 ~ ~~ ~ ~~' t~ • ~ 2~~ , Fire Pro ection District ~~~~ ~ Chairman Attest: ,~__~--~ ecretary By Resolution o.: D~-QQ ~ ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN /MERIDIAN RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIREFIGHTING AND LIFE PRESERVATION SERVICE CONTRACT AND JOINT EXERCISE OF POWER AGREEMENT Page4of4 January 18, 2~7 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT ITEM No. 5-M REQUEST Change Order No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement between the City of Meridian and LCA Archifects to Add Commissioning and LEED Service AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See attached 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: January 23, 2007 Date: rnone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shah become properly of the City of Meridian. January 18, 2007 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Public Works Department fTEM NO. b-A-1 REQUEST Mutual Cooperation Agreement with United Water Idaho, Inc. AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: gee ~~ O~C1~C~ 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 fhe City of Meddlan. ~~~T~~ ~T~~ ~D~ IRIC. 8248 West Victory Road, Boise, ID 83709 P.O. Box 190420, Boise, ID 83719-0420 Tel: 208.362.1300 • Fax: 208.362.1479 February 21, 2007 Brad Watson City of Meridian Public Works Department 660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 200 Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Brad: Water ~~. FED 2 7 2007 pity of ~9eridoaea ~it~ Cl~ek ®ffB~m Enclosed is a signed original of the approved Mutual Cooperation Agreement between the City of Meridian and United Water Idaho. I will retain the other original for our files. Thank you for all your help in accomplishing this agreement. United Water looks forward to working with the City to meet future water service needs. Sincerely, ~~-~~ Gregory P. Wyatt Vice President GPW: jw Enclosure: Mutual Cooperation Agreement ~~= ° United ~~ 0 WWW. UN ITEDWATER.COM • ivy CITY" OF ~-~ERII~IAN ~ .- ~ ' X007 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ` ' ~'' `~~ `~ WATER DATE: February O8, 2007 TO: Greg Wyatt United Water Idaho, Inc. P.O. Box 190420 Boise, ID 83719-0420 FROM: Brad Watson, PE Public Works Director SUBJECT: Mutual Cooperation Agreement Enclosed are the following: COPIES DATE DESCRIPT70N 2 Original Agreements {wl Mayor's signature) These are transmitted: ^ For Your Information ^ For Review and Comment ^ For Your Use ^ As Requested ®For Action Specified Below Remarks: Greg, Please sign and return one original to me, please. Thank yo CC: File Signed: 660 E. 6Vatettowea Iana, Snits 240 Meridian, ID 83642 done: (248) 898-5504 Fay (208) 898-9551 • • Memo To: Mayor De Weerd From: Brad Watson, P.E. CC: File, Karie Date: ?15/07 Re: Agreement for Signature I am forwarding to you for your signature the following agreement (two originals) that were approved by City Council at the January 23 meefing: Mutual Cooperation Agneement -United Water Idaho Inc Thank you, WILL or TARA: Please return both of the original agreements to me so that I can forward them to United Water for signature. I will return one of the originals to your office. • Page 1 MUTUAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT THIS MUTUAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), dated this~~day of __~, 2007 is entered into by and between The City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho (hereinafter "Meridian") and United Water Idaho Inc., an Idaho corporation (hereinafter "United Water" or the "Company"). Meridian and United Water are sometimes referred to as the "Party" or "Parties", as the case maybe. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, both Meridian and United Water own and operate public water supply systems in Ada County; and WHEREAS, on Apri128, 2006, United Water and Meridian entered into a Stipulation, for the purpose of settling Meridian's Protest in United Water's Case No. UWI-W-OS-4 before the Idaho Public Utilities Commission ("IPUC"), regarding United Water's request to amend and revise its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No, 143 (hereinafter "Certificate") which identifies areas in which United Water may provide public water service; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2006, the IPUC issued Order No. 