Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-27CCCITY COUNCIL REGULAR >W;rrl�zan MEETING AGENDA IDAHO �C � TRensuae VNi%Y City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 27, 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 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 23, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Tabled from January 23, 2007: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: Table to March 27, 2007 C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-045 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.556 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds — 4515 South Locust Grove Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-047 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.556 acres in a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • proposed R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds — 4515 South Locust Grove Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-063 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 14 building lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G zone for CentrePointe Subdivision No. 2 (North) by W.H. Moore Company — NWC of Ustick and Eagle Roads: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: RZ 06-012 Request for a Rezone of 1.69 acres from an R-4 to a C -C zone for Cherry Linder Rezone by Darren Blaser — 1440, 1516 and 1528 W. Cherry Lane: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-060 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 Acres from RUT to R-8 & R-15 zones for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development — South of McMillan Road and East of Linder Road.: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-061 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 18 single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone and 8 single family residential lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development — South of McMillian Road and East of Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval I. Approve New Beer and Wine Licenses for Health Nuts Natural and Organic Market by Denise Stevenson at 1756 W. Cherry Lane, Ste 110: J. Approve Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Javo Construction: K. Approve Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Reflection Ridge Subdivision by Corinthian Communities, Inc.: L. Approve Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hooaland at 1625 E. Bentley Drive: M. Approve Legal Department Budget Amendment for Deputy City Attorney: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • 0 N. Approve Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CHWHILL for $34,000.00: O. Permanent Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks: P. Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek. LLC.: Q. Approve Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services No. 2 for Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project with JUB Engineers for $15,000.00: R. Permanent and Temporary Easement Right -of -Way Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Aoratos, LLC, Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC, Strada Commercial, LLC, and Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: S. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos LLC: T. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments. LLC: U. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: V. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC: W. Approve Building Lease Extension with William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership for general office space at 660 East Watertower Lane: X. Approve Performance Contract with _New Heritage Theatre Co`. 6. Department Reports: 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 3 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 8. Request for Reconsideration by Morgan Development, Inc. for Woodland Springs Professional Park: 9. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Denial: AZ 06-054 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.40 acres from R1 zone to an L -O zone for Woodland SDringts Professional Park by Morgan Development, Inc. —1630 E. McMillan Road: 10. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: 11. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi -family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi -family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common / other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: 12. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for a multi -family development in a L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: 13. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O -T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Property by Paradigm Real Estate Holding — 39 W. Pine Avenue: 14. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O -T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 — 911 N. Meridian Road: 15. Public Hearing: AZ 06-046 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 21.7 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. — 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: 16. Public Hearing: PP 06-048 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 61 single-family residential lots and 6 common lots on 21.7 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. — 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 0 17. Public Hearing: VAC 07-002 Request to Vacate a public utility, drainage & irrigation easement common to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of the Olson & Bush Industrial Park for Lanark Street Easement by Ronald W. Van Auker — NWC of Eagle Road and East Lanark Street at 3180 East Lanark Street: 18. Public Hearing: AP 07-001 Request for City Council's review in an Appeal of stafrs denial of the Administrative Design Review application for the proposed Commercial Tire building for Commercial Tire by J.R. & Bonnie Schwenkfelder —100 W. Pennwood Street: 19. Public Hearing: VAR 07-002 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-31-1-462 to allow construction of right -tum only direct access to N. Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. — 3291 E. Pine Street: 20. Public Hearing: VAC 07-001 Request for a Vacation on a note on the Porky Park Subdivision No. 1 plat that prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. — 3291 E. Pine Street: 21. Public Hearing: Proposed Fireworks Ordinance: 22. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c) — (to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. REVISED 02-26-07 CITY OF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR 0 iDaH o. IDA MEETING AGENDA q TxsnsitRE V i803 City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 27, 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: X David Zaremba _X Joe Borton O Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird .)C _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: b y ARy d'c. 7Z--aap 0'15-2- /ra qvv- 3. Community Invocation by #474c �,Pard, wl i -x, 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 23, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Tabled from January 23, 2007: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: Table to March 27, 2007 C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-045 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.556 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds — 4515 South Locust Grove Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-047 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.556 acres in a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. REVISED 02-26-07 proposed R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds - 4515 South Locust Grove Road: 41�&-<-- E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-063 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 14 building lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G zone for CentrePointe Subdivision No. 2 (North) by W.H. Moore Company - NWC of Ustick and Eagle Roads: A,1"V"-- F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: RZ 06-012 Request for a Rezone of 1.69 acres from an R-4 to a C -C zone for Cherry Linder Rezone by Darren Blaser - 1440, 1516 and 1528 W. Cherry Lane: 417/ N -c, G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-060 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 Acres from RUT to R-8 & R-15 zones for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development - South of McMillan Road and East of Linder Road.: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-061 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 18 single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone and 8 single family residential lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development - South of McMillian Road and East of Linder Road:-R-Fepar— FlindiRgs of Fast-aandd-�. I. Approve New Beer and Wine Licenses for Health Nuts Natural and Organic Market by Denise Stevenson at 1756 W. Cherry Lane, Ste 110: 1f� J. Approve Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Javo Construction: 07)" „,,' K. Approve Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Reflection Ridge Subdivision by Corinthian Communities, Inc.: G i L. Approve Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hoogland at 1625 E. Bentley Drive: aloy,�ov,-, M. Approve Legal Department Budget Amendment for Deputy City Attorney:.,�,,� Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda - February 27, 2007 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. REVISED 02-26-07 N. Approve Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CH2MHILL for $34,000.00: 47"U-, O. Permanent Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks:�,,,� P. Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC.: �p�►rowL Q. Approve Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services No. 2 for Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Proiect with JUB Engineers for $15,000.00: a77WV,,.v R. Permanent and Temporary Easement Right -of -Way Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Aoratos, LLC, Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC, Strada Commercial, LLC, and Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: iov� S. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos, LLC: 41TV-0vI-c, T. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Proiect with Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC: A-lI'-JvW v�e, U. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: A a_ Vw V. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial, LLC: `,.�v� W. Approve Building Lease Extension with William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership for general office space at 660 East Watertower Lane: &J.h-V VX, X. Approve Performance Contract with New Heritage Theatre Company: � 'N`,v�- 6. Department Reports: a�,cir ,¢owrfree_ A. Mayors Office: 1. Appointments to the Arts Commission: r7w.& �' dc✓ri Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 3 5f 5`�1 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. 0 B. Purchasing Department: REVISED 02-26-07 1. Discussion and Approval of Change Order No. 2 from Ideal Demolition for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition in the amount of $83,000.00: 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: nvA-t- 8. Request for Reconsideration by Morgan Development, Inc. for Woodland Springs Professional Park: &!e^,I re foacd'i(- 9. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Denial: AZ 06-054 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.40 acres from R1 zone to an L -O zone for Woodland Springs Professional Park by Morgan Development, Inc. — 1630 E. McMillan Road: 09 10. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: �yre-flF, 4 e -l -e ql;,� AVS 11. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi -family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi -family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common / other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: �re�� -1lf -t 6 Ie 12. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for a multi -family development in a L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 EMa is View Court: /eme A-,4�/�� ci,Q 07: Io ro vu e- 13. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O -T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Property by Paradigm Real Estate Holding — 39 W. Pine Avenue: vf- ¢ LI.f ArY- �.i✓-D�� 14. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O -T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 — 911 N. Meridian Road: Igre-Pa--C �►I f e 611 Aw w"aV k"<. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. REVISED 02-26-07 15. Public Hearing: AZ 06-046 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 21.7 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. - 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: Ca».fin,,,e p`A 1-v 3-/3-07 16. Public Hearing: PP 06-048 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 61 single-family residential lots and 6 common lots on 21.7 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. - 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: carte ZLc., p/h. �v 3-13-o7 17. Public Hearing: VAC 07-002 Request to Vacate a public utility, drainage & irrigation easement common to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of the Olson & Bush Industrial Park for Lanark Street Easement by Ronald W. Van Auker - NWC of Eagle Road and East Lanark Street at 3180 East Lanark Street: X7 j% ,ova 18. Public Hearing: AP 07-001 Request for City Council's review in an Appeal of staffs denial of the Administrative Design Review application for the proposed Commercial Tire building for Commercial Tire by J.R. & Bonnie Schwenkfelder -100 W. Pennwood Street: " 'f- re f — 19. Public Hearing: VAR 07-002 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-31-1-4132 to allow construction of right -tum only direct access to N. Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. - 3291 E. Pine Street: 1,,-e p &,.c r/rc or a e A-, dz,,--etG 20. Public Hearing: VAC 07-001 Request for a Vacation on a note on the Porky Park Subdivision No. 1 plat that prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. - 3291 E. Pine Street: IV,�A-lt 1-1-r v &1-t -/?� 6&_4'At 21. Public Hearing: Proposed Fireworks Ordinance: C�6I--, .e.//k A 3-., -07 22. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c) - (to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency): Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — February 27, 2007 Page 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. as ?o.Syhjt ('C' NOTICE OF HEARING CITY OF MERIDIAN PROPOSED FIREWORKS ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, February 27, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho to accept public comments and testimony on the proposed Fireworks Ordinance. Copies of the proposed Fireworks Ordinance are available for public inspection and review, at the following location: Meridian City Hall City Clerk's Office 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 By title, the scope of the ordinance is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, REPEALING CHAPTER 4 OF TITLE 5 OF THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE, RELATING TO FIREWORKS, PROVIDING FOR A NEW CHAPTER 4, TITLE 5 TO BE KNOWN AS "THE MERIDIAN FIREWORKS ORDINANCE"; PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR ISSUANCE OF PERMITS; (PROVIDING FOR APPLICATIONS;) PROVIDING FOR INVESTIGATIONS; PROVIDING FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR AUTHORIZATION DATES; PROVIDING FOR TEMPORARY FIREWORKS STANDS AND TENTS; PROVIDING FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE; PROVIDING FOR RECORD KEEPING; PROVIDING FOR COMPLIANCE WITH IDAHO STATE CODE AND PROVIDING FOR VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES. The public is encouraged to review the proposed ordinance, attend the public hearing and offer comments and testimony. Oral testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes per person. Written comments are welcome. Please send written comments to the Meridian City Clerk, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 by Thursday, February 22, 2007. All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. The hearing will be held in a facility that is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 72 hours prior to the public hearing. j`„11111 f 11111, DATED this 2nd day of February, 2007 WILLIAM G. Publish 5b and 19th of February, 2007 FPP lilt., s 3ERG., R., ITS CL RK a s � � rim •, a° 'f°°py�A$P�g44R 11 v111it�.•�'°e,° 0 0 Will Berg From: Sharon Smith Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:39 PM To: Will Berg Subject: FW: Boy Scouts flag ceremony Do you want them to come today? He called and left a message on my Vmail earlier ............. From: Sharon Smith Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:16 AM f(VpP To: Peggy Gardner; Tammy de Weerd; Will Berg r Subject: Boy Scouts flag ceremony (��� v l y?i Page 1 of 1 Do we have scouts schedule to be here tomorrow? I had a call from Tory McDonald — 342-3559, ext 3101. Can his Boy Scout troops do a Flag Ceremony? It just takes a few minutes, they move flags, say pledge, post colors. They will be earning a badge for the ceremony. I can call him if you would like — Thanks! Sharon Smith Sr. Deputy City Clerk Meridian City Clerks Office Phone 208.888.4433 2/27/2007 Meridian City Council Meeting February 27, 2007 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, February 27, 2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Joe Borton, Keith Bird, and David Zaremba. Members Absent: Charlie Rountree. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Gene Trakel, Ron Anderson, Joe Silva, Caleb Hood and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll -call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba 0 Charlie Rountree X X Joe Borton X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Well, good evening. We will go ahead and get started. We appreciate you all joining us here tonight. Welcome back to those who were with us last night -- or last week. We appreciate you returning. And we will go ahead and start tonight's meeting. It is Tuesday, February 27th. It's five minutes after 7:00. Tonight we will start with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Tonight we will have our colors posted by Boy Scout Troop 152. So, would you all rise. (Pledge of allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Mike Dodd, Capital Christian Church. De Weerd: Very well done. Now, if I could ask the troop to, please, come forward. I do have some City of Meridian pins that we'd like to give to you. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Mike Dodd. He's with Capital Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Dodd: Thank you, Mayor and Council people. Please join me in a word of prayer. Dear Father, we thank you so much for this day, Lord, that you have made, and, Father, we just tonight acknowledge your goodness in our lives, your faithfulness, Lord, and ask that, Lord, you would just impart wisdom, Lord, as decisions are made and items of E Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 2 of 100 • importance are discussed, Father God, we just thank you that this city, in fact, is progressing and prospering to the benefit of all those that call Meridian their home, Lord God, and, Lord, I just pray your blessing upon every councilmember tonight, Lord, that makes rich and adds to sorrow to it, that your joy, Lord, would be their strength, Father God, and I also pray your covering and hedge your protection around the city -- the city's civil servants, the schools, Lord God, the administration of each school, Lord, the businesses, the churches, and, Lord, the residents of the City of Meridian, in the name of Jesus I pray, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Pastor, I, too, would like to give you one of our City of Meridian pins. Thank you for joining us. Okay. Council, Item No. 4, adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the agenda as published. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as published. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 23, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Tabled from January 23, 2007: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: Table to March 27, 2007 C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-045 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.556 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds — 4515 South Locust Grove Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-047 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.556 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision by Wirt Edmonds — 4515 South Locust Grove Road: Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 3 of 100 E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-063 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 14 building lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G zone for CentrePointe Subdivision No. 2 (North) by W.H. Moore Company — NWC of Ustick and Eagle Roads: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: RZ 06-012 Request for a Rezone of 1.69 acres from an R-4 to a C -C zone for Cherry Linder Rezone by Darren Blaser — 1440, 1516 and 1528 W. Cherry Lane: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: AZ 06-060 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 Acres from RUT to R-8 & R-15 zones for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development — South of McMillan Road and East of Linder Road.: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Approval: PP 06-061 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 18 single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone and 8 single family residential lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone for Arch Rock Subdivision by CTD Development — South of McMillian Road and East of Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 1. Approve New Beer and Wine Licenses for Health Nuts Natural and Organic Market by Denise Stevenson at 1756 W. Cherry Lane, Ste 110: J. Approve Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Javo Construction: K. Approve Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Reflection Ridge Subdivision by Corinthian Communities, Inc.: L. Approve Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hooaland at 1625 E. Bentley Drive: M. Approve Legal Department Budget Amendment for Deputy City Attorney: N. Approve Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CH21VIHILL for $34,000.00: • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 4 of 100 O. Permanent Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks: P. Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC.: Q. Approve Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services No. 2 for Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project with JUB Engineers for $15,000.00: R. Permanent and Temporary Easement Right -of -Way Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Aoratos, LLC, Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC, Strada Commercial, LLC, and Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: S. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos, LLC: T. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC: U. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: V. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial, LLC: W. Approve Building Lease Limited Partnership for Watertower Lane: Extension with William A. Hon Family general office space at 660 East X. Approve Performance Contract with New Heritage Theatre Company: De Weerd: Item 5, Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 5 of 100 Bird: On the Consent Agenda, Item B, resolution, has been asked to be tabled to March 27th. And the rest of them would stay as is. I move that we approve the revised Consent and the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as revised. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Mayors Office: 1. Appointments to the Arts Commission: De Weerd: Okay. Counsel, I gave you a group of resumes about a month ago on my suggestions for appointments to the Arts Commission and they are as follows: Meg Glasgow, who is a business owner here in town and also an artist. Dwight Williams, an artist and a photographer. Sandra Cavanaugh, who is artistic director of New Heritage Theatre. David Stolhand, who is president of the Meridian symphony. Nancy Rountree, our citizen at large, and I did like how the Statesman put it, our enthusiast. And Fred Shaddick, who is a teacher at Mountain View High School in their theater arts. So, those would be my recommendations for appointment as charter members of our newly formed Arts Commission. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: What is your choice? Do you wish us to vote on them individually or can we make a motion to vote on them as a group? De Weerd: If you don't have any issue with any of the individuals, I think it would suffice as a group appointment. Bird: Madam Mayor, I got one question on time limit. Is all of them on the same time or is it -- or have you got time limits. Of course, I don't care one way or the other. De Weerd: Yeah. Mr. Bird, we will be developing bylaws and a structure. That's one of the first tasks that this commission will have. So, they -- we have met informally just to kind of outline roles, expectations, interests and give them an opportunity to ask questions or perhaps even know what they are getting themselves into. So, those kind 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 6 of 100 of things, in addition to a strategic plan and some of those discussion items will be their first task at hand. Bird: Do you want David to make the motion, then? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I would -- seeing no further discussion, I would move that we approve the appointment of all six candidates for the Meridian Arts Commission. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the appointments as presented. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Purchasing Department: 1. Discussion and Approval of Change Order No. 2 from Ideal Demolition for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition in the amount of $83,000.00: De Weerd: Thank you, Council. I appreciate your support on that. Okay. Item 6-13 under the purchasing department. Keith. Watts: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members. Before you is a change order to the Ideal Demolition contract for City Hall for removal and abatement of contaminated soils for discussion. If you have any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any discussion? Questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing none, I move that we enter into a change order not to exceed 83,000 dollars with Ideal Demolition for excavation, loading, covering, hauling, and abatement of contaminated soil from the new City Hall site. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 7 of 100 Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request in front of you. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Watts: Thank you. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Request for Reconsideration by Morgan Development, Inc. for Woodland Sprinas Professional Park: De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 8, request for a reconsideration by Woodland Springs Professional Park. Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you have in front of you a request for reconsideration from counsel. I believe that counsel is present on the Woodland Acres project -- or, excuse me, Woodland Springs Professional Park project. The matter was denied a couple of weeks ago. Those Findings are on your agenda. You can, basically, review the request as presented. If you have any questions of any sort for the staff, that would be fine. Otherwise, it's not a Public Hearing. Our general process we have followed is if a member of the Council that has voted in the affirmative wishes to reconsider the matter and make that motion, then, we would proceed from there with a second and discussion at that point. So, it's before you for your consideration, which ever way you wish to go is within your discretion. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, you do have a consideration request in front of you. If you would like to hear from the applicant, certainly, you could ask for any comments. If not, I would wait for your stated desire. Okay. If there is no further information needed in this request and if there is no motion for reconsideration, I will certainly move on. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: To take final action, if the Council does not wish to move to reconsider, I would recommend you make a motion to deny the request. De Weerd: Okay. So, you have to talk to me either way, guys. • 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 8 of 100 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I know the applicant is here and I have read the materials for the reconsideration, I just -- I would be inclined to invite the applicant to provide us any information that might not be in their written -- in their written request. I would afford that opportunity. If there was anything that hasn't already been presented in writing. De Weerd: Okay. Is that the desire of Council? Is the representative here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Lee: Certainly. Mayor de Weerd, Council Members, my name is Frank Lee. My address is 601 West Bannock Street, Boise, Idaho, And I'm here representing Morgan Development. Mr. Morgan is here today, as well as Dr. Tim Hansen, and they may wish, if it pleases the Mayor and Council, to say a few words. The request for reconsideration is, really, quite simple and, in fact, it has to do with a misunderstanding as to what sort of plat the City Council prefers to have with their annexation and rezone requests and what sort of plat that we were talking about and, frankly, we didn't realize that there was a miscommunication until after the hearing on -- I guess it was two weeks ago. And when that occurred I spoke with staff and I was able to identify that this was, in fact -- there was, in fact, a misunderstanding. The preference of the Council is certainly with land divisions to have them run currently. We have, actually, not contemplated a land division here, we have contemplated a condominium division at some point in the future after the project is developed. During the planning and zoning process there are a lot of issues about a plat -- or ACHD had not yet made some decisions and staff thought that a plat might expedite ACHD efforts, so we said, sure, we will proceed with a plat, again, thinking it was a condominium plat. The ordinary process by which these sort of issues are resolved is through the CZC process that occurs after approval. And, frankly, it is our preference to continue on the normal process, although, granted, this is only a few months delay and, frankly, for Morgan Development it's not a huge issue, but it creates a huge issue for the client who wants to go into this space, Dr. Hansen, because he won't have enough time if this has to wait until a plat application -- a condo plat application and another application is filed, just won't make his deadlines. And so, you know, this is a matter for your discretion. You don't have to -- obviously, you don't have to approve our request for reconsideration now, but we think that it's appropriate to do so, because it allows the project to move forward in a way that works for Dr. Hansen and there is no real benefit, at least that I could identify in my discussions with staff, to not approve it at this time. Staff did, actually, review this letter before it was finalized and Caleb Hood concurred with its analysis and content. And, again, we work with staff as much as we possibly can and ACHD and we think that this project is viable and appropriate as it was presented and, you know, we will apologize for the miscommunication and misunderstanding, but, again, we think that this is an appropriate project for you to approve and request your Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 9 of 100 reconsideration. And if it pleases the Mayor and Council to hear from Mr. Morgan or Dr. Hansen, we would certainly invite them to come up and speak as well. De Weerd: Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: I might have misled you. I wasn't, necessarily, asking for any presentation. I just merely wanted to afford you the opportunity if there was something that hadn't been in the letter, to give you that chance. So, I don't think there is anything necessary that I'm requesting. Lee: No. We have been very forthright with the staff and wanted to lay it all out and so that's the reason why I put it in the letter, so that people would have an opportunity to -- you know, to confirm that their understanding is the same as ours. Borton: Fair enough. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Lee. Council, any further information needed? Okay. I would ask for your direction. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would -- if there is no further discussion, I would move that we deny the request for reconsideration. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 8. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 9: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order for Denial: AZ 06-054 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.40 acres from R1 zone to an L -O zone for Woodland Springs Professional Park by Morgan Development, Inc. —1630 E. McMillan Road: • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 10 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Berg. Okay public hearings on Waverly Place Subdivision. here without -- Item 9. 0 . Items 10, 11 and 12 are continued Oh, I already -- I'm whipping through Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Item 9 is the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Woodland Springs Professional Park. Normally, these would be on your Consent Agenda for approval. You just need to do that separately, now that you have made a motion regarding the reconsideration. De Weerd: Thank you. Borton: Madam Mayor? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and order for denial of AZ -06-054 and request the Mayor to sign all necessary documents. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Findings for Item 9. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi -family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi -family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common / other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L -O zone for Waved Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: Item 12: Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for a multi -family n U Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 11 of 100 development in a L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC — 2510 E. Magic View Court: De Weerd: Okay. Items 10, 11 and 12 on Waverly Place Subdivision, AZ 06-047, PP 06-049 and CUP 06-030. 1 will open this with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Waverly Place project. It's Lot 6, Block 1, of Magic View Subdivision, also known as 2510 West Magic Court. The applications before you tonight are for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and conditional use approval for a multi -family development in the L -O zone that is being requested. The development includes the annexation and zoning to light office, L -O. Preliminary plat approval of six multi -family residential building lots and a clubhouse lot. And Conditional Use Permit approval for 24 multi -family residential dwellings. And those are in six four-plexes. This is the plat. You can see the -- the larger lots that will accommodate the four-plexes. They are easier to see here. So, you have one, two, three, four, five, six and, then, this is the clubhouse. The gross residential density is 5.1 units per acre. The net density is 6.4 units per acre. The history on this becomes important to this application, so I will go through that. Staff originally required the applicant to submit a Comprehensive Plan amendment concurrent with the application, similar to the project that you saw before you just south of here immediately across the street to the south. The applicant appealed that decision and we brought it to Council and Council directed staff to go ahead and accept the application, as we did. The ambiguity that -- or what happened during that Council review was the discussion of the light office designation -- and how that reads is this designation will provide opportunities for low impact business areas. These would include offices, technology and resource centers, ancillary commercial uses may be considered, particularly within research and development centers or technological parks. Additionally, as noted in the residential district section of the Comprehensive Plan, light office uses may be appropriate in limited circumstances and at the discretion of City Council. And there was -- that last sentence is what was the hang up. It was added when we allowed some light office uses within the residential districts for parcels that, basically, weren't well suited for residential development, but we put that phrase in the office use as well and it was the -- in limited circumstances at the discretion of City Council that was perhaps ambiguous, so City Council directed me to go ahead and accept the application without the Comprehensive Plan amendment. You also directed me to go ahead and change the Comprehensive Plan, which has already been accomplished. But when this application was filed that's how the Comprehensive Plan read. Staff still believes that it's the intent of the office designation -- particularly in this area, to provide a low intensity transition from the commercial to residential uses and all that -- all the interior parcels are designated on the Comprehensive Plan as commercial and, then, all the kind of border lots within the Magic View Subdivision as designated for light office -- or for, excuse me, office designation, as I read to you before. We do have elevations of the proposed structures. That's the landscape plan. These are the four-plexes. Two of the units will have driveways on the sides and, then, two in the front that you can see there. Actually, all four of them are in the front on that one. I was thinking of another project. Sorry. So, those are the four-plexes. This gets into just more detail about the Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 12 of 100 front. And this is the proposed clubhouse. The Commission recommended approval at their January 4th Public Hearing. Becky McKay, the applicant's representative, spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition. Jim Recker, Gene Fox, and Dave Pearcey all commented on the application. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were compliance with the Unified Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan. Their key change to staffs initial recommendation is that staff did originally recommend denial, so they asked staff to go back and prepare conditions for approval. They also struck the requirement pertaining to private streets and required common drives instead. And that's kind of on the two comer properties in the southeast comer and, then, the northwest comer they make use of some private -- or common drives. Otherwise, they are public streets. The outstanding issues before City Council is compliance of the proposed multi -family development within the Comprehensive Plan and as I explained earlier. The written testimony since the staff report, we did get three e-mails from Richard Carlson supporting Council's previous denial of residential in this area and expressing opposition of the proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan. There was also verbal testimony. There was one person who chose to testify at your last hearing and they did speak in opposition to the proposed project. With that I will answer any questions Council may have at this time. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Questions from Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor, at this time. De Weerd: I guess just two -- two letters that weren't referenced in your staff report. One by Ronald Hodge, president of homeowners association of Woodbridge, and Tony Serio, a resident in Woodbridge. So, is the representative here? McKay: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'd like to apologize to the Council, the Mayor, and to the public who attended the meeting last week. I was stuck - De Weerd: Do you want to state your name and address for the record. McKay: Oh. Becky McKay. Sorry. I do my apology first. De Weerd: Spell it, so they know who the apology is coming from. McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. I'm representing the applicant. As I stated, I'd like to apologize to the Council, the Mayor, and to the public who attended the last meeting. I was first on Star's agenda, last on Meridian's, I did not anticipate my tar and feathering to take that amount of time. And so I had -- by the time I limped my way back to Meridian you guys had adjourned. So, I appreciate the fact that you did defer this to this evening and give me the opportunity to present this project for your review tonight. I'd like to kind of begin with giving you a little bit of background on this particular project. It's small in stature. There is only about 4.68 acres, 5.3 acres as far as the annexation is concerned. When the applicant 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 13 of 100 • brought this before me, I was not very interested in this project, but as he showed me the elevations that he had drawn up by Glancey's group, talked to me about the need for luxury condominiums in this area, that is a growing commercial medical corridor up through here, he convinced me that this project did have merit. At that time the Conger project had been submitted. A Comprehensive Plan map amendment. They were bringing forth a multi -family project. It was my recommendation that we sit back and we watch that particular project, because I was not convinced that a Comprehensive Plan map amendment was an appropriate route to take. As you well know, that -- the Conger project was denied by the Council and it also faced a substantial amount of opposition from the Woodbridge neighborhood. They were not pleased with the design, not pleased with the product, and came out in large numbers against it. And in this particular project my client met with the Greenhill Estates people that adjoin us on the north, met with the Woodbridge residents, their board, their president, showed them the quality of this project and won them over. A vast majority of them came out and supported us at the Planning and Zoning Commission, which is almost unheard of at these types of meetings. People typically only attend if they are objecting to a proposal. But what impressed them, I think, is the fact that if you look at the -- I think what impressed them was the overall look of this project. They are 1,500 to 2,000 square feet. They anticipate that they will be constructed between 175 to 200 dollars per square feet. So, that translates about between 250 to 400 thousand dollars. They are townhomes. They are attached in pods of four. We have six of them. They all have two car garages. They would have stucco and masonry on the exterior. The applicant also brought to me a picture of his entrance -- I mean he's thought this through in depth. We submitted this elevation of the front of the entrance. We also submitted an elevation of the 2,000 square foot clubhouse. And even though this is a small project, he's devoted 16 percent of this project to open space and included a clubhouse for their use. One of the stumbling blocks I think the staff had with the project in their review was the definition in the Comprehensive Plan. The definition in the L -O designated areas, which is what this particular project lies within. It's kind of a ring of L -O with mixed use regional in the center. It came about when they were reworking the Comp Plan, the land use map, based on input from the neighbors in this particular area, who did not want to see that commercial go right up against their boundary, that they were looking for some type of a buffering. And based on comments that I have received from some people who were on that committee, that comp plan committee, they have stated that the L -O appears to be a reasonable middle ground where they could be assured that they wouldn't have a 24 hour commercial service, they wouldn't have a four or five story hotel right in their backyard. Now, your L -O definition doesn't talk about multi -family, but in the UDC, which is the most current document, which is the implementing document, whereas the Comp Plan is a guiding document, it allows for multi -family as a conditional use. So, in reviewing this it's obvious that the L -O allows for multi -family as a conditional use, but, yet, it's not defined in the definition. So, it is our belief or our contention that the appropriate zoning designation is L -O. That is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. We submitted a preliminary plat and a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit would allow for the multi -family within the L -O zone. And I looked at other jurisdictions' definitions to kind of see is this just something that is unusual to Meridian and in reviewing Boise, Nampa, Star, Mountain Home, we Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 14 of 100 find that the definitions are very very similar. Some of them they almost mirror Meridian's and they all allow for multi -family, either as a conditional use or some as a principal permitted use within an L -O zone. So, therefore, we believe that this application does comply with the Comprehensive Plan. We are asking for L -O. We are going through the conditional use process for the multi -family. In staffs review of this project, they indicated that it met all the requirements of the UDC. They had some suggestions. We made some minor modifications on buffering on the joint driveways, but, all in all, the staff said it does comply. And we believe this project has excellent merit and the Planning and Zoning Commission did, too. When they reviewed it they said we are just shocked with the support of this project. This is something that this neighborhood thinks is a good transition, a good addition to their area. And I think when we look at the traffic up in the St. Luke's corridor, a lot of that traffic is generated by the commercial development, by the spinoff medical. We will be providing a residential use in that particular area, which we talked time and time again about providing some type of diversity and mixed uses, so that people don't have to get in their vehicle to go to the doctor, they don't have to get in their vehicle to run over to a convenience store, that we start integrating these projects to accommodate varying uses. And by doing so reduce our dependency on automobiles. We had a long discussion during the Planning and Zoning Commission. One of the things that staff said, well, if this was an existing L -O zone, the staff would be one hundred percent supportive of this. But where you're asking for L -O, we don't feel that we can make the stretch. So, I guess from my professional opinion, I don't understand that. I mean the L -O -- if the L -O was not intended for multi -family, then, why in the UDC did we allow it as a conditional use? Why do other jurisdictions allow it? I have had many projects where we had multi -family in L -O zones. It is not something out of the ordinary or unusual. I will just kind of give you a brief overview, if Anna could go to the -- the project. This is Magic View Drive. This is the entrance into Woodbridge. Eagle Road is over on -- to the east. We will have an entrance here with a median. A lot of open space, as you can see. The units don't start until we get into the project a little bit, so we have a substantial amount of landscaping and buffering. The club -- 2,000 square foot clubhouse is here. And we have parking facilities. And, then, some equipment here, some little play equipment and some pathways that meander through there. The buildings, like I said, are pods of four and we have six pods. And, then, a center pod here. All of our streets are public streets. We are not asking for any variances. We are not deviating from the UDC standards. We have two joint driveways, one here, a common drive here, and a common drive here for these end units. The staff had some issues with the buffering between the units. We added some area in there, some landscaping, and we moved our units over a little bit, which, then, of course, satisfied that requirement. But I'd like the Council to look at this project with an open mind. There will be a total of 24 units. We are at 5.1 dwelling units per acre. And I think my client has done an excellent job of submitting information that could be pulled into his development agreement and tie this project down. A lot of our clients don't -- haven't thought through their projects as well as Mr. Jones has on this. And I was quite impressed and that's why I decided that even though this project was small in stature, it warranted my representation. Thank you. • 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 15 of 100 De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for Becky? Becky, I do. What makes this different from the one that was denied in this same zoning area? McKay: Madam Mayor, the problem with that -- the Conger project, I believe, was the Comprehensive Plan amendment was one. I believe the Council made statements that they were not comfortable with amending the Comprehensive Plan map for one specific project on a case-by-case basis, that they just didn't feel comfortable with that. And, secondly, I believe the quality of the project was not luxury -type condominiums, it was more your standard middle-of-the-road multi -family and they had not worked as closely with the neighborhood. In fact, it appeared that they almost worked against the neighborhood in trying to mitigate the concern and minimize the impact on the Woodbridge residents. Whereas, this project they have really gone out of their way to try to please as many people as possible. One of the other things that was mentioned was the fact that -- I believe Mr. Rountree indicated that he believed there were other options available that would allow multi -family within the umbrella of that L -O designation and this is one of those other options. And, therefore, it wouldn't warrant a Comp Plan change. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. I do have a number of people who have signed up to indicate their support or their opposition. If when I call your name you would like to provide verbal testimony, please, come forward at that time. Otherwise, I will read your name in support or opposition into the record. Gene Fox for. Mr. Fox, we can bring a microphone to you if you would prefer. Okay. Fox: My name is Gene Fox. I live at 582 South Woodhaven in Meridian with my wife Celeste. De Weerd: Thank you. Fox: And I thank the City Council for allowing me to speak this evening. We live to the south of the proposed project, approximately a long Jared Zabransky potato throw away. My sole purpose in being here is to represent the interests of the Woodbridge community to the best of my understanding and ability. I will not pretend that I speak for all of the Woodbridge residents, but I do have permission to voice the opinion of a significant majority. A few months ago I spoke here in an attempt to encourage you to not approve a plan being pursued by the Conger Group. Tonight I wish to encourage you to approve the Waverly Place project. Had the Conger plan been similar to Waverly Place, I would have supported, rather than opposed it. Jim Flecker, a fellow Woodbridge resident, my wife and I, and a number of other Woodbridge residents -- Ron, our president, association president, but especially my wife, have invested a significant amount of time and energy in developing backing for this project within our community. We are not shields for Mr. Alston Jones. We are not on his payroll. We merely believe that this project is a good compatible fit with our neighborhood. Our sole concern and desire is to help maintain the quality and integrity of the City of Meridian and the Woodbridge community. Matt Beers spoke here last Tuesday evening and this is the flier to which he referred. It was put together by the Woodbridge association 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 16 of 100 0 board and I'm the one -- probably the one who put it in his newspaper box. We have been working for months to get people interested and involved in the current project, so I was pleased that Matt spoke, because I firmly believe that if a person goes to all of the trouble of forming an opinion, then, there should be no reluctance to express it. Matt raised the issue of traffic and safety of Woodbridge residents, which is a concern for us all. Speeding on our streets is a common occurrence, but there have also been at least four incidents of vehicular mayhem. A mailbox was destroyed, because it popped into the path of a moving car. A woman crashes into her boyfriend's car, which was, unfortunately, parked in his own driveway. And two houses from us another person managed to smash into the rear end of a curb side parked car. All these incidents involved Woodbridge residents who were seriously impaired by various mind altering substances. The fourth occurrence concerned a small tree which had the misfortune of having been planted some ten or 12 feet from the roadway and which could not resist the urge to impede the progress of a motorist who was exploring a new path through the grass. Where the driver of that car lives is still a mystery. Fortunately, no people found themselves subjected to the same mishaps. The Woodbridge community needs to address the problem of traffic as quickly as possible. But our options appear to be limited to the judicious placement of speed bumps or perhaps spike strips. Concerns about traffic embroil almost every construction project that comes before this Council. Yes, this project will increase the flow of traffic passed our homes, but that traffic will be much less than what would have been produced by the R-9 development that we had previously opposed. Flow of traffic through the neighborhood will increase regardless of the type of development between Woodbridge, because Woodbridge is an island located on a connector between the mainstreams of Eagle, Locust Grove and Meridian Avenue. We cannot stop the increase, only hope to keep it lesser, rather than greater. I will not reiterate the virtues of Waverly Place, but I do believe this project, as proposed, will provide a pleasant transitional gateway on the east side of Woodbridge. Single story buildings of quality will compliment, rather than detract from the types of homes found in our neighborhood. Please allow me to share a concern with you. This project is to be built on land designated as L -O, that the Council has previously referred to a medical corridor. My concern is that there is so much land available in the area that it cannot be all developed as medically related or even as light office space. Further, the concern is that in a few years, if this land is still vacant, a builder will stand before this Council and state that the property could not be developed as designated and in its stead will be proposed multi -story, multi -family complexes, which a Council with a different face and attitude might approve. Should that happen the path into our neighborhood will not have such an attractive nature and the traffic situation in Woodbridge could become quite dire indeed. I sincerely urge you to approve this proposal. And if you had a question about Woodbridge, I would be happy to try to answer it. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Fox. Any questions from Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. E Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 17 of 100 Fox: Thank you. • De Weerd: Celeste Fox also signed up for. Thank you. Betty Morita. Thank you. Rich Allison signed up for. We were kind of hoping Mr. Fox spoke for you. No, I'm kidding. Allison: My name is Rich Allison. 916 North Main Street, Meridian. De Weerd: You know, Rich, I really like you. Allison: Well, I hope so, Tammy. Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: I was just trying to give you a hard time, so I will behave myself. Allison: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there are two things I would like to address. First of all, Alston Jones and I met with Anna Canning on -- to discuss a proposed townhome project on 6/20/05. We additionally met with her again on 9/16/05. She indicated this appeared to be an excellent transition use for this property and would simply require annexation, zoning to L -O, a Conditional Use Permit, and approval of the Public Hearing process. And, then, my client proceeded to acquire the property. The second thing I would like to address -- I was on both the 1993 Comprehensive Plan approval, I was also a member of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan -- what is called the land use subcommittee. And during our discussion in the 1993 Comprehensive Plan, I was the one that recommended the L -O zone be made for the lots around Magic View Subdivision, because a number of the residents in the Greenhill Estates to the north didn't -- as Becky was mentioning, want a 24 hour gas station, a drive-thru restaurant, whatever. And when I recommended the L -O and discussed the uses possible, this satisfied the landowners to the north. Of course, Woodbridge didn't exist then. After our meetings were concluded, the staff -- the City of Meridian, not the land use subcommittee -- created the designation office in the Comprehensive Plan and the staff actually wrote that definition after our meetings were concluded. There was never any discussion during the urban land use committee about an office zone. It was an L -O zone, limited office, allowing all the uses as outlined in the 1993 Comprehensive Plan. Thank you. Do you have any questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions for Mr. Allison? Allison: Thank you. De Weerd: Very well. Thank you. Bob Workett signed up for. Lary Holstead signed up for. Okay. Thank you. Lori Holstead. Thank you, ma'am. Carman Holstead signed up for. Okay. I'm sorry. I had Lary and Carman. So, you just count twice. Craig Steele signed up for. Steele: Craig Steele, 2021 Northwest 8th Street, Meridian. Madam Mayor, Council. I'm here in support for this for a couple different reasons. One, I think it's a great transition. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 18 of 100 s It's not a huge piece of property we are talking about. It's close to the hospital. And from everything that I read, that hospital is becoming more and more popular. Therefore, having some multi -family in a very nice way close to that hospital for those professional people who work there, is a nice thing to have. It is a good transition from the neighborhood to a commercial area. And, again, it doesn't come so far out of -- away from the subdivision of Woodbridge that it creates any real hindrance, I don't think, to the area around it, as far as office space and those type of things. The other thing that I'd like to say is I have worked with Alston for about three years now and Alston's always brought forth very nice quality projects and there is a lot to be said for that and as Meridian grows and the types of things that we want to be -- to have in our communities and known for, I think Alston can bring out a nice project in that area that we can be proud of. That's pretty much all I wanted to say. De Weerd: Thank you. Matt Beer signed up against and testified last week. Ron Hodge signed up for. Thank you. Ernest Bater signed up for. Okay. Thank you. And John Munt signed up for. Thank you, sir. Those are the names that signed up to indicate their support of or opposition. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to provide testimony on this application? Walker: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I apologize for not signing up. You had standing room only when I arrived and couldn't make my way over there to the table. De Weerd: That's all right, sir. If you will, please, state your name and address. Walker: Dan Walker. My address is 5457 Willow Lane, Nampa. I am a partner with Bill Caston in Idaho Real Estate Connection. Our office is at 23 East Fairview in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Walker: We are very familiar with the fast growing area, both north and south of the freeway. Our company is currently marketing a number of properties in and around the area, including the Majestic theater project on Overland, as well as many others. And for full disclosure purposes, I suppose I should tell you that we would be very proud to represent this proposed project moving forward. We feel uniquely qualified to speak to the quality not only of this project, but to the quality of the developers and the quality of the investors who are involved. As you well know, city officials rarely enjoy the luxury of making decisions on developments that have generated such little opposition. Many of those speaking tonight in favor of this application were the same citizens who opposed an earlier proposed development on an adjacent property. It is my belief that the majority of those choosing to support this project are basing their decision on two principal considerations. First, they believe the developers of Waverly Place have listened to their concerns and are proposing to build a lower density luxury condominium project of exceptional design and exceptional quality that should, indeed, enhance the value of their properties. Second and perhaps most importantly, they have gained the confidence that the developers of the Waverly Place project can be trusted • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 19 of 100 0 to complete this type of community that has been proposed to them. Since I know most of the Waverly Place developers personally and professionally as well, I can certainly vouch for their commitment to quality and I can also vouch for their financial strength. Three of the Waverly Place project owners are Meridian residents. They are Kathy Karl, better known in most circles as the mother of Koby Karl, the basketball star at BSU, giving basketball equal time with Mr. Zabransky tonight. She's also a Woodbridge community resident. Verl Terry is the owner of Intertech, a Meridian residential construction company. Craig Taylor, who lives in Meridian Greens, is vice-president and general counsel, as well as corporate secretary of Washington Group International. The other owners are George Juetten, who is the executive vice-president and chief financial officer at Washington Group. Richard Perry, senior vice-president and general counsel at Washington Group. Steve Johnson, the senior vice-president of corporate development for Washington Group. Roger and Linda Tebow, who are retired business owners and reside in Eagle. The managing partners of this development are Alston Jones, a retired Eagle, Idaho, businessman and his wife Sandy. Clayn Sonderegger and Terry Christensen, owners of Benchmark Construction Company. Many of you may be familiar with Benchmark's outstanding 58 year reputation in this state. Benchmark will be responsible for all site work and all construction. I rise in support of this project with the conviction that Waverly Place would be an outstanding addition to the City of Meridian. These developers and investors are determined to build a unique community of the highest quality that will be embraced by their customers, their neighbors, and by Meridian city officials. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Canning: Madam Mayor? Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, part of my job is to consistently and fervently advocate for the Comprehensive Plan and I think that there has been some confusion tonight between the Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code and I feel the need to back up just for a moment and clarify some of that discussion. The Comprehensive Plan has a list of designations that vary -- that do not directly comply or correlate to the Unified Development Code. For instance, the Comprehensive Plan has a commercial designation that specifically says high density residential is appropriate. So, you have approved in the past R-40 residential designation -- zoning designation in the commercial Comprehensive Plan designation. So, they can be very different things and I'm -- there is no one-to-one correlation. If you were doing a high density project, you could look for properties that have a Comprehensive Plan designation as commercial, of mixed use regional, or even of high density residential. So, there is not this one-to-one correlation between the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance. So, the Comprehensive Plan designation of office makes no mention of residential uses and that has been my point that I have been trying to make consistently. This project is a nice project. I am not denying that and I don't -- I can see why the neighbors like it. It's very similar in density to the project that they live in, it's just that the units happen to be attached. But it's, basically, the same density. If this property were designated industrial, I'm sure they would be here advocating for you to approve this project, but the point that I really want 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 20 of 100 you to think about is whether this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of office as I read it to you. It doesn't say that everything in the light office zoning category is appropriate. It has a very limited scope of what's appropriate for this designation. So, please, consider the Comprehensive Plan in -- in your decision and I hope to preserve the integrity of this district. If we need to clarify it and clean it up, I will certainly take that direction from Council, but I do believe that this office designation was there for a purpose and it wasn't to allow residential uses. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: In your defense, Anna, I believe the office designation was approved by the City Council on the change and we had one testimony that left it believing that you had changed it on your own, but you don't do that. Canning: No. Bird: So -- and there was two of us that were sitting on that in 2002 when it was changed. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would comment that I agree with everything that Director Canning has said. I also served on the committee that was made up of many stakeholders and citizens that was trying to write the UDC, which, eventually, was adopted by this Council. And there was discussion in the L -O zone about whether residential was appropriate and I hope I'm not misstating. The thought on the committee was that there should be a possibility -- if somebody had a large mostly office proposal, that it would be appropriate for them to be able by Conditional Use Permit to also have a portion of that be residential and that did seem to be appropriate to include it. So, the reason that it caught in there was that somebody said if I had a big L -O project, I need to be able to put a portion of it as residential. That doesn't appear to be what is happening here. The application we have before us is entirely residential in an L -O zone and the exception to that is if you consider the regionality of this small piece of property, except for the residential developments north and west of it, the rest of the land is either already annexed mostly as L -O or still in the county with the assumption that it will be annexed as L -O and in that regional view, I would very be comfortable that this is a small portion of residential. This entire project is a small portion of residential within a bigger L -O picture and I think it meets the intent of what the framers of the UCD, the Unified Development Code, were intending. That's my personal opinion and I hope it's not terribly disagreeing with what Director Canning just said. I think it supports it. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 21 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. With the addition of Director Canning's statements, is there any further public testimony that is desired by our public? If not, I would ask the representative for her wrap-up remarks. McKay: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I will be brief, since we didn't have anybody speak in opposition, so there aren't any items I need to address as far as that's concerned. I guess I would like for the Council to, obviously, take into consideration that these people took time out of their busy schedules to come here and support this project. To me, that's pretty amazing. I haven't had that happen before. So, this is a unique situation. Secondly, the Comprehensive Plan is a guiding document. It's a living document that we utilize to do the best that we can in our land use planning. And as a guiding document not all the pegs fit in the right holes and we have to look at projects on a case-by-case basis and I think that's what the Council does every Tuesday night. This particular parcel is back there up against single family residential, low and medium. It's not out there along the Eagle Road corridor. It's not lying next to commercial, such as McDonald's or Subway. It's tucked back in here. And I am absolutely convinced that the intent, when they were laying out the Comprehensive Plan map, was that this area have a proper mixture and a proper transition and I believe transition was the key word. That the development that would take place along Greenhill Estates, along this future medium residential area, would be an appropriate transition. And I think that's what we have here. We didn't submit this as an R-11 or an R-8, we submitted it as an L -O. L -O complies with the Comprehensive Plan. And I guess I ask you if this were an existing L -O and I was standing before you tonight with a Conditional Use Permit, we wouldn't have this in depth discussion about does it meet the intent. I think this is a good project. The neighbors think it's a good project. We have a few naysayers, but overwhelmingly they have been wonderful and I thank them. And I think this project warrants approval. And there are many uses in Meridian that don't comply with their zoning designations as far as the purity of compliance. A good example of that is the new office that I built in Meridian. I am in an I -L zone. Petra Building is in an I -L zone. That's light industrial. I don't see anywhere that it says in the definition for professional office is encouraged or allowed, but that's kind of how that area has transitioned. It started out as kind of industrial. We have commercial, we have professional office, and that area is blossoming and this area is doing the same. And I think we need to look at trying to mix -- mix our uses. Otherwise, we are just ending up with strip commercial, strip office, we don't get the integration that we are looking for. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Any further comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. C Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 22 of 100 6_1 Bird: If we have no more public testimony needed, I move we close the public hearings on AZ 06-047, PP 06-049, and CUP 06-030. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 10, 11 and 12. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we don't have anymore discussion, Council, I'm ready to make a motion. Zaremba: I had nothing to add. Bird: Okay. I move that we approve AZ 06-047, request from RUT to L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10. Is there any discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Having gone through a lot of the -- somewhat a similar analysis with another project back in June to design style that I supported at the time, this particular project is one that I don't support. I think I share some of the sentiments of Mrs. McKay that she indicated that at the inception it was not a project she was initially interested in. My difference is that it never became a project that I was particularly interested in, in light of the medical districting options and opportunities in this area. So, I think what will provide a better product in this region is what I saw before, compared to this. So, it's not a project that I support. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 11. • 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 23 of 100 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 06-049. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Preliminary plat for Waverly Place Subdivision. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: I second. De Weerd: Motion and a second. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 12. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve CUP 06-030 for Waverly Place Subdivision. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 12. Mr. Berg. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you all for joining us. I imagine we will take a five minute break while the room, I think, will clear. (Recess.) Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O -T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Property by Paradigm Real Estate Holding — 39 W. Pine Avenue: • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 24 of 100 De Weerd: We will go ahead and call this meeting back to order. Item 13 is a continued Public Hearing on the Nazarene Church property on RZ 06-013. Start with Anna's comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Valley Shepherd of the Nazarene project, but it's not for the church, it's for a home they own on Pine. It's located on the southeast comer of Pine Street and West 1st Street, as shown here. The existing home, as you can see, takes access off of Pine. This is their proposed site plan. It is a rezone of .43 acres from R-8 to Old Town. The applicant intends to convert the existing home to a professional office, which is not currently allowed in the R-8 zone, but would be allowed within the O -T zone. The staff has recommended a DA accompanying this rezone and it would include the following kind of site specific provisions. There are the general ones as well, but the applicant shall be allowed to construct only one driveway access to Pine Avenue at a location to be approved by ACHD. No other public street access to Pine Avenue would be permitted. And that's there on the east end of the site. The applicant shall construct at minimum a 20 foot wide landscape buffer along Pine Avenue. At such time as the existing structure is removed or structurally altered, the landscaping may be removed as the downtown design guidelines and the OT district -- they do allow that. So, the idea was that since they are not rebuilding, they are not subject to the Old Town design guidelines, which would move the building up towards the street, but to preserve the landscape buffer at this time until they do tear down that building and rebuild. And, finally, the site shall be developed in general compliance with the concept plan that's presented here. The concept plan does include diagonal parking partially within the right of way and ACHD does not have an objection to that parking, as long as the applicant enters into a license agreement with ACHD. The structure is about 3,500 square feet. The Commission did recommend approval at their January 18th Public Hearing. At that hearing Gary McCallister spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition or commented. Key issues of discussion were the possible cross -access to the east. In looking at it further, though, there are some power lines that pose an impediment to that cross -access. Plus, the property to the east has -- it does have access to Meridian Road. The key Commission changes to staffs recommendation. There were none. And to our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council. With that I'll answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address. Parker: Julie Parker. P.O. Box 95, Nampa, Idaho. I'm representing the applicant. De Weerd: Thank you. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 25 of 100 Parker: We agree with staffs recommendations and just look forward to working with the city on completion of an occupancy permit and allowing our developer to move in with his business. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. This is a Public Hearing on this item. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Thank you. Staff, any further comments? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: It's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Sony. Borton: I don't know if I can support it. Just kidding. De Weerd: Comments this evening are falling flat. Mr. Borton. Borton: My only question is that property directly to the east, it takes access to Pine right adjacent to that property line. It's real close to it as well. Is there -- is that part of some concern? I mean you have got two access points right near the intersection -- Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Borton, I know that the staff did look at trying to require that cross -access, but, apparently, there are power lines right there that would need to be relocated to accomplish that. We can go back and reevaluate it if it's -- if Council would like us to. I'm not sure what to do, whether it's worth it at this time. If in developing under the Old Town guidelines, if we are anticipating that most of these folks will be walking to these businesses and perhaps that will develop later with an in lieu fee, I'm not sure. So, we can look into that if Council desires. Borton: Okay. De Weerd: I guess, Anna, just a comment. It's an interesting observation and I think as Pine is extended from Eagle Road to Locust Grove, this collector is going to see increased traffic and it will be increasingly difficult to get in and out of some of those properties. Where we have an opportunity to consolidate those access points, it's certainly worth pursuing. I do understand that has definitely been an obstacle that staff, I guess, as those opportunities for dialogue come in, if there is a way we can encourage consolidation. 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 26 of 100 Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the things we don't exactly know yet is when they do the design drawings for Meridian Road and the expansion, we do know that they are primarily going east -- or, I'm sorry. West. Bird: I was going to say, that's -- Canning: So, there is some question -- yeah. Sony. You know, as a planner I really wish I got that right more often than I do, so I apologize. The question would be if they are predominately taking the right of way going west and it may be that that first line of houses or structures all ends up being required for a right of way, so that there may not be any development on that property, but we don't know exactly yet how much they will need. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, there is already addition on the old Wilmot place. They are starting to -- and they have got parking, it looks like, in the back and will be coming off -- I'm with you, I don't know how much, if you're going to step out of the front door and be on Meridian Road, but -- but there is -- they will have an entrance off into Pine. And this one already has, you know, the existing driveway. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: And Director Canning. Is there any way we encumber the rezone with a condition that should they ever tear this building down and build a new building, that they would have to take access off of West 1 st Street, instead of Pine? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, certainly. And at that time it may be that we don't even want -- the Old Town guidelines as they apply to this right now, if Pine develops similar to the downtown core, then, you wouldn't -- you wouldn't have any access, likely. They would be paying parking in lieu fees for a structure somewhere, most likely. So, we could add that to the development agreement, that -- similar to the one about the landscape buffer. If they tear down, then, they either remove -- they could remove their access from Pine. If they rebuild on the property. That is what you said, sir, wasn't it? Did I miss it? Zaremba: I believe it is, yes. Canning: Okay. Zaremba: Having suggested that, I certainly would support that. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 27 of 100 De Weerd: Would the representative have any comments? Good evening. Riser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Garland Riser. My address is 12058 West LeGrange. Quite frankly, we have entertained that idea, Mr. Borton, that you brought up. I'd love that idea personally. It would have solved a lot of the issues we had with some of the parking dilemmas that we had as we had to face the issues of parking in the right of way on West 1st Street. Unfortunately, the issues that we had to address there were the guy wires off the power lines. There is also a monument post out there for the phone company. Unfortunately, we were faced with a situation we couldn't do a common access area. Again, as I said, if we could, I would have loved it, because it would have supplied us with some additional parking that we would have liked to have had. So, I will entertain any questions that you might have. De Weerd: You heard some of the dialogue and if this building were to be replaced some of the ideas of access at that time. Are you in support of that? Would that have any hardship on you? Riser: You know, I'm not so sure that I'm in a position at this point. I hadn't really ever gone there, that what if the building -- what if we tore the building down and did something different. I mean under the current guidelines of what our use would be going forward, what the future use would see, I don't know that we'd probably face that position, so I hadn't ever really thought about it. But on the other side of it, I'm not opposed to being reasonable either. So, I'm not sure that I can give you a definitive answer and I apologize for that, because, normally, my approach is always be fairly clear and concise. De Weerd: Neutral is good. Riser: Well, at least you're treating me better than the guy that came up in the blue coat. De Weerd: What, my friend? I was actually kidding. A fellow Kiwanian. But it kind of fell flat, like we have been doing tonight, uh, Mr. Borton. So, no, thank you. Riser: Thank you. De Weerd: Anything else, Council? Bird: No. De Weerd: Staff? Any other final remarks from the applicant's representative? Okay. Council, seeing no further testimony, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Bird: So moved. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 28 of 100 Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 13. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would like to propose a motion. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number RZ 06-013 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date, actually, of September 20, 2007, which was continued to today, with the following modifications: I would add to the development agreement, a statement to the effect that should this building ever be removed and a new building built on the site, that they would abandon access to West Pine Avenue and, thereafter, take access off West 1 st Street. End of motion. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Would you like to repeat the motion? I'm kidding. Zaremba: Would you like me to repeat it? De Weerd: No. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 14: Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O -T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 — 911 N. Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 is continued Public Hearing from February 20th on RZ 06- 014. 1 will go ahead and start with Mr. Nary. Did you want to provide comment? We did continue this specifically to get some feedback from the applicant. Nary: Yes, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What the purpose of continuing this from last week -- and I do believe the applicant and a representative from the Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 29 of 100 school district are represent -- was two things. There were two conditions that were placed on this project by the Planning and Zoning Commission that they were recommended being placed in a development agreement and the discussion by the Council last week of whether that was necessary. The applicant had requested that a development agreement not be required on this project. I did meet with counsel for the school district last Friday, he did have contact with the school superintendent. One of the conditions that was placed was readdressing of the property. The school district is not in opposition to that requirement. We don't need a development agreement to do that. We -- I wouldn't say routinely, but certainly we have had occasions for the city to readdress properties for various reasons and we simply just do it and notify the property owner that their property has been readdressed for safety reasons, normally. So, that could be done without a development agreement. The second was moving of the Pine Street school and the Planning and Zoning Commission was just concerned that that move of the Pine Street school from its present location close to the comer there of Pine and Meridian Road be done prior to the -- prior to the sale and as part of this -- of this application. And so they asked that that be put in a development agreement. In speaking with their counsel and him speaking with the district superintendent and Mr. Bigham is here as well, if you want to have -- hear from him directly. The plans to move the Pine Street school are in place. I mean it is going to occur. They have already negotiated with a construction company to move the school to the site on the Meridian Elementary property. They have some donated and reduced cost that's already been negotiated. So, that plan is already in effect and, essentially, the school district can't proceed with their plans for this district office and selling it until they have done that anyway. So, it seems unnecessary. I think Mrs. Canning had spoke last week about sometimes doing these types of agreements with other governmental entities, sometimes they are a little awkward to do, and that was the reason we set this over and, in my opinion, we don't need to have a development agreement. It appears that the process is in place. It's already occurring. It would likely occur before we even record this development agreement anyway. So, it isn't necessary. I feel comfortable from the city's perspective that those two considerations that were of concern to the Commission are going to get accomplished, but, again, Mr. Bigham is here if you wish to have anymore direct testimony from the school district, he's certainly able to provide that. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, do you need further information on that item? De Weerd: Mr. Bigham, do you want continued Public Hearing. We did hold item. Is there anyone that would like to Seeing no public testimony, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? to comment? Anna? Okay. Well, this is a it over for specific testimony to this particular provide testimony on this application? Okay. 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 30 of 100 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on RZ 06-014. Zaremba: I'm just not fast enough, but I'll second it. De Weerd: Okay. Well, I have a motion to close the Public Hearing on 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve RZ 06-014, without a development agreement. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 14 as stated. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 15: Public Hearing: AZ 06-046 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 21.7 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. — 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 06-048 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 61 single-family residential lots and 6 common lots on 21.7 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision by Great Sky, Inc. — 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive: De Weerd: Okay. Items 15 and 16 are public hearings on AZ 06-046 and PP 06-048. 1 will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Harcourt project. It's located on the south side of Victory Road, approximately a sixth of a mile east of Eagle. The applications are for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat. The annexation and zoning would be of 23.05 acres and they are requesting R-4 zoning. And, then, the preliminary plat approval they are requesting is for 60 single family residential lots. The lots range in size from 9,000 square feet to 22,250 square feet. The subdivision will provide 1.42 acres or 6.4 percent open space, including eight foot parkway throughout the entire project. And you see that those show up as the predominant form of open 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 31 of 100 space within the subdivision. The gross residential density is 2.68 dwelling units per acre. The Commission recommended approval at their January 18th Public Hearing. Darin Fluke, the applicant -- spoke in favor of the application. Brady Turner spoke in opposition. Michael Reedy, Robert Aldridge, Harold Kaczynski spoke -- or commented. Written testimony was also provided by Brady Turner for the Dartmoor Homeowners Association. Dartmoor is immediately to the south of this project. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the type of fencing to be installed on the perimeter and micro pathways, as well as the common open space. The redevelopment potential of the Kaczynski property to the southeast, that's the property that would be in this comer here. You can see it right there. The potential for drainage and runoff to affect neighboring properties, preserving the ditch canal irrigation currently serving the neighboring properties, preserving trees within the right of way at the terminus of the Falcon Drive cul-de-sac. And the possible transitioning of lot sizes adjacent to Dartmoor Subdivision along this southern boundary. Key Commission changes to staffs recommendation. They restricted Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 and 11 on Block 7, to a 25 foot rear setback. And I apologize, I didn't look that up, but I am assuming that that is those lots right there. Okay. Yes. I'm getting a nod from Mr. Fluke. And requiring the applicant to install vinyl perimeter fencing. Outstanding issues before City Council. Staff has not received an updated landscape plan, so we have not been able to evaluate that yet, but that is the only outstanding issue. I'm not aware of any written testimony since the staff report was prepared. I will answer any questions that you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Any comments from Council? And you did refer to the letter we received from Mr. Aldridge? And Mr. Hutt. And we did receive a landscape plan as well. Canning: I believe it was not submitted in time to review it, is what Ms. Hess has stated. Bird: It's dated 2/22/07, Anna. Canning: Okay. Councilmember Bird, I believe we have got it, but we didn't get it in time to evaluate it for tonight's hearing. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant's representative here? Fluke: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Darin Fluke, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, with JUB Engineers, representing the applicant in this matter. Anna did a good job summarizing the application, so I'm not going to go over the vitals on it again, other than to say that the site is designated as low density residential by the Comp Plan. I would note we are in strict conformance with the Comprehensive Plan on this one. That low density designation allows for up to three dwelling units per acre and we come in at about 2.68. So, by definition you're looking at a low density project. We don't have any particular issues with the conditions of approval. We did agree with the Planning and Zoning Commission to increase our rear setback where we abut Dartmoor Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 32 of 100 Subdivision. Here on the south and I'll talk about that a little bit more in just a second. One of the other issues -- Anna, could we see the aerial, please? Your aerial. Canning: The -- yeah, I don't think -- Fluke: No. Yours. Canning: I know. Fluke: Oh. Thank you. One of the issues that we were dealing with is the Kaczynski parcel here is the five acre parcel that lies within Golden Eagle Estates, the same subdivision that our four parcels lie within. They have about 90 feet of frontage on the cul-de-sac here and they have got some mature vegetation that abuts that cul-de-sac. That's not currently developed with curb, gutter, and sidewalk and they are interested in maintaining that vegetation that they have there, which appears to encroach into the right of way somewhat. We -- in trying to work out that situation, we had a phone conference with the Ada County Highway District and they did agree that we could pull that cul-de-sac back somewhat to allow us to construct curb, gutter and sidewalk within the existing right of way and not affect their vegetation. Otherwise, what you would see would be just curb, gutter and sidewalk ending at their frontage and, then, picking up again on the other side, because we will be redeveloping this stretch of Falcon Drive here with standard street section and curb, gutter, and sidewalk, of course. With regard to irrigation water, Mr. Aldridge lives here. There is a ditch that courses through the property here and provides irrigation to all the existing lots within the development. We have been working with him on a solution to that. Conditions of approval state that we do have to maintain existing irrigation and we will do that. We are not quite sure how yet, we are working -- the engineers are looking at it to figure out how best to do it. What we'd prefer to do would be to hook into our system up here in Sutherland Farms, which does have adequate capacity. We may need to put in some larger wells to do that, but we would connect the two and make more efficient use of that infrastructure that we have already built. So, that's our preferred solution. We will see if that's going to work. In any event, we will continue to provide Mr. Aldridge with his allotment of irrigation water where he receives it now, no matter how we have to do that. With regard to the other issue that came up before the Planning and Zoning Commission, it had to do with transitional lot sizes against these two lots here abutting Dartmoor Subdivision. Are we able to see the -- that exhibit that I brought? What this shows you is the southern tier of the proposed Harcourt here. These are the lots that we have got with 25 foot setbacks on, which is an increase of ten feet over what's required by code. What this is showing you is that we have an exceptionally large lot here, which it's not exceptionally large, it's an acre, but due to its odd configuration it has almost 400 feet abutting our project here and what we are trying to show is that the house has about 120 feet of setback currently. In addition, we will have our houses set back off this road about 20 feet and so you're going to have a good 160 feet of separation. At least between the dwellings. In addition, the Commission did require that we put a six foot vinyl fence along the perimeter here and we are okay with that. So, that is why they did not require us to lose another lot against here, because it does comply with the intent of Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 33 of 100 the ordinance. The last thing I would make mention of is just that the city anticipated just this sort of project on lands that are designated low density residential. When the Comp Plan was adopted, most of the development in the area -- maybe we could go back to your aerial, Anna. The only thing that really existed out here at the time you adopted your Comprehensive Plan was the Dartmoor Subdivision, which was platted as a non-farm subdivision. That allowed for one acre lots to be platted in the front with dedicated open space back here in the rear, which has now been re -subdivided as the Kingsbridge, I believe, Subdivision. When you designated this as low density you recognized that we had low density next to us and thought that it would not be appropriate to have higher densities out here. But recognizing that you were going to the expense of extending sewer and water and we would have larger roads out in the area, you did recognize that some more density than what was here originally was appropriate for the land. When Dartmoor Subdivision was platted, it was a county subdivision again. It was not required to build curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer, water, fire hydrants, streetlights, it was not provided -- it was not required to provide open space. It was not required to improve Eagle Road. And so it was a much cheaper way to develop. Well, now that we are in the city or, you know, contiguous with the city and the city has planned for growth in this area, this is the type of growth that makes more sense. So, we think we have designed a nice project that fits well with the neighborhood. We do have -- excuse me. We do have the support of the majority of our neighbors and we would simply ask for your approval. De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions for the applicant at this time? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would ask one. Can you point out where -- what I'm looking at is your access -- what I'm looking at is your access to Eagle Road. Where is the access of the project across the street in relation to your access? Fluke: Anna, do you know if they were required to align with that existing driver offset? Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, they do line up. It's not very clear there. There is an odd parcel line that goes further up, but this comes right across there, so they do line up. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 34 of 100 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Darin? Anna, can you put the plat back up? 0 Canning: Yes. After I -- after I recant my last one. Commissioner Zaremba, I'm not sure. The entrance may be there. It's hard to tell. It could be that it's at the south end of the project. Zaremba: My recollection was that when we were considering that -- the opposing development that we are pointing at, it moved around a little bit, and I thought that it had ended up at more the southern end of their project in this area. Canning: I believe it is. Zaremba: Which was leading me to my question of how many accesses are we having opposing each other on Eagle Road in a stair step manner. Not opposing each other, but going stair step. Canning: The one on this southern end it looks like it is right on the south boundary, so this property to the south could share an access, because there is a landscape buffer preventing it from taking access to the road to the south. Zaremba: So, we would end up with a stair step kind of -- Fluke: Madam Mayor, may I address that? Commissioner -- or Councilman, I presume that -- I believe that when they came in with this project that they were showing it aligning. We did speak with the developers over there when we were looking at our sewer options. And I believe they started out with it in alignment and, then, ended up moving it for one reason or another, but I believe that that does comply with the ACHD offset policy for the minimum offset between the two accesses. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further for the applicant at this time? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. I do have several people who have signed up. I will read your name and your support or opposition. If you would like to come forward at that time, please, do so. Brady Turner signed up against. Turner: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. My name is Brady Turner. I live at 3678 South Caleb Place in Meridian. My property is right here. I'm also the president of the Dartmoor Homeowners Association and I'm speaking on behalf Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 35 of 100 of the homeowners in that subdivision this evening. Our objection with this application is the lack, as you have heard, of transitional lot sizes adjacent to the Dartmoor Subdivision. The original design had lot sizes adjacent to Dartmoor ranging from 12 to 21 thousand square feet. These were reduced when the development was redesigned at ACHD's request. The new design was never presented to us prior to the P&Z hearing, nor was our input solicited. As the applicant stated, while the distance from my house to the nearest build -able lot of 120 feet does provide some relief, when we look at other properties in Dartmoor Subdivision, the approximate distances from the nearest build -able lot in Kingsbridge range from 75 to 230 feet. The average being 134 feet. So, our property at roughly 120 feet falls below that average. However, the distance to the nearest build -able lot only tells part of the story. The other factor is the size of the adjacent lots. The adjacent lots in Harcourt range from slightly over 10,000 feet to 11,400 square feet, averaging 10,006 square feet. In contrast, adjacent lots in Kingsbridge range from 16,800 to 25,000 square feet. Moreover, all of these lots but one are restricted to single story homes. When comparing lots with comparable distances to the nearest build -able lot, comparable to our 120 feet, the lot size in Kingsbridge range from 23 to 25 thousand square feet. Averaging 23,700 square feet. We are simply asking for parody with the transitional lots in Kingsbridge that were supported by this Council and negotiated between the Dartmoor Subdivision and Vision First, negotiations that have been held up by this Council and the Idaho Statesman, is a prime example of how the developers and existing homeowners can work together. Unfortunately, the applicant has ignored our attempts to open a similar dialogue on three separate occasions. Napoli Subdivision is another prime example where split zoning and larger transitional lots adjacent to supported existing acreages were supported by this Council to address homeowners concerns. Fewer larger transitional lots in Harcourt would help to mitigate the impact of these homes being uphill from our property, blocking our foothills view, for which we paid a premium when we built our home and help to retain the feeling of the Dartmoor Subdivision, which is large, open, estate lots. We would support this application if at least two lots were removed adjacent to Dartmoor Subdivision, making the transitional lots on the order of 18,000 square feet. Still smaller than those provided by Kingsbridge and more in line with the original Harcourt design. We thank you for the consideration this evening. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Can I ask you a question? Turner: Yes. De Weerd: You had mentioned that the plat changed after it went to Ada County Highway District. Turner: Yes. The original plat that was presented by the applicant at a homeowners -- or an informational meeting I think it was back in the April 2006 time frame, had much larger lots than what are proposed here. They had about four lots that were adjacent to Dartmoor Subdivision. When the street configuration on that south parcel was reconfigured, they added in some additional lots, thereby reducing the total size of each Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 36 of 100 lot, also because originally there was a cul-de-sac there and now there is a stub street. So, all of those factors contributed to reducing the lot sizes. De Weerd: They had to get the road to that back lot. Turner: Correct. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Theresa Turner signed up against. Thank you. Tammy Cook signed up against. Thank you. And Rick Stott signed up against. Stott: My name is Rick Stott. 3684 South Caleb Place in Meridian. I live in the -- I'm neighbors to Brady -- Mr. Turner in the -- in the lot just south of his. So, we touch the comer of the proposed subdivision. We spent a lot of time -- I was interested earlier this evening on the discussion with the Woodbridge neighbors in that subdivision and the relationship that they developed with the proposed developer and the ability for them to work through a process that was rejected just months ago in that same lot. We have been very successful over the last couple of years in working with Kingsbridge in developing a strategy and a plan to provide for transition, provide for an exceptional neighborhood feeling, not only in our neighborhood, but in the Kingsbridge neighborhood, increasing the value of those lots and the overall value of the neighborhood as a whole. Originally, in Kingsbridge we were not thrilled with what they were proposing and after lengthy discussions and much encouragement from this Council, in discussion with that developer, we were able to come to a mutually agreeable position where they have premium lots in a premium neighborhood that provides additional value to -- to a nice area to live in. This does not fit any of those qualifications. The developer has not worked in any way. Mr. Turner has tried -- tried repeatedly to open conversations and dialogues with the development company and has been ignored to a large degree. I'm surprised that the developer would insinuate that the majority of neighbors were for the subdivision. I know several -- one in particular on his -- on the west side of his that is not for it. Certainly, the neighbors in Dartmoor, as Mr. Turner indicated, are not for the current application. So, I'm not sure how many other neighbors there are, but right there alone I think he's pretty much outnumbered. But I haven't talked to many of the other neighbors. A couple of concerns. One is that -- for example, in our backyard we have a horse and, you know, it stinks. I was back there and it's a little smelly. And additional setbacks and lower density houses is important for continuity of the -- of what they -- the new neighbors to the north of us will have to put up with and encourage that that be in consideration. Adding an additional lot in the interim period of time between what was originally given to us as a neighborhood to the time that it was actually presented before the P&Z I think is a concern as well. And so I just would encourage that this Council be consistent with its active participation in working with neighborhoods and making sure the transitions occur amongst the lower densities to higher density projects. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Bird: I have none. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 37 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. Stott: Thank you. • De Weerd: Those were the people that had signed up. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Fluke: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Darin Fluke. JUB Engineers for the applicant. Okay. Well, I suppose we are, essentially, down to this issue of transitional lot sizes and why we did or did not do that and how well we may have negotiated with the neighbors. I do take slight exception to the fact that I have been unresponsive. Nobody from the Dartmoor association saw fit to attend the neighborhood meeting. Every time Mr. Brady called me, which was approximately three times, I did return his call each and every time. I think what he means to say is that I did not -- my client did not choose to redesign his project in the way that he wished. That does not indicate a failure to negotiate, it simply means that there was not agreement and I think I have touched on some of those reasons. But, again, I'll tell you why. We don't have the same land base and number of lots that Kingsbridge Subdivision had to spread those costs over. The costs for bringing urban services that we are required to bring to this area, sewer, water, curb, gutter, and sidewalk, wider streets, street lights, fire hydrants, all the things that you expect when you live in a city we provide and Dartmoor Subdivision does not. So, it's very easy to sit back and say they ought to have big lots, because we have a 400 foot long lot line across there. If I were forced to lose two lots against the Dartmoor Subdivision, all that would do -- would not increase the depth of the lots against this, it would simply make them wider. That will do nothing to mitigate the smells from horses if the pasture is not well maintained. It will not do anything to increase the distance between the houses that do get built there. I would submit to you that this is low density, single family housing against low density single family housing. I fail to see how just because our lot is as large as their lot, that we are not compatible. The definition of low density has transitioned through time, because when Dartmoor was approved it was, of course, approved in the county. One acre lots were high density in the county at that time. The situation is considerably different now and the city has other considerations besides just the neighbors who want to have large lots or large tracts of open land against their subdivision. I totally understand that, but I also know that it's not really in keeping with the plan that the city has for the area, which mandates that we extend services to the area. So, I would tell you that we have worked with the neighbors. We have gone to great lengths to accommodate the Kaczynskis. They are very complimentary. We have gone to lengths to work with Mr. Aldridge on his irrigation issues. And we have also had to accommodate the highway district, which cost us a lot, to accommodate their changes that they wanted. And I make one final comment and that is our original layout your staff did not like and asked us to work on it. It had a couple of lots back here in the comer when this was a shorter road that had long flags on them, the very lots that the police department routinely asks you not to approve, because you can't see into them. And so we get sort of caught between a rock and a • 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 38 of 100 hard place trying to balance out the needs and desires and wishes of the neighbors and the agencies and the staffs. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to take those. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Fluke: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further information needed from staff or the applicant? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, a question for you on this East Falcon. Was there a recommendation that that be stubbed across? Maybe you mentioned it earlier and I missed it. If there is not, why not? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, East Falcon is an existing street. It already stubs to the Kaczysnki property. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: So, this -- when I see the cul-de-sac, that exists until that property develops? Canning: Yes. The property line is actually on the other side of those numbers right there, so it has access right along there. Borton: But that cul-de-sac eventually goes away; is that correct? Canning: No. Borton: So, when this property develops that remains a cul-de-sac or is it stubbed through? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, if the Kaczynskis decide to redevelop, we have seen folks ask for an exchange of right of way with ACHD where they do remove the turnaround portion in exchange for some of the property that they have. They could do that. So, they could vacate a portion of that cul- de-sac and put it in green space or some other use. Borton: Okay. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further, Council? Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 39 of 100 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we close the preliminary, I do -- we have made two or three developments go back and -- when they have backed up to acre, acre and a half lots, and had them take out and I didn't hear the testimony from the two -- or the two neighbors there song about the depth as much as just having square footage size. The smell of horses or cattle -- I guess if you buy out there you'd expect that, because it is still rural out there. And that's not -- that's not something that you're sneaking in afterwards. Darin -- and I realize that it does cost a lot of money to develop these. You pay a lot of money for the land to start with. But we have always -- and I don't think they were worrying about the depth as much as having some width, too. You compare -- I don't know what those run, I don't have my scale on it, but I would guess those are maybe 80 foot lots down at their property? Canning: For the record, sir, this is 154. This is 85, 80, 139 and 44. Bird: Okay. That -- yeah. The ones that are -- I wish there was a way that we could figure out to have two lots there instead of four. I think that would back up and we may -- Kingsbridge, which goes to the east there, do it and I'd just like Darin to -- other than cost, is there a reason? I mean cost is a major item, I'm not trying to -- Fluke: Councilman Bird -- or Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, I didn't tell you the full story on how we got to where we are today. We had a layout that showed 61 lots. We had our entrance further to the east, which complied with all the standards, but in the interim you and ACHD approved a Comprehensive Plan amendment with a site plan to the property to our west. In so doing it locked them in on a driveway here and, then, we, then, had a conflict with a driveway here -- with our approach. So, we moved it over and we added another stub and in so doing, you know, we lost a couple of lots. We tried to kill two birds with one stone and do what your staff had requested, which was rework this area, which I might point out was a very difficult layout to begin with. I would simply say that esthetically it's not going to work. If I have to lose two lots down here, you can see if I were to erase that lot line I would lose one lot and I'm going to have one huge lot. I could scootch these over a little bit and make it work, but if I lose two, I'm going to just have freakish wide lots in there that don't comport to anything else within the project. The only reason would be because one lot in the subdivision to the south has an exceedingly long lot line. That's all. And so it's esthetic, as well as a cost issue. Bird: Madam Mayor? How about taking one lot? I mean you have got X amount of feet across there, lineal feet. Getting them a little bigger. I mean -- and I'm just throwing this out. I'm not -- I would like to -- I'd like you to suggest doing it. And I'm not -- I'm not telling you -- you know, I'm not telling you that it's going to fail because of it, okay? Fluke: Yes. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 40 of 100 Nary: Feel free to do what you want. Bird: Feel free to do what you want. I would -- and, no, in no way, shape, or form is this a threat or anything. I mean -- I just would like it to work. I think you got -- it's a nice development, don't get me wrong. Other than I understand where those people are coming from. But I also say something. One of these days a developer is going to walk out there and those guys are going to take their acre and a half and probably want to put eight units on that. Fluke: Well -- and we will have the built-in opposition right here for it. Bird: And you will have a bunch of people there, but is there any way that you think it's feasible to get that down from four to three lots? Fluke: Madam Mayor, Members -- Councilman Bird. It's feasible by just taking out an eraser and doing it. It's certainly not the preference of my client to do that for the afore- stated reasons. If the Council feels strongly in that way, I would assume that you would condition it to that way, but having -- I mean I'd just like to be on record as having made my case. Bird: No problem. I appreciate it. De Weerd: You know, I guess just to expand on what Mr. Bird has been saying is this Council has consistently tried to look at that transition and we know the situation -- oftentimes we do find that the owner's preferences are certainly motivated when Council says, you know, we would like to see a minimum of this, go back and just get it done. And I guess I -- we worked with Dartmoor and Kingsbridge. I know Kingsbridge was a much larger development, but you can push some of that higher density up towards the road and have a better transition and I guess that's what we have tried to remain sensitive to is how do you transition and it is all single family housing, but it is a perception, too, of my open space that I paid for, it's nice to have that transition and a better flow than what we are really seeing there. So, I would echo Mr. Bird's comments, but you can see that I won't be a tie breaker, I'm just another voice up here. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Yeah. Darin, I see your Lot 6 and 11 is over 11,000 square foot and none of your four across there is that. And I realize when you come to a comer and you get cul-de- sacs, it's tough, don't get me wrong, I understand that. But, man, I just wish we could just get some 15 to 16 thousand square foot lots across that back. And I don't know, I mean -- you know. Fluke: Madam Mayor, if the Council decides to condition us in that manner, I'd simply ask for the flexibility to work with our layout. We won't change the street configuration, Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 41 of 100 but to work in the northern part of the development to see if there is an opportunity to pick that lot up elsewhere. Like I said, I can easily enough reconfigure those by dropping a lot to put fewer lots against that subdivision to the south. I would simply ask that you give me the flexibility, then, to find that lot up north, if I can, without changing the street layout at all. And I would just further ask that you send me on my way, rather making me bring it back. I won't change the street layout, so you will see what you have is what you have, it just might squeeze another lot in up north. Bird: Well, I think the Mayor stated my preference is that if you can -- you know, if you can get the square footage down there a lot better, you can have a little smaller up -- another lot up there. But I would ask if that's the way it goes, that at least you bring the preliminary plat back before the staff. We don't have to see it, but, please, take it back to them. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as much as I would like to accommodate Mr. -- or have you accommodate Mr. Fluke's request, it has typically not worked out well. We need to have you approve the preliminary plat. Bird: Okay. I have no problem with that. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would also comment that the staff has not had time to go through the landscape plan. That would be a reason to continue. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, let me clarify. When you have required that folks lose a lot in a particular area, we are able to do that. It's the adding or making up for the lot in another area that typically doesn't turn out well, so -- De Weerd: Certainly, Council, we could continue this to a specific date, if you would so desire. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: So far it's just been one vote and you don't get to break a tie, so what do the other Councilmen feel? I mean do they want to see larger lots down on that -- and they have had -- you know, the way they are going to vote. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 42 of 100 Zaremba: My comment would be -- and let me preface that comment. In the staff comments they mentioned that this was before the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 2nd, December 21 st, and, then, again, on January 18th. I was a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 2nd and December 21 st and those two meetings did nothing but continue it on to the next meeting. So, this is my first substantive look at it. I did not really see it on the Planning and Zoning Commission. Their decision on the 18th was after you had graciously appointed me to this Council. So, I was not there. I have to admit that this is not attractive to me. I realize the parcels that are included in it make it an extremely odd shaped piece of business and I'm sure they have gone to some difficulty to work in as best as they can. Seeing four cul-de- sacs in a city that has professed that we are against cul-de-sacs is not comfortable for me. Seeing the access to Eagle, which, if I noticed the aerial right, there are currently five residents that use that access to Eagle. It seems to me that probably works okay for five residences, but to etch into stone that that is forever going to be the access for an increased number of residential units, not -- probably not only this project, but the property to the southeast, then, is going to keep that same access. The three properties it looks like to the west between this project and Eagle would probably maintain that same access. I would much rather see a larger picture of where this access matches up with the development on the other side of Eagle Road for their access. I like the access to Victory. It aligns with the subdivision across. I'm uncomfortable with this access to Eagle. Unfortunately, if this project is approved, that pretty well means that forever this is where that access is going to go and I would want to until the property to the west between here and Eagle was included and the access to line up with the development across the street. Plus, the four cul-de-sacs in this one. I have no problem with the density. I think it's right. If the housing were to align that way I could see subtracting a lot on the south and adding one on the north someplace and maintaining the density, I don't have a problem with that. I just feel that the four cul-de- sacs and the location of what will become the final access to Eagle is not comfortable for me. And I'm not sure continuing it would change my opinion on that. De Weerd: Okay. Fluke: Madam Mayor, could I just make a quick comment regarding the cul-de-sacs? Because that was an issue we looked at for sure. Councilmen, I respect your opinion on this and I understand what you're trying to do is get connectivity. I would point out a couple things for you. One is Falcon Drive is existing public right of way now. We have zero control over this cul-de-sac or its location on Eagle Road. It is what it is. That's where it was platted. The one across the road was approved by this Council and ACHD and I have no control over the fact that it doesn't align either. So, I find that to be a high bar that's a little bit unfair to hold this project to. But to mitigate your concerns I would point out that this does provide better connectivity, because now you have got a connection up to Victory Road where before you did not. And, in fact, part of ACHD's problem with the previous alignment was we had an approach here that came into the project and it made almost a straight shot if you came up here and they were concerned about cut -through traffic coming from points south and cutting through the project to go to points east and that was part of their rationale for making us move it over to here to 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 43 of 100 make it a little bit more difficult. But we do provide that access to Victory Road. And I would submit to you that most of the trips they will be going to Boise, if not going up Eagle Road to the freeway, will be going east on Victory Road from that access right there. The majority of the lots do, in fact, have easier access to go to that. So, as far as the other cul-de-sacs that we designed, I could have connected this, granted, but it didn't gain us much. In fact, it loses a lot, because this is fixed and this is an existing house that we were trying to maintain. So, it made an ugly lot here with a road on, essentially, four sides of it and lost a lot without getting much benefit. The same is true of these. We could have connected these, but, again, it didn't provide much, except for losing lots within the project. We were trying to hit that three dwelling units to the acre that the city was looking for in the area, you know, to make the project pencil. You all pointed out correctly that it's expensive land, because, you know, each one of those five acre lots has a house on it. There is one here, there is one here, there is one here, and there is one over here. And two of those we can't maintain, obviously, but, two, we tried and that was part of our -- our challenge in this layout. So, it's been -- this thing's been over a year in the planning process to get in front of you today by a long way. Zaremba: I would have -- Madam Mayor? I certainly would have to admit that I would not want to have to try to design for this particular shape of property that you're working on and I know it has a lot of problems in it and, on the one hand, basically, I think you did a good job with what you were given, but I just have a little difficulty with a couple of those things. Fluke: I understand. De Weerd: I guess just to muddy the water a little bit more, can you tell me a little bit about your open space? Fluke: Your ordinance provides for parkways in lieu of, you know, a -- sort of a park area and that's what we opted for in this case, because it's a low density project. We have only six lots within the project that are less than 10,000 square feet and of those six about three of them are one or two hundred square feet less than 10,000 square feet. Those are large lots and lots of that size don't demand a lot of dedicated open space or play area within the project and so what the client had opted for was to do the open space in a parkway configuration, which, as you know, creates a more traditional feel in the project and, actually, a feeling of more openness. Those lots are fairly wide, 80 feet and up, and with the addition of the parkways it gives it a real nice low density feel to it and allows you to get the open space that the code requires in a method that the code allows for. De Weerd: The triangular piece, what is the plan? I see on the plat here just says lawn. What is the idea for it? Fluke: We assume that that will accommodate storm drainage on that lot and, again, in compliance it will be landscaped and it will be open, but in the event of a hundred year storm it would fill with water and, then, slowly seep in. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 44 of 100 De Weerd: What slope? Fluke: Oh, it would be no more than about four to one. I forget exactly what the Public Works standards are. I'm sure Len could tell us, but whatever those standards are we will comply with them. De Weerd: So, it will be a pretty obvious drainage area. Fluke: Four to one is pretty gentle. It will all be sodded and you only need to leave a sand window, you know, where you actually infiltrate and so it's a question of design. We have done them all over the place. Burney Glenn and Cedar Springs and all those projects have similar -- I mean the realignment is that that was the left over piece and so we -- you know, it didn't make any sense to go into the lot north of it and so we will accommodate some drainage in there and landscape it nicely. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I agree with some of these concerns, amongst others, this transition issue, I don't necessarily need to restate some of the remarks already put forth on them. What I would like to see -- and I tossed the idea out, is that this matter be continued to March 13th -- Mr. Nary, correct me if my understanding's wrong -- it would be nice to continue it on all matters to March 13th. I know Councilman Rountree will be back, then, as well. I'd like to invite Darin to meet with Mr. Turner or the Dartmoor Homeowners Association group and kind of work together to discuss this transition issue that Councilman Bird has invited -- invited the opportunity for you to propose with reducing at least one lot down on that southern portion. I think, again, Councilman Bird did a pretty good job of describing the balancing act in wrestling with transition areas and trying to be sensitive to existing homeowners, like Mr. Turner, as well as developers who are trying to meet budgets and have to lose a lot. It's difficult on both sides. If that doesn't work I'd invite the applicant to tell me otherwise, but I think March 13th should give enough time to redesign -- get together and meet and perhaps we will see you in the vestibule in just a few moments talking with each other to come up with a date and, then, come back on the 13th and go from there. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Is that a motion? Borton: Having said that, I would move -- if there is no further discussion, I would move that we continue Items 15 and 16, AZ 06-046 and PP 06-048, to Tuesday, March 13th. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 45 of 100 Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 15 and 16 to March 13th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: And Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: presuming that would provide the opportunity for the landscape plan to be reviewed by staff. Item 17: Public Hearing: VAC 07-002 Request to Vacate a public utility, drainage & irrigation easement common to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of the Olson & Bush Industrial Park for Lanark Street Easement by Ronald W. Van Auker — De Weerd: Okay. Direction taken. Okay. Item 17 is VAC 07-002. 1 will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a project on Lanark. It's the west side of Eagle Road approximately a fifth of a mile north of Franklin Road and the Eagle Road intersection is highlighted there before you. You may recall that recently you approved annexation and -- or a rezone of this property and now you are -- to accommodate the site plan that they provided that evening, they need to vacate this easement. It is a ten foot wide, which is five feet on either side of the existing lot line for public utility irrigation and lot drainage easement. Again, the property is currently two lots and just the plat has an easement on that interior lot line that they need to vacate. Staff is supportive of the vacation and to our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward. Any comment? Van Auker: Good evening. My name is Ron Van Auker, 3084 East Lanark in Meridian. Well, junior, if that matters. De Weerd: I was going to ask. You don't look like Ron. Bird: We know the difference. Van Auker: Taking some age -altering drugs. Anna pretty much summed it up. I just -- if you have any questions I'll feel free to answer them. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Oh, come on. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 46 of 100 0 Zaremba: Madam Mayor, the only question I could ask is where is Brad. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we close the Public Hearing on Item 17, VAC 07-002. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 17. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we approve Item 17, AZ 07-002. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion and a second to approve Item 17. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 18: Public Hearing: AP 07-001 Request for City Council's review in an Appeal of staffs denial of the Administrative Design Review application for the proposed Commercial Tire building for Commercial Tire by J.R. & Bonnie Schwenkfelder —100 W. Pennwood Street: De Weerd: Okay. Item 18 is a Public Hearing on AP 07-001. 1 will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this project is for Commercial Tire and it is a City Council review, which is also known as an appeal. It is located at 100 West Pennwood Street as shown here. The application before you tonight is a City Council review and it was an appeal of my decision regarding design review criteria 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 47 of 100 along the entryway corridor for Meridian Road. The original elevations for the proposed Commercial Tire are shown before you here. Staff evaluated it while -- in conjunction with a certificate of zoning compliance and found that these elevations in particular did not meet the criteria of the design review as set forth for the entryway corridors. The applicant did come back with a revised proposal that is much more in line and in particular they added the detail along the roof that broke up the mass of that surface, as well as the change in the facade and the change in the height of the roof. You will see those, the change in material and the change in the roof. Unfortunately, the way the site is laid out that the roll up doors still face Meridian Road as shown. Here is some other elevations. You get a little further away from the building, so it's hard to see. So, although staff appreciated the efforts that the applicant made in coming closer to meeting the design review criteria, I just could not find that the proposed east elevation with the five roll up doors, constructed of prefabricated steel panels and windows, would meet the design criteria for the entryway corridor. The applicant did verbally propose roll up doors with all windows to meet the required standards. Again, I just felt that the roll up doors in general, that the idea would be that they would be open during the day, so that those folks could work in there and that it just would not meet the intent of the design review criteria. So, I have denied it and they are appealing that decision today. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff? Bird: Yes, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, you consider Meridian Road as the gateway how far down? Canning: It is shown as a gateway from Franklin Road to a half mile south of Amity. Bird: Okay. From Franklin? Canning: Yeah. Bird: Because I don't believe it's been over two years ago that we approved a building a lot like this down at Bobby's Auto Transmission that had faced the doors and stuff. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, it wasn't the entryway corridor designation that changed, it was the design review criteria in the Unified Development Code that's changed since Bobby's was approved. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: We will listen to the applicant. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 48 of 100 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would ask one other question before that. And maybe I need to see one that shows the lot again, but was there any discussion with the applicant about reorienting the building to -- you know, turn it 90 degrees, so it faced Pennwood instead? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Zaremba, my recollection is that we had a brief discussion about it, but it just didn't work with the concept plan. They would have -- they would have had to modify their concept for development of the site considerably and we didn't talk about it at length, no. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: And could you almost do those two far west doors on the rear to break that up? I will ask the applicant. Canning: And if the applicant -- I don't have a site plan in my presentation. If the applicant has one if he gives it to me I can get it put up on the overhead. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, do you have -- do you have the -- sitting like this, do you have the north elevation? Canning: No. Bird: If we had -- Canning: Well -- Bird: Yeah, you do. Canning: This was the original submittal and I'm not sure how they have changed it on the north. Bird: I take it that's probably the north on the -- I can't read it. That's the -- no, that's the west. Because if that's the east that would be the west. De Weerd: We can ask the applicant, Mr. Bird. Thank you. Blodgett: Madam Mayor and Council Members, my name is David Blodgett, I'm the architect representing Commercial Tire Company and Bob and Bonnie Schwenkfelder. My address is 295 Parkway Drive, Boise. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 49 of 100 De Weerd: Thank you. Blodgett: As hopefully you can see the presentation board that is up on the easel, our project is a Pennwood Street project. We have 500 linear feet on Pennwood Street and we have approximately 185 linear feet on Meridian Road. The issue before us is, really, the issue of the overhead doors and their use and whether or not anywhere in the Unified Development Code such a thing is prohibited, which it is not. The kind of configuration of our -- of our site plan is really based on kind of one of two things. It's to somewhat minimize the amount of parking and activities on the site from Meridian Road and somewhat creating a barrier between Meridian Road and our project and the activities in the back of our site, being the more fleet service centered activities, there will be larger trucks being worked on in the backside of the site. In the front side of the site it's really just the retail portion of the Commercial Tire Company. It's from the sale of tires and changing of tires. So, in our plan as presented here, you know, we have really strived to create, you know, a development that has -- you know, obviously, we are asking for no concessions of setbacks or landscaping, we are just trying to do something consistent with other projects next to it. Bob's -- there is a -- there is an auto care facility just directly south of our property. Our setbacks are consistent. The look of our building is consistent. And, you know, what we are trying to do here is treat our facing of Meridian consistent with other properties and, then, create parking lots that are segregated and the building creates a buffer for other activities. Simply rotating the building around would only create a blank face potentially towards Meridian Road and, really, as a person is driving down Meridian Road, they would see overhead doors in the back of the building. This is going to do nothing to change the fact that overhead doors will be seen. Again, nothing in the Unified Development Code in any section prohibits overhead doors or auto bays. This is purely a prohibited -- I mean this is an allowed use, along with a number of other allowed uses that will have overhead doors. There are a number of facilities that exist throughout both Meridian Road and Idaho Street that are very similar, that have the overhead doors. Anna's major statement about the overhead doors is the fact that in the design review standards it states that pre -finish metal panels are prohibited in a design review area. The actual intent of that is to really prohibit such buildings as prefabricated metal buildings is these locations, because they don't really -- they really don't age well. My belief -- and it has to be true, that there was never -- that language wasn't written to prohibit overhead doors made of metal panels, they are just a component of the building. That section of the code really talks about the exterior of building wall material, not exterior -- you know, miscellaneous components, because a metal man door is a pre, you know, fabricated metal panel. There is no difference here. You know, we do not have any pre -finish metal panels on the Meridian Street side. We are an absolutely allowed use and we meet all the other criteria set forth in the Unified development Code and there are existing uses throughout this area that look very similar to this. I have brought multiple -- multiple photographs of -- Bird: Grab that microphone, sir. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 50 of 100 • Blodgett: These are photographs of just various projects that may have or may not have been built since the Unified Development Code had the design review portion put into it, but, you know, this is just a simply small building north of our project. It has an overhead door, obviously. The second photo is Les Schwab. This is the Meridian Street face of Les Schwab. This is several blocks north of our property on Meridian Road. Here is its facing. You know, they have some overhead doors on their side, but this is what faces Meridian Road. I see -- I see that being non -desirable completely, but at some point fairly recently this was allowed to be constructed. De Weerd: You know, that was -- that's pretty old. Blodgett: Well, furthermore, it's just -- Bird: It's within a year. Blodgett: This project -- yeah, this is a new project and this is John's Auto Care that's adjacent -- this is adjacent to our site. Its look and feel is pretty consistent with our building. Its setback is similar. The only difference is they have a curb cut along Meridian Road, which we will not, but we are providing all the required set landscaping, which is 35 feet. This is a photo of Meridian Road looking south -- just south of our site showing the -- kind of the heavy use of fast food restaurants and landscaping and, then, somewhat -- not industrial uses, but not a -- not something consistent with what we are trying to do. There is a storage -- self storage facility here. There is a car rental place. This is Snake River Truck. They have displays out in the parking lot. Again, all inconsistent with what the nature of our development would be. Here is a -- here is Wendy's on Main Street. This is the Main Street face of Wendy's, which has the back of the building and the drive-thru that is -- this is a project that's been approved. And a similar project. This is the Starbucks that was built not too long ago. Again, it's face -- it's face to Meridian Road is a blank wall and, you know, I don't see any of these projects being, you know, overly desirable from a planning standpoint. A lot these are. John's south of us is a fine project. You know, we just -- you know, we are having a hard time believing that our project is somehow noncompliant because of one simple design review issue and staff has chosen to deny our application. Just a little background on our application. This project was originally approved in 2001, the same project, but based on some delays and some other focuses of Commercial Tire Company, that approval was finally expired. One of the things that they had done in that time frame was they -- one of the things that -- one of the major projects they had done is relocate their corporate office and warehouse to Meridian. So, that was part of that delay. Now they have refocused and want to develop the property. I do have one other thing to share with you. This is, basically, a similar slide of our project along Meridian Road, 35 foot landscape setback, parking lot, or buildings about 100 feet back from Meridian Road. This is a project with the overhead doors, fully developed and landscaped. This is the same rendering showing four of the overhead doors open, cars parked inside, if you want to come up and look and see, there is -- I just don't see how -- what the planning -- the staff issue is with this project based on nothing within your code that prohibits such a use along Meridian Road. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 51 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: You might have mentioned it, David, but in the staff comments it makes reference to you agreeing to roll up doors with all windows. Blodgett: Yeah. That's correct. We -- that was in the meeting that we had at the Planning and Zoning office on January 31 st and it's something that we would definitely consider. I mean we consider in that meeting if that would have taken care of the problem, we would have done it and we said we would do that. Borton: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I think two comments. One, part of the reason that the Unified Development Code doesn't specify for or against these kind of things is because it was anticipated that design review would become that decision, instead of trying to identify in every zone all over the city and entryway corridors and not entryway corridors, you know, what was going to be permissible and what wasn't. It was decided that design review was the better choice than trying to codify every possible thing. So, I would defend the director's right to make that decision, even though it may or may not be specified for the zone. The second piece of it would -- even though John's Automotive building was built before the design review was in process, it shows, just looking at the drawing that you have up on the -- the one that's on the screen now, you appear to be showing three horizontal window panels, compared to the John's one, it would be four horizontal window panels. They, actually, had a metal panel at the bottom and a metal panel at the top. I'm not too supportive of it being all windows, but the compromise -- if we are looking at this drawing and you're saying there is going to be one, two, three, four, five, six panels, I would be supportive of four of those being windows. That's my opinion. Blodgett: And we would have no problem with that. Bird: You can have as many as you want. No. But, seriously, they will put in as many panels as you want or glass as you want. De Weerd: You just like windows. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 52 of 100 Bird: I like windows. Yeah. De Weerd: Any other questions from Council? Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: So somebody can talk back to me if I'm wrong, but I -- I think this is a real addition to Meridian. I believe if you check the records that the addition that you see Les Schwab, which is maybe a block down to the north, hasn't had a C -O over a year, it was just done -- it's the addition they done for their truck center. John's was put in -- I don't think -- I think it's very attractive. The Glass Doctor and he's all -- all these don't -- neither one of these, the Glass Doctor or John's, have the landscaping that is being shown by Commercial Tire to block their view. While I would prefer to have the drive -up doors probably not facing Meridian Road, I think it's a beautiful building, I don't know how they could do it any different, and this is, basically, the same thing we have seen in 2001, so I can support it. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Anna? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I just -- I have not been trying to pick on the applicant here, I just -- you will likely see me having -- until we have more definitive design guidelines and design standards, you will likely see me sticking pretty close to the code, because it doesn't give me much latitude. So, this may not be the first time you have to do this and we are still trying to feel out what is appropriate for Council. So, I just -- I wanted to make that known, that the code just doesn't give me much flexibility and I'm not really willing to go out on a limb much on this one, so I just wanted to make sure it gets before Council for their decision. Bird: Madam Mayor? In response, Anna, I realize that and we don't want to stick you in that kind of a spot and until we get some guidelines for you, then, it's up to us to put our heads out on the block, not you. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, I agree with -- with Councilman Bird and by all means I appreciate any efforts to apply the letter and intent of the UDC. The 11-3-A-1987, as I read it, to create attractive and quality design structure as reflecting the unique character of Meridian along the city's entryway, it is wishy washy, touchy, feely, typical language, so -- but I want to applaud you and the applicant's efforts. To the extent there is a disagreement and there has been some modification of the design and efforts on both sides to improve this, the city benefits greatly. So, kudos to you, Anna and David -- where did 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 53 of 100 you go? As well to you for making some changes. My one question -- we don't see a lot of this, which means you are doing a great job in keeping people happy, Anna. My one question is during that discussion is there a proposal that you suggest, formal, informal, that says, you know, this doesn't work, here is why. Why don't you do it this way. Is there something that's presented to an applicant that says if they can't buy off on this design, if you do this it makes sense? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, it's not a formal -- it's if there is a disagreement we oftentimes just end up meeting again and trying to banter through things. This one is just -- I really had no idea how Council was - - felt about the roll -up doors, whether it was appropriate or not and we just got to a point where we couldn't talk about it anymore, because I didn't know. So, usually, we do try and work things out. The criteria are not that onerous in general, it was just this question of the roll -up doors, and we hadn't come across it yet, so there wasn't much we could do. Borton: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe in helping provide -- since I can read the tea leaves on where we are -- in helping provide further guidance for staff in the future, in this particular section that was, really, the crux of what we are talking about, if part of-yourdecision and the order that you may want to direct, would give some guidance in regards to the discussion that was brought up regarding whether or not the doors themselves is what the language in this section is dealing with in regards to walls and panels and metal buildings and also I think Councilmember Bird raised the fact that there was additional landscaping and screening on this project different than some of the other projects and if that's a factor to you that you would like staff to consider as Mrs. Canning and her staff try to piece together these design guidelines and those are things you think are important to consider in weighing against what the look is in relation to that, that might be helpful and we can include some of those things and in order so that we aren't here every time over roll -up doors, red roll -up doors, blue roll -up doors, four panels of glass, six panels of glass, that might be more helpful in giving some guidance and especially the landscaping is one way to set off that -- that look that might be helpful, that might help us to maybe not have as many of these. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree with everything that Bill says, but we need to have -- as a Council and Mayor, need to have a sit down with the staff and legal and see if we can't get some rules and regulations a little clearer than what we have got there, you know. That i Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 54 of 100 sounds like a good political committee wrote that thing up, you know. If it's good, I'll take credit for it. If it's bad, it's the committee's fault, so -- De Weerd: I think Keith wrote that. Bird: We need to work on that deal and I appreciate what Mr. Nary said. And I'm certainly one Councilman -- I know the other ones feel the same way -- we are not going to let our staff hang their heads out to get chopped off. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: You're kind of caught in the in between aspect, because we don't want to add another layer of bureaucracy to have a design review committee, yet we don't have the design standards to be more specific to give staff better tools to deal with these things, so you're caught in the in between part and so these gentlemen up here can make those decisions. Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, my comment was going to be that some of that wording got into that provision of the UDC because many of us on the committee were determined not have another Car Quest building like the one that's on Franklin just east of the Chamber of Commerce building. And you can't cover all bases in a thing. But that was the ultimate bad example of what we did not want. There are other buildings, particularly along this row, and part of a decision in -- in the transportation plan of making this the lower part of the split corridor is that these would be auto -oriented businesses along here. Well, what more auto -oriented business than this, in addition to drive-in restaurants and so forth. So, I think we've said I certainly support the director in the decision that she made. She also included in her decision how you should appeal it, which you have done. And I feel our director has done pretty much what she had to do. I agree with the other statements that have been made that we need to sit down and get better guidelines on what the design review is going to be and some of that was waiting for Meridian Development Corp to come up with their design plans, which we were going to use as a basis for other places where design review was required, but that seems to have been a delayed process. But I do agree with Councilman Bird, it behooves us to sit down and give some better guidelines. That being said, with another row of windows, I could support the current project. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we don't have anymore public testimony, I move we close AP 07-001. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to close Item 18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 55 of 100 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: I think what we don't want is to design buildings up here. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the request of AP 07-001, the appeal on the Commercial Tire building on Meridian Road, with the exception of adding one more row of windows, instead of panel, in the six roll -up doors that face east. Is there anything else? And, well, the landscaping, yes, definitely, the 35 foot buffer landscaping is definitely part it. I don't think I could support it without that. So, anyway, that's my motion. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Anna, clarification? Canning: If you might. Mr. Nary, do they need to direct me to go ahead and approve the elevations as part of the design review or is that tied up with the appeal? We don't see these very often and I just want to make sure I get the proper directive. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think what I would anticipate is we would -- my office will prepare an order pursuant to that direction that you have -- that is part of this motion, if that's approved. Part of that would, then, be they would need to submit new renderings to Mrs. Canning with those -- with that door changed to it and I guess they already have the landscaping as part of it. So, they would need to submit that and, then, she could go ahead and approve that. Canning: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Does that give you enough clarification? Bird: The motion maker agrees. Canning: Yes, ma'am. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Any further -- Zaremba: I believe I heard the maker accept that. Bird: Yes. Zaremba: The second accepts that. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 56 of 100 De Weerd: Mr. Berg, will you call roll. • Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 19: Public Hearing: VAR 07-002 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-31-1-4132 to allow construction of right -tum only direct access to N. Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. — 3291 E. Pine Street: Item 20: Public Hearing: VAC 07-001 Request for a Vacation on a note on the Porky Park Subdivision No. 1 plat that prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store by Jacksons Food Store, Inc. — 3291 E. Pine Street: De Weerd: Items 19 and 20 are on the -- are both public hearings on VAR 07-002 and VAC 07-001. Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I am going to want to pinch hit for Anna in this instance. She has a little bit of a conflict on this one and so I'll be presenting the next two applications to you. It is for Jacksons Food Stores. They are requesting a variance to the city code, as well as the vacation of a plat note for Porky Park. The subject property, as you can see on the map on the overhead, is on the southeast comer of Pine and Eagle. The proposed request is before you now on the overhead and the applicant is requesting a right tum only into the site from Eagle Road. So, heading northbound, a free right into the Jacksons Food Store site. There is the existing structure and, then, the gas pumps on the north side of their site. As you are aware, the UDC prohibits direct lot access to state highways at locations other than the half mile or section line roads. This proposed access point is about 315 feet south of Pine Avenue. As I mentioned earlier, part of the application request is to vacate a plate note on the face of the final plat for Porky Park Subdivision, which explicitly requires -- or restricts direct lot access to Eagle Road for lots in that subdivision. Some of the justification, aside from the UDC, prohibiting direct lot access, was we did receive a letter from the Idaho Transportation Department. In their letter they state that they plan to construct a free right tum all the way down to the intersection of Pine and if this driveway is approved they will have to reevaluate it, because now there is not a lot of room for a separate free right to tum onto Pine there, so that may throw a wrench in their works to allow that free right to happen if this access is approved. Also, staff had some concerns about, you know, it's pretty rare these days that you can go 50 miles an hour on Eagle Road, but that does occur occasionally and people are slowing down to turn at this site still will have some pretty good speed built up, I would imagine, and you also have to negotiate traffic that could be right in front of you after that free right. So, there are some general public concerns of people slowing down to make that tum on a 50 mile an hour road and if they are, in fact, going faster than that coming into a site and having to go left or right immediately, so those are some of staffs concerns, aside from just the code requirements. Staff does believe that granting the variance would allow a 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 57 of 100 0 right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed for properties that are adjacent to a state highway. Staff further finds that granting the subject variance would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and/or welfare. For these reasons staff is recommending denial of both of the applications. There are no findings required for a plat note vacation. That recommendation is based on staffs recommendation for recommending denial of the variance to the Unified Development Code. So, with that I will stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Caleb. Any questions for staff? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Jackson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is John Jackson. I'm located at 3450 Commercial Court in Meridian, Idaho. I'd like to start out by saying that one of the biggest concerns that we have is safety and in no way are we trying to promote something that would increase danger to any of our customers or the motoring public. The second concern, I guess, that we have is that we don't impede traffic flow or make Eagle Road any more congested than it already is. I drive it every day and I'm very familiar with some of the problems there with Eagle Road. But we are not asking for any special favors. We have been in Meridian -- I think when we moved our office to Meridian 24 years ago, we have never, to my knowledge, ever asked for a special privilege or a concession or any type of incentive and we have tried to be a good citizen and be a part of the community and contribute to the community with our time and money for nonprofits and this sort of thing. We are not interested in creating a difficult situation or a safety issue at all. Obviously, I don't believe that we are. I'm not going to get into a lot of the technical aspects of the traffic, I have got Joe Canning and Pat Dobie here that can speak to that better than I can, but I did want to talk on a few issues. This has been kind of a struggle for us and there has been some mistakes that we have made, I'll be the first to admit it. One of the ones when I wasn't present and I guess that's why I'm here tonight, is our architect, who is a single person office working out of his home, got confused when he was in front of the Council some time ago and didn't quite understand when the condition was placed on this site that prohibited a right turn only and I want to reiterate this is a right turn only. This isn't a right -in, right -out, it's not a left turn, it's a right -in only. He -- and he wasn't authorized, you know, but he agreed to that condition. In defense of himself, bless his heart, he was under the understanding that ITD would make that call and it was irrelevant what happened. Well, that wasn't the case and it was a mistake and call it what it is, a mistake. But I certainly didn't intend to give away any right and that was in error. Another error that I have to take the blame for personally was on Item 2A of the staffs report where plat note six on the final plat for the Porky Park Subdivision, which, by the way, was not even a subdivision when we bought this ground, restricts access to Eagle Road. I'd like to make comments that that was, actually, the second plat that was issued. I signed the first one and there was no restriction and I checked for that and everything was fine and, then, another plat comes along, I, you know, sat down -- sat down at my desk Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 58 of 100 saying, you know, this is now being subdivided, it's a technical thing that has to happen and I signed it in haste, my error, and didn't notice that there was a new note slipped in on this plat that restricted it. Had I, obviously, seen that, I wouldn't have sign it. But, anyway, that was my error and, you know, again, what I think is the most important thing to look for here was the safety and traffic flow and, hopefully, we can forgive some human error on some of the technicalities. On the -- one of the comments I wanted to make on the right tum only, it says it's a special privilege, but, actually, in our -- in our deed we were granted two -- think of the right term. Two curb cuts deeded to that site. One, maybe two, depending on how it's interpreted. But these are rights that were given to the ground in a settlement with ITD years ago. So, this is not a special privilege, in my opinion. I mean if we don't get something, we are giving up a right that we had that's recorded on that deed. So, I don't think it's a special privilege. You know, there was no restriction, even, on a left tum or a right -in, right -out. There was a 41 foot curb cut. So, I think we are giving up something. I don't think we are getting a special privilege. Second of all, you know, they talk about there is no undue hardship. I have -- and I normally wouldn't do this, but I have nothing to hide here. I have a financial statement that I want to -- I'm willing to submit for the public that's our last year's operating statement and we have lost -- well, right here, 186,000 dollars on the site, because of the limited access we have. So, we certainly have a financial hardship. I also want to comment briefly on some of the -- some of the statements that were made result -- in result of this -- the safety issues. It's talked about would be detrimental and based on, you know, public health and safety or welfare, according to a letter submitted by Sue Sullivan, but if you read Sue's letter, all she says was that they would have to determine whether the danger is created by the new approach would outweigh the benefits of this turn lane from Eagle Road to Pine. In other words, they haven't done a study. They don't know and I don't think it's a it's fair to say that it has been determined that it would be a safety issue. In fact, we are the only ones that have done a traffic study and our studies show it would enhance safety and improve traffic flow. So, I think that's -- you know, I'm just appealing to common sense here. I certainly would not want to be responsible for anyone's death or making Eagle Road more congested, because that's just -- that's crazy. What I'm looking for is common sense here, that -- you know, and I'm not a traffic engineer and you will hear better testimony than you will from me on this, but, first of all, the site is not the one that we are proposing. This is an older one that the newer one is the one that we should see, but it's a better design, but in the end result, as a layman, I see this -- we are not putting traffic onto Eagle Road, we are taking it off of Eagle Road. They get off of Eagle Road earlier. They get out of the intersection. It declogs the roadway and it improves things. You won't que up so far back behind the light. And those of us who drive Eagle Road, you know, you can -- you can que up between -- behind a street light two miles back. You know, you're not expecting to have to stop suddenly, but you should be prepared to, because it can happen to you. This, actually, improves efficiency of this intersection by nine percent, which is a significant amount. So, I guess appealing to the common sense of it all, it improves safety, it improves traffic flow, it's the right thing to do and I hope that we get an opportunity to pursue this with ITD. I know it's really their jurisdiction and we go to ITD, they send us back here and we -- you know, we feel like we are getting bounced around a little bit, quite honestly, but they respect your opinion and, you know, whatever Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 59 of 100 you do for us -- or don't do for us tonight, you know, it's -- it doesn't mean that we are going to get this curb cut, I just -- it just means that we will be allowed to approach ITD and maybe a study should be done by them before they make these sort of comments, like we have done, to see, because if it truly does, like our study shows, improve safety and traffic flow, why on earth would this be a bad thing? Thank you very much. I will be available for questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Can I ask a question? De Weerd: Mr. Jackson. Bird: Mr. Jackson. It's -- you offered it or I wouldn't ask it, but you had a -- you had your P&L. Do you feel that this right -in and right -out will -- will reverse that 186,000? Jackson: Well, I'm certainly -- I'm hoping so. It would definitely improve it. I mean our problem is restriction. I have people -- you know, our headquarters are right next door here and so I'm familiar with a lot of people in the neighbor and they -- I get comments all the time -- I got one tonight saying, you know, I'm in the office right across the street from you, but I never go in there, because it's too hard to get in and out on it. It's difficult for larger vehicles, particularly -- I mean the internal circulation is difficult, the way we have to come in from the -- from the top and it's not convenient, so to answer your question, yes, I think it would help. I'm not saying it would turn it around 180 degrees, but it would certainly help. Bird: Madam Mayor? With your -- with your traffic flow as it is now, you're, basically, a right out right now. That upper one I guess you can get across the traffic if you're brave enough, over to the deal, so -- Jackson: Right. Bird: So, basically, when you get in there you're going to be a right -out on Pine Street anyway. Jackson: Correct. Bird: Am I not right? Jackson: No. That's correct. On the one close to the comer. If you take the second one, you can tum left. The median stops there and we purchased additional ground, so we could get to -- beyond that median and so you could make a left tum and continue on northbound on Eagle Road. Bird: Yeah. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 60 of 100 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Let me really applaud you for that last comment about purchasing that land on the north. It's unrelated to this project, but that access issue to Pine is extremely difficult. Is there a reason that the -- this right -in access is where it's located on this particular map, as opposed to further south along your property? And the reason I ask is it looks as though it puts people entering your property at whatever speed right into a parking stall where people would be backing out and -- Jackson: I'd probably defer that to the engineer. I know that there is a decel lane that stretches several hundred feet beyond our property, so there is -- I mean it's almost interstate standards this access. It's a -- to my understanding it meets or exceeds all state type road requirements. As far as the exact location of it, I -- you know, I guess you reach a median -- a happy median between -- well, I'm talking about stuff I don't know. De Weerd: If only we could all admit to that. On the decel lane, then, are you purchasing the right of way to put in that decel lane? Jackson: I really don't know. I know it's of no cost to the state. We are paying to put it in. I don't know -- we have already -- we have granted some ground, as I understand it, as far as an agreement for the tomorrow development. I don't know if they need more or -- I can't answer that. De Weerd: Okay. Jackson: We have got almost a half an acre of landscaping. You know, we tried to make this a very -- it's a gateway street into our fine city here and we try to do an upscale site and that's a lot of it and it's part of the problem, why we are having trouble making money, because it's a big investment, but I just feel like if we could get more accessible to the public, we could make it here. De Weerd: Thank you. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would ask about the two plats, if I may, Mr. Jackson. Jackson: I'm song. Excuse me. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 61 of 100 Zaremba: I was on the Planning and Zoning came for annexation and the accompanying insisted that the no access to Eagle be put on. Commission when this piece of property plat on which I was one of the ones that Jackson: So, that must have been plat number two. Zaremba: Well -- and that's why I'm wondering how that got to be plat number two. Was number one in the county, because the one that had the no access accompanied the annexation. Jackson: Well, you know, I may be mistaken here, but as I understand it -- and I'm not an attorney, as well as an engineer, but there was -- the initial plat was a one time split, which you're entitled to do. And that was done and completed and we bought the property and the plat was recorded without that restriction. And, then, after that when they subdivided the remainder of it, they came back and for some reason kind of included up in the first, maybe CC&Rs or what, I'm not sure, but there was -- I can assure you the first plat did not have that restriction and that was, you know, some time ago. That's the one that I was more comfortable about. The second one was -- no one pointed that out to me. My mistake. Zaremba: Well, I assure you it's not something that snuck in, because it had lengthy conversation at the Planning and Zoning level. Jackson: No, I don't think it -- Zaremba: During the annexation. Jackson: I don't think it was a trick, I just didn't see it. Had I saw it I would not have signed it at that point in time. We already had one recorded without it. Zaremba: In the county. Jackson: Was it in the county? Zaremba: It had to have been. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else? Jackson: Okay. I believe Joe Canning is going to speak a little bit more about some of the background on this and, then, Pat Dobie will speak some on more of the engineering fundamentals behind the safety and better traffic flow. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. J. Canning: Yes, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Joe Canning and I'm with B&A Engineers in Boise. The address is 5505 West Franklin. And I'm here �I Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 62 of 100 tonight with John and Pat to discuss this request and, actually, I can tell by a lot of the questions being asked I think some of my thunder has already been taken here, but I'll proceed. Our request is to vacate the note six of the final plat of Porky Park Subdivision. That does state direct lot access to Eagle Road is prohibited. And the second request is to request a variance to allow the construction of a right turn in lane to the site from Eagle Road. And I think it's important to point out -- and John did mention this, that it is a right -tum in only. This is not a left turn. It's not a right tum out. It's only to cavy cars or vehicles from Eagle Road into the site. Now, hopefully, I can answer a few questions about some of the history of this particular site, particularly with the plat. Jacksons Food Stores did purchase this site on March 18th of 2005 and that was a result of a City of Meridian administrative lot split. So, it was in the city, but it was an administrative lot split that occurred. So, it was not in the original subdivision. The current land use was approved by the city on May 24 of 2005. The developer of adjoining land, that would be the Porky Park element, received preliminary plat approval on August 16th of 2005 and that plat did include a Jackson site. The Jackson store received their certificate of zoning compliance on August 1st of 2005. So, as you notice, that was even prior to the preliminary plat approval of Porky Park Subdivision. And just as for interest sake, the city's UDC is dated October 19th of 2005. So, all that post dated all of this activity. The plat of Porky Park Subdivision approved by the City Council on November 22nd of 2005 and the plat was recorded on February 17th of 2006. Now, we have seen an original version of the plat that did not have that note six regarding the access out to Eagle Road not being permitted. But, anyway, the primary issue we are here tonight about is the access to Eagle Road. And, of course, the Council to approve a variance request, as we have submitted, must make three findings. One of those is the variance shall not grant a right or special privilege as not otherwise allowed in the district. And at face value, when you read that, it's almost impossible to imagine a situation where they could be held as true. However, in this instance, the site had an access that was approved by the Idaho Transportation Department as part of a prior condemnation process. In our opinion we are not asking for a special privilege, we are simply asking for what was on the site and granted by ITD. Number two is the variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site. I think several of you have already -- have noticed that. It is difficult to get in and out of this particular piece of property. The only access right now is off Pine. The medians and channelization that occurs out there is a challenge to get into this property. And, of course, we feel that the addition of the access to Eagle Road for a right tum in only will help considerably. The third item is the variance shall not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare and Pat Dobie is the next to come up and I think Pat can speak specifically to the specific traffic study that he's completed for the property and I think we will see that, actually, it improves things quite a bit in the area. So, with that, Pat. Dobie: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Pat Dobie with Dobie Engineering and my address is 777 Hearthstone Drive in Boise. I prepared the traffic study for this project, submitted it to ITD in 2005, 1 believe. When ITD received it, they raised a number of questions. The first one was conformance with this spacing standards on Highway 55. The second one was the question of access rights that 0 • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 63 of 100 existed on this property. And, then, the third one was safety and operational considerations. The access rights were documents and based upon our condemnation that occurred in 1989 between the state and the previous property owner, which was the DeBorren family, the DeBorrens reserved a right to either -- either two driveways accessing Highway 55 or one driveway to be located as they determined. That driveway was on a 60 foot right of way with a 41 foot street section. Now, that's ACHD standards for a commercial driveway or a collector road. The second issue dealt with operation and safety considerations. I prepared the traffic impact study. It was submitted to ITD. It was reviewed with their staff. ITD, then, rejected the application, because it didn't conform with their spacing standards. Their policy -- especially the IDAPA policies allow for a variance and it's very strict criteria. It says if the project will improve the operation and the safety of the highway, which is a very high standard to meet. There was an appeal submitted and there was a hearing examiner appointed by the state to take testimony and to review the technical issues associated with the operation and safety and what I have for the record -- and I want to submit it -- is, number one, a copy of the second judgment and decree of condemnation which established the access rights and the second is the records of the hearing examiner, together with facts and findings and conclusion of law. Let me submit these for the record. I won't bore you with the legal issues, but the hearing examiner found that the access rights to the property were not extinguished and the property had, in fact, retained an access easement. The second thing they found -- the hearing examiner found was that the ITD staff acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by denying the variance request, because there was no factual basis for them denying it and I'd like to read you his findings. It says -- it says -- now, two engineers -- De Weerd: Mr. Dobie, we need you to summarize. Dobie: Okay. There were two engineers from the state that testified concerning operational and safety issues. The hearing examiner found that neither of ITD's engineers were able to demonstrate what was wrong with Mr. Dolby's calculations or his ultimate opinion. My opinion was that the proposed right -in driveway would improve the operation and safety. And there is a number of reasons for that and I think it's detailed in my report. The hearing examiner agreed that the proposal here qualified for a variance and that there was a preexisting access right that remained pertinent to this property. I would be happy to answer any questions that you have concerning any of these issues. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I have got one question and it's -- not being a traffic engineer, I -- by having a right -in only I don't know where you get -- where your safety comes in from the existing from what you got is what you're doing is -- because you could go another 200 feet, you got a stop sign -- stop light there and turn, slow down, stop, tum right and come back in the right way. It don't get you any exit different than what you have got now and the 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 64 of 100 more cars you got in there the more cars you got to get exit out and I don't know, you know, explain to me why that one cut out there is going to make it much safer to get in and get out. Dobie: Madam Mayor, what's proposed here is a deceleration lane that starts down on the highway. The taper is 540 feet long. It, then, goes into a continuous right tum lane that goes all the way down to the stop light at Pine Street. Now, none of this exists today and these are the improvements that were proposed as part of the original application to be funded by Jackson's company. The safety considerations stem from vehicles crossing another vehicle's path or speed differentials on the highway. The deceleration lane with the taper meets all generally accepted standards for a safe exit off the road. So, there -- what -- by the vehicles coming in this way and, then, turning in -- and the primary purpose of this slip lane is for large trucks to access the fueling stations back here. The alternative is for the trucks to come up to the stop bar, which creates a condition -- a very strong possibility for rear -end collisions. Vehicles making turns here -- and there is a lot of right turns on red that occur at this intersection, these vehicles turning here cross the path of vehicles on other signal phases. These turning conflicts are eliminated by the slip lane. The rear end possibility is eliminated by the slip lane. And, moreover, then, the vehicles have to come down, decelerate, which creates the potential for rear -end collisions at this point turning into the site. All of those turning movements are eliminated. All of those conflict points are eliminated through the installation of this and everything that's proposed here conforms to both ITD and national standards for these types of facilities. And from an evaluation of the safety -- you know, overall safety of the intersection, both for these movements and especially what's going on up here, by taking this traffic out of that stream, you reduce the conflict points and, therefore, you improve the safety. Bird: Madam Mayor? So, what you're telling me is that right in there is for trucks? Dobie: Primarily for trucks. Bird: For semis? Dobie: Yes. Bird: To get to the fuel station back there. Dobie: Correct. Bird: Well, they are going to have to swing it and I don't know how close your detail is on your deal there, but they are going to have to do some swinging to make that comer if they are very long at all and that gets you right into it, as Councilman Borton mentioned earlier, right into the people backing out. Dobie: But if I may, the alternative is to come up here and, then, have those trucks wander through this area to get to the fuel and, then, come all the way back here and 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 65 of 100 back out -- this is a raised island in the middle of Pine Street. Those -- those large trucks are either doing this maneuver or doing this maneuver, which is very difficult and really congests the site. De Weerd: But the question is why isn't it further down here, which allows for better access? Isn't that what you're trying to get to? Thank you. Bird: No. I mean I just -- I have a real concern of not only getting an in, but getting an out. You know, I don't know, how many -- I don't know how many semis right now fuel up there, but if you get that and they double their business, it's -- you got to get them back out on the road and down the -- and most of them is going to want to go north on Eagle Road. Very few of them's going to want to go -- tum right and go over to Cloverdale. Dobie: The turning movement -- this was -- this curb was laid out with a truck template, so it is the minimum. And the reason I put it at this location was so that it would be useful both by the automobiles and by the trucks. But the trucks can now pull in here, pull into the fueling stations, and, then, leave this way, which is a fairly easy operationally efficient maneuver, as opposed to what they have to do right now and you can see from the testimony that was given before as far as the lack of fuel sales and those trucks buy a lot of fuel, they just aren't -- they are not going there, because you can't get there from here. Bird: Thank you very much. De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I thought at one point you were saying that you designed that for trucks that were bringing fuel to the station. Did I misunderstand that? Dobie: No. This is -- this is the fueling. There is -- these are truck fueling bays in this location. Zaremba: I did misunderstand. Dobie: I think there is six positions back there. De Weerd: Anything further? Okay. Thank you. We will ask for concluding remarks. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? Arnold: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Rebecca Arnold. I live at 3973 Eric Lane, Boise. I -- initially -- well, I have to disclose that Mr. Jackson is a friend • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 66 of 100 of mine. He has his corporate office in Meridian, but his -- he lives, actually, in my district. And when he first approached me and mentioned that he wanted an access onto Eagle Road, my initial reaction was a knee jerk reaction are you out of your mind. Eagle Road? Absolutely not. But, then, it occurred to me that since I do have a little experience with transportation planning, that perhaps I should look at it on a case-by- case basis and listen to what he had to say and look at the particulars of the location. After looking at it, there were two things that persuaded me to change my opinion on the issue. One was the traffic study, which does show that it improved safety on Eagle Road and improved the functioning of that intersection. And the other was driving on Eagle Road. I find myself on Eagle Road far more often than I'd like to be there and, actually, do go into this gas station occasionally. If you are driving on Eagle Road and proceeding toward the intersection of Pine and Eagle, if you're stopped and you want to get into the gas station, about the time you get going again you have to make a hard right, which is a traffic conflict, because people behind you may not be paying attention and may rear end you and, then, you have to make another hard right to get into the station. Having a decel lane there eliminates that issue, because you get off of Eagle before you get into that intersection. The other thing that it does, if you're not stopped at the light, but if you're -- if you're driving along there, it's much safer to enter a decel lane, because you enter at a faster speed, you enter the decel lane and, then, make the right turn into the station, instead of getting to the intersection and, then, slowing down to the point where you have to make a hard right onto Pine to go into that intersection. So, those two things persuaded me to support having an access off of Eagle Road and I think it's important to keep that in mind. It's coming off of, not getting onto Eagle Road. Thank you. De Weerd: And that's because the decel lane does not exist today. Arnold: Right. But it's my understanding that Jacksons is willing to pay for putting that decel lane in as part of building this exit off of Eagle Road. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Can I ask a couple of questions? You brought it up, Mrs. Arnold. Are you here representing ACHD? Arnold: No. I am one of five commissioners, so this is strictly my personal opinion. Bird: Okay. You stated that he was in your district, so I wanted to make sure that that was -- Arnold: My personal opinion I am one of five. Bird: If that right -in off Eagle Road is going to work and the first right -in and right -out -- I guess that's right -in -- well, it can only be right -out, too, because you got a barrier there Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 67 of 100 -- along there. Maybe that goes away if it's hard to get into, if it's dangerous. The first -- the first one on Pine there. You put the right -in on Eagle and then -- and, then, take the right on Pine out. Arnold: I would think that would be less of a concern, because Pine doesn't have nearly the traffic, nor the speeds that you see on Eagle Road. And that's an access point that I think functions fairly well at this point and it's an existing access that I wouldn't -- wouldn't be inclined to eliminate. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Arnold: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there any further testimony on this application? Would the applicant like to have closing remarks? Jackson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I guess I would just like to reiterate the fact that we are the only party in this arrangement that has actually done a traffic study and I know we didn't have time to get into all the details and, quite frankly, I'm not sure I would even understand them, too. But I know that there is a science to engineering traffic and that's a conclusion. I guess I would just ask that we have the chance to take this to ITD and discuss it with them on a more thorough basis and let them get a traffic study before they make some of the comments that they are making that are, quite frankly, I think a little bit irresponsible. If you haven't done a study, you draw conclusions -- it surprises me. But, you know, if our -- if our conclusion is correct, we are talking about possibly saving lives here, not just through traffic flow and I think it's worth looking at and what you decide tonight will not determine whether we get this or not, but it will allow us to shed more light on the situation and safety is people's lives. So, please, give me the chance to take this further for further investigation. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further comments? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I don't know if there is an answer to this or not. ITD has done a very thorough Eagle Road corridor study that involved a great deal of public money and time and public open houses to study this corridor. To say that they have done no traffic analysis I believe is a misdirection. They have done a thorough traffic analysis of this area. Their determination is that there needs to be a dedicated right tum lane onto Pine from Eagle in this location. What ITD has not studied is an additional break in that right tum to give access to a piece of property that has a plat note that says they will never have access there. It isn't that ITD has ignored this area, they have a study and their 0 • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 68 of 100 study says they need a dedicated right turn lane onto Pine. The only piece missing is throwing another access in the middle of that. De Weerd: You know, Mr. Zaremba, I -- having -- I'm not a traffic engineer and nor do I want to be. I thank God I'm not. But if -- I have seen how long it takes to get a road improvement on Eagle Road and there is no doubt that a tum lane is needed to get to Pine. It's ridiculous. I can understand why there is a real issue of someone trying to go to that gas station, because turning onto Pine in that area is really difficult and I don't know at this point getting road improvements anywhere, looking for these kind of partnerships to get them done, I'm kind of at the point of just do it and if you get a free right in to get that extra lane in in a timely fashion, I'm kind of at this point all for that. So -- because I haven't seen road improvements done very timely if they are not driven by the private sector. So, that's my -- my kind of worthless comment, but it is what it is. Caleb. Hood: Madam Mayor, if I may follow up on just a couple of questions that came up that weren't answered by the Council and maybe just a comment, too, on your most recent comment. Just going back to ITD's letter and it just -- it says and it's not clear when they plan on constructing it, but it says ITD currently has a project to construct a right turn lane for northbound traffic to tum onto Pine Avenue. Again, we didn't follow up to say, hey, is that this year, next year, but it's at least a project they are planning on doing it, so I just wanted to -- there is detail there that they at least -- didn't say it's in our program or we are evaluating it, they are saying that there is -- it's a project, so I just wanted to -- De Weerd: And I haven't seen it in a program and that's why I made that comment. Hood: I guess the -- you know, they have the right of way, it really would take some striping and some asphalt. They are really not a huge dollar cost to do that if there is -- when they are so inclined. I know they don't have a lot of money, but that wouldn't be a big dollar item to construct. So, just to throw that out. A couple other things that did come up that weren't answered. One of the reasons this is in the location it is, aside from it being able to be used by regular cars and trucks, as the applicant stated, there is a big power pole that's right near the property line. It's right about there and I'm not exactly sure, but it's one of the big power poles, so you can't really come any further south with the location. And the other thing, the administrative lot split -- and this is more for Mr. Jackson. When we only did half a dozen of those a couple years ago and this was before the new UDC was in, a condition of one of those administrative lot splits was that the entire property being granted the administrative lot split had to come back in and be part of a subdivision. So, just some clarity. There wasn't really two subdivisions, it was an administrative lot split and it's kind of a temporary split, if you will, because it required everything to come back in for a subdivision. So, just a couple of points of clarification for you. De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb. Any questions for staff at this point, Council? 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 69 of 100 Bird: I have none. E De Weerd: If there is no information or comments needed, I would a entertain motion. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would move we close the public hearings on Items 19 and 20. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on 19 and 20. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: After review of the applicant's materials and comments and the staff report and comments of the applicant's representatives that were represented here tonight before us, I see this right -in access variance as being something that is -- actually is an appropriate variance and should be granted. I don't see it granting a special right or privilege. I do believe that is relieves an undue hardship on this particular site and I don't think it would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. I think some of the comments of Mr. Jackson, Mrs. Arnold, and other individuals who provided information today, provides information at least for me that allowing this opportunity to relieve some traffic from Eagle Road with a right -in only access is sufficient and I'm comfortable going forward with it and I would presume, Mr. Nary, if that's the way we went, we'd just be back for findings for approval at a later date? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, that's correct. You would be directing that we prepare that, so -- Borton: Okay. All right. Those are my findings and thoughts on it. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would comment on another subject that has come up in -- that they have a 1989 right to an access. It has been a precedent with this body when the use of the E Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 70 of 100 property changes, conditions of those changes often include giving up an access and I believe that happened to this as well. In accepting the annexation and zoning and preliminary plat, the applicant at that time agreed to give up the access. The other thought I would have is if it is the thought of the other Councilmen to accept this access, I would want to make it possible to come back out through that and my suggestion would be that one of those razer things be put in this driveway or some other measure that absolutely prevents anybody coming out that way. De Weerd: I will remember not to mess with you. Okay. Any further comments? Point well taken. Okay. Do I have a motion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would move that we approve Item 19, VAR 07-002, and direct staff to prepare Findings for approval. I don't know if we need a date certain for that at this point, Mr. Nary, or -- Nary: Normally it's a couple of weeks. Borton: For a couple of weeks. March 13th. De Weerd: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Okay. Hearing none, I would entertain a different motion, if someone wanted to give me one. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would move to -- are we dealing with both subjects at the same time? Nary: No. Bird: Just the one. Nineteen. De Weerd: Just 19. Zaremba: I'm song. Okay. I would move to deny vacation VAC 07-001. Is that correct? De Weerd: 002. Bird: 002. De Weerd: Item 19. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 71 of 100 Zaremba: We are doing the variance first? Okay. Nary: Yes. is Zaremba: I'm song. Then I retract that motion and, Madam Mayor, I would move to deny the variance VAR 07-002. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Bird: Yeah, I'll second it. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: This is something that I -- I have real concerns about. We have allowed right -in and right -outs along there, but I -- and not being a traffic engineer or anything, but just -- as Mr. Jackson says, using common horse sense, I think we are asking for some trouble and that's -- I don't know. I know they can't move it back. If they could move it back, that would be -- I'd probably have seconded Joe's motion. But I know that big steel power line -- power pole is there, so you can't move it back. So, in this form I just can't do it. I mean if they want to -- if they want to trade that off for one of the Pine entries, I could take a good hard look at that, but right now -- De Weerd: I guess I would just ask Mr. Bird what makes this different from some of the other right -in, right -outs? This is just a right -in. It gives a decel lane and in that area right now there isn't one. And, you know, I understand that at some point there is going to be one, but we needed it when -- we needed it yesterday, like most of our road improvements, and I think the situation -- because I have been stacked there waiting to tum onto Pine. It's not an ideal situation and I see this almost safer than some of the other things that this Council has approved and I haven't always been in support of them. So, I will preface that. Bird: I don't disagree one bit with you, Mayor, on that, but, I'll tell you what, you want my support, no trucks. No semis go in there. De Weerd: I don't think we made that condition on any of the other right -ins. Bird: But the others weren't fuel stations, but that's neither here nor there. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion, Council? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 72 of 100 Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Item 20. Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we deny vacation VAC 07-001. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second on Item 20 to deny. Any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree; absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 21: Public Hearing: Proposed Fireworks Ordinance: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 21 is a Public Hearing. Chief Anderson, are you going to introduce this? I won't ask Mrs. Canning to. Anderson: Thank you. I appreciate that. Madam Mayor and Council, we are here before you tonight to ask for your help. We have an ordinance that we have before you regarding fireworks and I'd like to introduce the ordinance tonight and, then, I'm going to have Deputy Chief Joe Silva give you the nuts and bolts of the ordinance, but this ordinance has quite a history with me and I started working on a fireworks problem long before I came to Meridian and I can tell you that Meridian has a fireworks problem, Ada County has a fireworks problem, the Treasure Valley has a fireworks problem. And what we are proposing tonight I think is -- moves us down the road towards a possible solution for that. And this has been a growing problem that has occurred and the reason it has is I need to give you a little bit of history, is Idaho has had a fireworks law on the books for a number of years, I believe it was originally drafted in 1979, but it was modified in 1997 to clean up some problems that were in the law at that time. In that cleanup, however, there was a provision that was put in there that allowed for interstate commerce and for a legitimate wholesaler of fireworks to be able to sell fireworks at wholesale, as long as they were being taken somewhere else and lit off or being used other than in the state of Idaho. And so this provision allowed for somebody -- if they were to buy fireworks that were the non -safe and sane type that they could bring those into Idaho and, then, legitimately wholesale those to other companies and, then, they would be shipped out. What has happened as a result of that, though, is that a number of firework vendors have taken advantage of that provision that provided -- that allowed 0 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 73 of 100 for the interstate commerce and they have actually used that as a loop hole to sell illegal fireworks in the state of Idaho. And when we talk about illegal fireworks, you probably heard the term safe and sane fireworks, those are, typically, the sparkler types of fireworks, the fountain, the snakes, those types of things. And in Idaho we have a definition for the non -aerial common fireworks is the term that we use for the safe and sane. For the others it's, basically, any firework that travels outside of a 20 foot circle or travels more than 15 foot in height or 20 foot in height, throwing sparks in any manner. So, those illegal fireworks are the ones that are creating the problems, because those are the ones that you typically can't control. Once you light the fuse and you run away, you don't know what that firework is going to do and for most of us we think back about when we were kids and we think about things like bottle rockets and we think about things like lady fingers, the little one inch long firecrackers that you used to light, but I can tell you the fireworks are growing in size and those little bottle rockets that we used to think of, those are small in comparison to what's being shot off today and what's being sold out there and used in our community. In fact, when we get close to the Fourth of July, the reports that we get -- and I know that you folks have been out and about, you can look around our city on the Fourth of July and it's been compared to war zones and it literally looks like mortars and shells -- it looks like what we saw on CNN when we were entering into that Iraq war and I mean that's really what it looks like and the concern is that all those fireworks are not necessarily in control and a lot of those are being shot towards the neighbors' houses and so you may not even be the person lighting the fuse, but you could be the recipient of some of those as they land on your roof or they land in your shrubbery and they bum your house down and it's just something that is really getting out of hand. This problem is being compounded by this loop hole in the law. I can tell you that I personally have worked for a number of years, even prior to coming to Meridian, at trying to get this loop hole closed up in the law. I have talked to the legislators that drafted the changes in 1997. That is not what was intended with the changes. It was for legitimate wholesale and interstate commerce, not to be able to sell fireworks to the local people and what's happening is they will sell to anybody as long as you sign a piece of paper that says I'm going to take it out of the state and set it off. And we have, actually, reviewed some of the paperwork that some of the vendors have used over the years and it's kind of interesting when you read some of the reasons and some of the places that people put on these waivers that say where they are going to use these fireworks. Obviously, they don't get reviewed very closely by the folks selling those. Some of them have listed my cabin, some of them have listed Mars, Pluto, I'm taking it to the trunk of my car, so it really has just become a joke and it's not taken seriously. So, this has been a growing problem and getting worse over and over the years. I can also tell you that last year when we got close to the Fourth of July we came to you folks and we talked to you about some changes that had happened in our Unified Development Code in the City of Meridian and there was some issues with the size of the temporary stands and we had a number of firework vendors come to that meeting and testify about inconsistencies between the fire departments in the valley and the instructions that we got from you folks at that time is that after the Fourth of July is over we would like you to sit down with the firework vendors, we'd like you to sit down with the other fire departments and see if you can't come up with some standardization. I can tell you that the City of Meridian and Meridian fire department L Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 74 of 100 and in particular Deputy Chief Silva has spent a considerable amount of time working on that effort that you guys challenged us with. And the first thing we did was we got together with all the fire departments throughout the Treasure Valley and ask them what they do for fireworks and the answers were all over the board