30070 in Case UWI-W-OS-4 approving the Stipulation and approving United Water's amended Certificate; and WHEREAS, Meridian and United Water have been negotiating in good faith regarding future water service to additional areas within Ada County that may be-within Meridian's current or expected future Area of Impact, and/or corporate city limits; and WHEREAS, the colored map attached hereto as Exhibit A shows certain service areas over which the Parties have completed negotiations; and WHEREAS, Meridian and United Water wish to enter into this Agreement in order to more clearly define future water service areas between the Parties, and to establish criteria upon which certain future water service areas can be determined; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the following mutual covenants and agreements between the Parties, and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Simulation: As a result of the above referenced. Stipulation, United Water shall have the exclusive right to provide water service to the areas denominated on Exhibit A as "Danskin/Sa,ddle Ridge", "McMillan/Eagle", "Cloverdale", and "Lake HazeUCloverdale". 2. Continued Service: United Water shall have the exclusive right to continue providing water service to all areas in which United Water currently provides water service, as of the date of this Agreement, that may fall within Meridian's Proposed Area of Impact as shown on Exhibit A. 3. Chinden: The Parties agree that United Water shall have the exclusive right to provide water service to that portion of the Meridian Proposed Area of Impact that is north of Chinden Boulevard and is shown in yellow and denominated as "Chinden" on Exhibit A. Further, to the extent that water service is requested for property fronting on the south side of Chinden Boulevard and the "Chinden" area, and if United Water has the capability to serve directly from its main(s) in Chinden Boulevazd, then United Water shall have the right to provide the requested water service. 4. Graff The Parties agree that with respect to the area denoted as the "Meridian/LTnited Water Gray Area" ("Gray Area") shown in gray on Exhibit A, Meridian shall provide water service in the area if the area or any portion of it is annexed by the City of Meridian, and likewise, United Water shall provide water service in the area if the area or any portion of it is annexed by the City of Boise. In the event that any portion of the Gray Area is not annexed by either City, then Meridian shall provide water service within such portion of the Gray Area if Meridian provides sewer service to such area, and United Water shall provide water service within such portion of the Gray Area if the City of Boise or any other sewer provider provides sewer service to such area. 5. Other Service Areas: The Parties agree that, other than the areas discussed in Paragraph 4 hereinabove, United Water shall have the right to apply for amendments to its Certificate. for areas outside of Meridian's Proposed Area of Impact, as shown on Exhibit A without protest by Meridian; provided. however, that in the event that Meridian extends its actual Area of Impact i • beyond that which is delineated on Exhibit A, Meridian shall have the exclusive right to provide water service to that area within its Area of Impact that is not akeady within United Water's authorized service area and United Water shall have the exclusive right to provide water service to areas within its then authorized service area. In addition, if Meridian's Area of Impact contracts, then United Water shall have the exclusive right to apply for amendments to its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity without protest and, if so authorized by the Il'UC, to provide water service to those areas that were formerly within Meridian's Area of Impact, excluding any existing customers and any property that has been annexed, or applied for annexation, to Meridian at the time of United Water's application. 6. Proposed Area of Impact: The Parties recognize and agree that, as of the date of this Agreement, the area designated on Exhibit A as Meridian's Area of Impact has been adopted by Meridian's City Council but has not yet been approved by Ada County. To the extent that any portion of Meridian's Proposed Area of Impact is reduced from that shown on Exhibit "A", and such portion is covered within this Agreement, then Meridian shall not protest any filings by United Water to amend its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity with regard to such service areas. 7. Consumption Data for Sewer Billing;, United Water agrees to provide information necessary from its water consumption records for any and all of its water customers located within the corporate limits of Meridian for the purpose of updating Meridian's sewer billings. The information shall include such information as account status, account number, customer name and service address, winter consumption reading dates, consumption per reading, total consumption for the last two billing periods prior to March 31 of the present year, and the average consumption of that same period. The information shall be in water book order and contain all books for accounts in which Meridian would have a sewer account. Meridian agrees it will request this information by letter in March of the current year, and provide the water book numbers to United Water that have Meridian sewer accounts in them. This information shall be provided annually during the month of April of the current year. The information shall be provided in a digital format agreed upon by both United Water and Meridian. The information provided shall be used by Meridian for the purpose of updating sewer billings, computer sewer modeling and for future reasons agreed upon by both United Water and Meridian. 8. Entire Agreement: This Agreement and all exhibits hereto embody the entire Agreement of the parties. There are no promises, terms, conditions, or obligations other than those contained herein, and this Agreement supersedes all previous and contemporaneous communications, representations, and agreements, either written or verbal, between the parties on these matters. 9. Severability: If any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be held to be unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless be enforceable and carried into effect, unless elimination of the unenforceable provisions shall materially frustrate the intent of the parties. 10. Successors and Assigns: This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective administrators, employees, successors and assigns. 11. Controlling Law: This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho. No term or omission of language in this Agreement shall be construed to amend or waive any provision of the regulations or ordinances of the City of Meridian. The venue for any claim, litigation or cause of action between-the parties shall be the Fourth Judicial District Court, Ada County, Idaho. 12. Exhibits: All exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement as if expressly and fii11y set forth in the body of this Agreement. 13. Notice: Notices required or contemplated under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed received when mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the respective parties at the following addresses: C~ City of Meridian ATTN: City Clerk 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 United Water: United Water Idaho Inc. ATTN: General Manager P.O. Box 190420 Boise, Idaho 83719-0420 14. Amendment: No amendment, alteration or modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless made in writing and duly executed by the parties. 15. Duplicate Originals: This Agreement shall be executed in duplicate originals, with each page, including exhibits, initialed by each party, and each party shall retain one (1) original of the Agreement. 16. Waiver: The waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained in this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant, or condition or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained in this Agreement. 17. Dispute Resolution: The parties agree that any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or its breach, shall first attempt to be settled by discussions and negotiation between the parties. If, after reasonable negotiations, the parties are unable to resolve the dispute, then the parties shall attempt to settle the dispute by mediation in accordance with the Commercial Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration Association then in effect, with both parties sharing equally in the mediator's fee. A request for mediation shall be filed with the other parry to the agreement. The request may be made concurrently with the filing of a legal action but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of legal or equitable proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of filing, unless stayed for a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order. The parties shall endeavor to mutually agree on an independent, professional mediator within 15 days of the request for mediation. Agreements reached in mediation shall be enforceable as settlement agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The parties shall pay all of their own expenses associated with mediation, including any attorney fees and travel expenses. 18. Attorney Fees: In the event either party is required to enforce the terms or provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in any litigation arising therefrom shall be entitled to recover a reasonable attorney fee for the prosecution thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement and made it effective as of this ~ day of ~~,~Q.~iA.2~ , 2007. United Water Idaho Inc. By ~. Gre ory y Vice P d Unit ater Idaho Inc. City of Meridian By Tamx~d,~ W erd `,leotto,t,atsaottroe~~eeeA®~~ Mayor, City o eridian aoe~•~ ,~~ ~®~~~ ~ ~~m ~ r, Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., Cit~Cl ~~~ Approved By Council: ~~' v 7 ~ ~`~ s ~ ' ~ tip. -p t ~ ~ ,~ , ~~, STAR ~ -.. ~ - ~ -~ W MACE ® N C \\ loci ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : G ^~~~ _ - _ p K ® ChirMen - ~r~' _ ® ;„ ® _ _, r ~~ _. ' - ~ EAGLE _ W CHtNDEN BLVD _ __ . ~ E CHINDEN BLVD - - (W ~ ~D pp C - -... .. _ ENI DIVA p K ~ ao ~ .... . a ~ ~ z' ' .. McM1116NEBgle w McMaLAN Ro z ... . .. ,. '- - - ~J WEECNILLANi RD'. _ • '~I~OIJ E'.. W EDNA. ST Q , - QF tl W UBTICK RD o ~ Z ~. ~:. -_~. ~ ~ Grey Aree - ~ ~__ W USTICK RD: 3. ' z 7 ~, -a9 ~ , - C W CHATEAU AVE i ~ E CHATFI~U-OR ~., ~ V a ~' W.CHERRY LN Z Z: ~ /~ y. ~ • c~overdale ~ ~ MERIDIAN ~ ,. ~ ~{ ~~. Z _ ~~~ - U. Z N'am11a W Q Y W FRANKLIN RO ~ _.. E FRANKLIN RD ... W FRANKLW:RD.. -. ~. ... E CENTRAL DR i-~_ .. , 07TER8TA7E 84 '._. -.___-__,. ~ _._._. 'INTEI~TATE bt __:_.._ !. W OVERLAND RD -. W OVERLAND RD _ E OVERLAND RD W:OVERLAND.RD: Gray Area _ ~' _ ~ a ' w vlcroRY Ro ~ ~,: -- ,. ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _~. ._~ ~o; ' V . ~~ ~ ~ DR REUT~ - Yd ~. ~ . W AM171' RD ! ~ ' E AYrfY RD Oa' W,AMT' Ro: N .. - .Jf ______ . W - ai qJ ~'~. W LAKE NA2EL RD ~ - _._ - _.. L8~(e HBZBUC.~OYBrdB~B ._ ,; :: ~', J _ ~ ~ ` . W COLUMBUI RD ~: ' ~:. E COLUMBUI . RD ': ~ __. _ ~ ~ ~ ~ i1 } ~ .~ _.. DerreWN W NUBBARp R D E HUBBARD RD ' SBddleridge ~i ` ~ KUNA ~ ~' ~ c ~. ~ w oeER Fwr RD ~ a DEER FLAT Ro '- ~' _ i , -- _ Y ~ , ~' m... W BOISE 9T ~ 2~: ' : z ~ w 4TH ST E 4TH ST ~ W KUNA RD ' . . W AYALON 8T E AVALON 8T ~ ~ E KUNA RD Z~ ' '. _ _ _ _ - .... - ~ 1 .. _ _ ~; ~ ~ W' ~; i ~ ~ ~ i a v z ~ x ~ ~. ~~ - i 1 Y YY t % ~ ~~ pF p~ $ ]i W KING RD ~ ~ EKING RD c ~; E KUKi RD ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `. y .~ ~. qa y ~ ~i - °` f JI O1E ~ ~ ~ Ai e a B 0 Nampa z w MCMILLAN RD STAR Chinden City of Meridian Service Area Exhibit A Meridian Proposed Impact Area t1WID Certlflcated Area Boundary ® UIMD Additlon ® Chinden Gray Areas 80188 City ImpaG Area °~~ Scale 1 Mch equals 1 mAea N I W CMNDEN McMillan/Eagle '' ~ Z W Lrsngc RD ~i z W CHATEAU AVE ry. W CHERRY LN ~ MERIDIAN ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ Z Z W FRANKLM RD DITERBTATE JK OVERUIND RD W OVERLAND RD °a ~ W WcroRr RD ~ ~ m ~ s m m m w AILII'/ RD W LAKE HAZEL RD Lake Hazel/Clove IILL! ~ //~j ~. DanskiN W HuBBARD RD Saddleridge KUNA ~ W DEER FLAT RD W BOISE 8T Z W 4TN 8i E 4TH 8T W KUNA RD W AVALON BT E AVALON ST ~ p S ~ m W MNO RD ~ ~ E MNO RD a rA . a S W MACE RD' EAGLE e cxLNDEN BLw w cx~a e~ ~ K W SCGeL0.lAN R0. _~ _ .~ _... BOISE. W m~A eT ray Area w uancK Ro E CHATEAU 6R t3 '~' '~ z -: ~O Cloverdale ~~, Z _ E RRANKIJN RD jj ~~. RRANKLIN RD ~~ ~ . E CENTRAL ~ ~ ~ _ MTERSTATE BO ~ E OVERLAND RD [_ WOVERLAND RD Gray Area ~~ '^ i . o . _ I1 y O ~ REU~L DR r W E AMRY RD ~ _ _ W AlAITY. RD., m ~ ~ J~ ~ >;.,: ars ~~ ~j E COLUMBIA RD G ro _ _ E DEER FLAT RD tl~ Z E MINA RD W KUNA RD K E KMO RD ~ ~. ~. a ~ ~ ~ January 18, 2007 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Parks Department ITEM NO. 6-8-~ REQUEST Approval of Park Direction Signs for Roadways AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNfNG DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: See attached 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: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubec meeHn~s shall become property of the City of Meridian. • 24 in 0 M i • CEI~E~ JAN 2 3 200 c~cy a~~r~;a~~ c~~ cis or~~ Memo: To: Mayor and City Council From: Doug Strong, Director Meridian Parks and Recreation Department Subject: Park Directional Signs Date: January 23, 2007 Staff has spoken with John Wasson and Dennis Frank from ACRD and the following information has been obtained in regards to the park directional signs. - Maintenance: ACRD will install and maintain the signs for free however if they are damaged the city will have to provide a new sign for replacement. Life expectancy is approximately 10 years. - iz The signs will be of standard size not to exceed 30" x 30". Proposed sign by staff is 24'1N x 30"L with standard 3" letters. - Color: The color and design is what they are standardizing to be used throughout Ada County for park directional signage. - Location/Placement: The city can suggest the streets that show the route or routes and provide a map to ACRD however, they will ultimately decide on exactly where the signs will be placed. Driving Directions to Champion Parr Starting from Main Street in Meridian: 1) Drive east on Fairview Ave. 2) Tum left (north) on Locust Grove 3) Turn right (east) on Ustick 4) Tura left (north) on N. Troxel 5) Champions Park is on the east side of N. Troxel. s MAP~1~E`j~~ 7 ~ _ E Tuweed St E Gmm~ev E; S~hback br E F ' ' ~ E_Lelgh FIe9d 99 N °~n3gf St ~ ~FW&x $1 ' ~ s' ~ $1EfF ~i• ~ -- --~--- - ~ E ~jrae~m Ln m In --- - -_ _ ~ -AFrQ~ nrercove.~t ~ Q E Csnne~ ~_- ~~ ~~ -tea -- hAl W Eagle 1 JAN 2 3 2007 City of Meridia~t City Ct~rk,p~ic~ f ~~ ' ~ u~~ Ra E ,ee s~ ~_ _~ Eyanp~ E ~ ~_ _ E Batdsiia~~15~t i~ - r ', ~E 3edg_ee~x St - - ~< - ~ E Uuak_ e1y Ct " ,,~~_-~-~~ - EHaroak_5t _ ,T1'a~ ~~~~~ _.. i ~. --1"e'-'- 4'' - -- E9'~amm6u_S ~ ~.I i°, ~ , E l~W '~-~ ~ - °-~_Cltmteatl~ ,_ - i dj `~ Ne' 101,E Ave ' - ~ ' __~ ~ -~ Wflbw~ok~ ~_i~VYio+~ttrtoak E ~bera ~ E Clerene 15l N Cmo1 St 4 i ~ 20Di PASt~eom, lnc. ~ ~ W J~mfne Ut-- a®~ A_ ~1 ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~~ ~ -- - ~ E 6hemise Rr _E tam Dr --- z ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~s 3t ~ ~ ~ ~ _m i ~ ~~ E kI~3lentech ~! ~ ~ ~ ' ~ -a k ~lgci~meadaw -~ ~ i ~ J ~ I -' i i -~"'0 f4 pdawlAladdSt EpalgertBlpF ~ e ~~ ~_ _ ~ ,°~ ~ `~ dj tl E.~lnrette C! • • Driving Directions to Chateau Park Starting from Main Street in Meridian: 1) Drive west on Fairview Ave. 2) Fairview Ave. becomes Cherry Ln. 3) Turn right (north) on Ten Mile Rd. 4) Turn right (east) on Chateau Dr. 5) Chateau Park is on the north side of Chateau Dz. MAPti4EST _:, ryro Fief ~ tlm I ~ _ NJ Wdde- 3i_ ~ _ !PY l1~Hck Rd t - - lJsliCk Rd ~ d W PtNtV ~# carte Ct =~ W ._ _~ i ~~' W 8bmmk ~ .y Z I ~ ~. ~ -- . ~ P"atrbiestcim ~ ~ ~ _'~ - 1py ~h ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~ Perk-Stge~a S! -}-- ~ _ W _L11Adlestone Ct SN Jaust 5'i. ''~ w a~.rn ;~ ; . `~~, ~ ~r RaweNurst st „~$~_ ,i - , _~ ~ w io-~,s+ s~ !¢ ~i1f IG9~ lak6 i~t --ai Z -`' ~-e~ Gt ~_F.A~ a~- i~ a FRI eLl1LL11 Z ~~~rx g ~ _~-~ m~' '~ ~~ a o ,~~~~_ ~ - ~ .~ - - 2 - - _~ 11II c~ ~ - ~ ~ I @ ~. NC7~ ~ ~ ~?~+~ t~ +~" tl ~ ~` ~ y~j ~ tRl Taros 9tr, Igp -v. `" Yl eberdtn '~~. (7!~/'CfYD ~ ~ ~ 'g' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-- ~f ~_ - - rr ~~ Qr ~Ri,u~^~+.w~. Ql I ~ ~ -~V Ra~k~ip~ £t~ ~~, - W Emeaeld F~ - j i ~ ~ ~ C - ' ~ MY _ St IOC W ReD~oE~ 1~O'a r~__ -- a Che(t~+ L _ _ ~ °-~- ~ -- W tyme'rjte X29 W Fa Cheek iCt~~~ I _ y ~ ~ ~ '~ cre@x st w I~Mu ~ae~x or ~ w 4ecn~e st ~ - '' - Z ~ ~ . ~- -- -., ~ yy SYeenl ~! ~ ~•p ; ~~ -i _ ~ 5a~o~ th 1MP~ -` ' fie' 1Nlti St -°___ ~`~r W $u~YS~P$ Ori. ~_ -a of - ~ - _~r- ~ sanm ctnra or '~ ~ ~~__' ~ - - -- ~ ~ __ 5iY Fereta~t 3t a -- y ~~ ~ytkr ~ P, .-- ~ - I_ W i~r-a! Ct ~.. 14ark i +„e i1P~ItNave 01 ~ ~~~ ~ 2605 Uitk¢'am. hie.- ~ e~r~r st i8 ~o~~,$I~ 'ter ~ ~~ + ~-,~ t!r ratel6we , ,~_~~ ~y ~t ~i® -~~._i.. _... i CI~JI~TEI~ JAN 2 3 2001 Driving Directions to Kiwanis Park Starting from Main Street in Meridian: 1) Drive south on Main. St. 2} Main St. becomes Meridian. Rd. 3) Turn left (east) on Overland Rd. 4) Turn right (south:) on S. Eagle Rd. 5) Turn right (west) on E. Easy Jet Dr. 6) Turn right (north) on S. Burgdorf Way 7) Turn left (west) on E. Indian Cmek Dr. 8) Turn right (northwest) on E. Three Bars Dr. 9) Kiwanis Park is on the north side of E. Three Bars Dr. ~ E ~ _ l E BoPga7 S4 _ ro i ,~°x @!Pu4~ 33 '' ~ ~ J- - E Mf ~ `9 _-E ~~ St E Gf~rWdA GFt I~ a E, Bkce Tddt ~ _ @ Gtif4ma S1 Epape~mm~t EILtaSOrmon.Dr ~' ~ ~ E Party Jet 9t __11vae Bces ~ - _ -- ~~~r~ _. ~_~ 'htge ~~~E E~ det S3 °9m ~Fk_e~de 6t_ ~` ~y~ ~ E Worce ~feak se E L,alte Caeuk_~ -- + E fAUerePek ~ -- ~ E Lake Creek m p_m tre ~ 9 ..... 4 B ~m a i W ~fiD~ ~ - ~ i, ~ 113ctorv Rd _E ti ~ J,~- -~s~i~~~ --ys~ i 0 a _ ~ E sL"~®. m _-- ~ yb_ Pabrrano d~4 I~ y i~ ~~ im ~ aoas hAayQemstsam, rte, x E ~~°"e flay ~EGaeenCer~nmpr_ co v ~ croex or ~i ~ el Dr ct -~ _ _i E form C+eek 9t ~ ~v_ ydA`~ .~~' E Ner® [ir §~~--..- G ~ y ' __E Roma Dr_ E taocsa dr , , p Lr p~ ~ '4 p ~r ~ i h ~ ~~ ~' ~~ ce ~E a ~ yl ~_ 1~~ _ %aP~r ~ ~ i FL - ( ~~a~sr_P•otrttt~ay City ®fMeridiatt City c~~rl~ Q~c~ ro m ~~ ~_ '9t I~ ~y ~` ~ ~~ -`-~ ~ I~ -~"" ~! - E~ A. ~' W wi m, ~,, ®s~oos nnavtEtt • • Driving Directions to Seasons Park Starting from Main Street in Meridian: 1) Drive west on Fairview Ave. 2) Fairview Ave. becomes Cherry Ln. 3) Turn right (north) on Black Cat Rd. 4) Turn left (west) on W. Talamore Dr. at the Autumn Faire Subdivision S) Turn left (south) on N. Dayside Ave. 6) Ttun. right (west) on N. Willowside Ave. 7) Turn right (west) on W. Ridgeside St. 8) End at 53~ W. Ridgeside St. ~MA~®~E~T W K~abte Ln 'YY UsGck Rd o ~ ~ O 1 fa A I 0 2 i A~_.. _....1A1Cher~r_Ln_-_ ~ 3CR5 PALcnm,11M, ~,~~I~ED JAN 2 3 2007 city ci k o City o~"' W JarBOn Lat z ~'~ ~-~ W Aldarat Sf I~ ~" ' ~~W lJs3ick Rd --- -- - - W 6As6Awtr_p~5t ~' ii W Nla~a 31 W~N-trr~lut ~ S94 Btbmetkl~ i _ fZ-' _I Ali _`~~7,' ~ z - VYHedrask93r m ~ Q Ems' ~ ~+- ~ ~ z i _~ ~~ ~ I ~ ~e -f 'Ifl/dlb9fi L6kp ~'"~ I~--- '~ ~ , Ly -- jp H ~ ' ~ ~ _ 3 ~' -- ~ - ® ~ ~ - '~D _ _ _ yl+ e,,~~ W Gharlos S{ 4 ~ ~V ~0'Ct - ~ t'lab ~' ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~- w ro~r~am~ra ru w oa~sln o~~ -1 . ~ ~ ~ ~~ s' ~ ~ o wraeaar~cr ~ yy +~ ~~ -- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~I ~ tiaNttkesr U1fa~ Ghr~r i.n ~ _ __.._.. ___.W Aspen C,tsek S1. ~ _ . ~ -- _ . W pu Ciekk C2 I r ~!?ligy Ln ~Thorti Cedbk 91 i_ W J'+MZ Greek St~~~® V11 ~krm Creek Ci _ y~ ~9Ck ~ ~Q~~ _-_ W ~4 Gree!'Jt - X005 [3Y4V'fEfi~ January 18, 2007 PP 06-055 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Ronald Van Auker ITEM NO. S REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from Jan 9, 2007 -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 lots on 39.28 acres in existing I-L zone and C-G zones for Seyam Subdivision - 3660 EastLanark Street 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 P8Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clty of Meridian. January 18, 2007 AZ Ob-031 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT James L. Jewett ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from Jan 1 b, 2007: Annexation and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8, R-4, TN-R, TN-C, 8~ R-2 8~ L-O for South Ridge Subdivision - south side of C)verland Rd between Linder Road and Ten Mile 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: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet /Minutes See attached Memo from Planning See attached correspondence INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Emails from Citizens Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of fhe Clay of Meridian. January 18, 2007 P P 06-031 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT James L. Jewett ITEM NO. 10 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from Jan 16, 2007: Preliminary Plat approval of 224 lots including: 189 residential lots, l lcommercial/other lots 8< 8 Mega lots [to be developed in the near future} 8,16 common/open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN-C, TN-R, L-0, R-8, R-4 i3< R-2 zones for South Ridge Sub-south side of Overland Rd between Linder Rd 8< Ten Mile Rd: 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: See attached Emaiis from Citizens COMMENTS See Previous item Packet /Minutes See attached Memo from Planning See attached Correspondence Contacted: Date: Emailed: Staff Initials: Phone: January 19, 2007 MI O6-Ol i MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Treehaven, LLC ~'~ ND• ~ ~ REQUEST Public Hearing -Miscellaneous application to amend the previously approved DA by including a provision to permit the installation of a double wide mobile office building on the property at 4740 W. Chinden Blvd for The Tree Farm Annexation {AZ 06-004) - n/o Chinden Blvd on both sides of Black Cat AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See attached Staff Comments CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No comments CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See attached Comments SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presenfied at putsHc meetin®s shall t~ecome property of the CHy of Meridian. January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Farwest, LLC RZ 06-008 January 23, 2007 ITEM NO. ~ Z REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office/Commercial Addition - South of Chinden Blvd and West of N. Linder 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: See attached Affidavit of Posting Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: COMMENTS See P >L Z Item Packet /Minutes See Attached Recommendation Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. January 18, 2007 MCU 06-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT Farwest, LLC ITEM NO. 13 REQUEST Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed CUP approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Sub No 12 for loehsa Falls Office/Commercial Addition -South of Chinden Boulevard and West of N. Linder 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: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See attached P8Z Item Packet /Minutes see attached Recommendations Date: Staff Initials: Phone: January 18, 2007 AZ 06-052 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT POrfICO, LLC ITEM NO. ~ 4 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.17 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Portico Place Subdivision - 1780 E. McMillan 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 attached P&Z Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations Contacted: Date: Emailed: Phone: JTQTT Ir11TIQ15: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • January 18, 2007 AZ 06-042 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2(~7 APPLICANT Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust ITEM NO. 16 REQUEST Ordinance -Annexation and Zoning of 20.18 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Cottswoid Yillcage Subdivision - 2180 East Amity Road 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 WEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Emaiied: Materials presented at See attached Ordinance v~ d~~~ B"' 0 Date: / d'd' ~ ' Phone: i}C eat . CoM toff I itials: mes8ngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER(. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 BOISE IDAHO 01/25/07 01:48 PM DEPUTY PatB Thompson III IIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIII III III RECORDED-REQUEST OF 17011158 City of Meridian CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING ORDINANCE N0.07-1282A BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING DESCRIPTION FOR AN ORDINANCE (AZ- 06-042 COTTSWOLD VILLAGES SUBDIVISION) FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY BEING A PORTION OF THE WEST %: OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/ OF THE SOUTHWEST'/ OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A"AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIlVIITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN A5 REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM RUT (ADA COUNTY) TO R-4 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-zoned from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Low Density Residential District) and in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. ANNEXATION OF AZ-06-042 COTTSWOLD VILLAGES SUB Page 1 of 3 SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re- zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote ofone-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDL~N, IDAHO, this ~ day of ~lGl~tit-fit. ~/I , 2007. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 3 `~~' day of ~Gt/~+~-tvt, r// , 2007. ~~ X22 i~ MAYOR de WEERD ANNEXATION OF AZ-06-042 COTTSWOLD VILLAGES SUB Page 2 of 3 ATTEST: WII.LIAM G. BERG, STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada ) ® ~~ `~ r__~~G CITY CLEF ~°`~ ~ ~ J~ ' ~'~' ®~` ~s~®'r°rrrr~esaa~o s~i~+o'~~`~~4y, On this o73'~ day of , TO~rt u ~L.rta _ , 2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., 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 first above written. ~~ rA IrY~l ~ ~ 0 0 ~ NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: C~ ~(~ l~ 1 ~ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Ip-e ~.-~ ~ ANNEXATION OF AZ-06-042 COTTSWOLD VII,LAGES SUB Page 3 of 3 A. Legal Description IDAHO SURVEY GROUP 1450 Last Wacertnwer Sc sire Iso Meridian, fdaho 83b4Z• , Phone (208) 8qb-8570 •• Fax (208) 884-5399 ProjectNo. 06 135 Nlay 1, 2006 ' Dalton Annexation Description . The West 1/z of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 29, T.3N.;1t.1 F;., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly descn'bed as follows: Commencing at the comer common to Sections 29, 30, 31, and 32 of ~'.3N., 7t.1>;., B.M.; Thence South 89°43'50" laast,1322.G0 feet to tha Wcst 1/16 comer common to said Sections 29 and 32, said paint being the REA][. POllVT OF BEGINNYNG. Thence North 00°07'38" West, 1325,01 feet to the SW I/1 G ettim~i of said Section 29; Thence Month 89°42'02" East, 6G5.67 feet to the Northeast Amer of the West ] /2 ot'the SF 114 of the SW 1/4; ' Thence South 00°03'54" West, 1324.64 feet to di® Southeast corner of the West 1!2 of tha SE 1/4 of the SW ]/4 of said Sectiuu 29; • ' Thence North 89°43'50" West, 6G1.22 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 20.18 acres, ~uorC or less. Prepared By: Idaho Survey nE~~ APpim~.l~~ 3Y _~-" ,r I iti ^'~' ~, 'p. J4K~ I,'', D. Terry Peugh, PLS Pro Fesslonal Land Surveyors B. Site Map S89'42'02"E ~------- 665_6?' ---~-_ 1 W ~~ 0 ~ ~ _~ C { I I I I REAL POINT 5.30 S.29 ~ OF BEGINNING 588'43_50° _ _ _ _ FOUND 5~8p S'~2 132z.so N89'43'S0"W IRON F'IN s~~ .~2 ANNEXATION MAP ~'~'" t~~~aile En neerln lnc. Y ~ g~ ~ ~IUlL ENGINEERING I R[ANNING I CADD I 1%10 Q~IRON FJK~$&OR Tq ^08.898-00/3 RApI& 81 83816 FAX 208.B3B.Og16 1 I 1 Ij IT W ~~ ~AA ~~ T (~' I +. .~ ' { ~ ~fi~ti Ij A~ WORIKS DEPT. C 1 I I1 ~~ 681.22 FOUND ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENT NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE N0.07- / 2 ~ ~ ~ PROVIDING FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting annexation and zoning for land being a portion of the West lh of the Southeast 1/a of the Southwest'/a of Section 29, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Attachment "A". This parcel contains 20.18 acres more or less. Also, this parcel is SUBJECT TO all easements and rights-of--way of record or implied. As surveyed in attached exhibit "B" and is not based on an actual field survey. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at C~,~y~tHal1~~~Cty of Meridian, 33 East Idaho Avenu~e,~ Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance; 5`l~i~l~~ai~e,•effective on the Z r.~ day of ~c/~~Ir , 2007. ` ,; ~~ ~~'.°°.-.-- °:.~~ fd,/.~ bs`~.<`~ ; fir; :' ~. Mayor and City Council of e City ~f M r~lian "` "~ ~, By: William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerl-° ~~ r, First Reading: ~~ 2~ - 0 7 Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho C Second Reading: ° viii 9i7 <. ,, by suspension of the _ NO STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF Si1MMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 07- /2 S Z LZ The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Ordinance No. 07- l Z 8Z- ~ of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-901A (3). DATED this ~ j day of ~~~ 2007. L- William. L.M. Nary, City ~a ey ORDINANCE SUMMARY-AZ-06-042 COTTSWOLD VII,LAGES SUB Page 1 of 1 January 18, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 23, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. ~ 7 REQUEST Executive Session per Idaho State code 67-2345(1)(f) - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation) 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: 1DAH0 POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POSE OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pub8c meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.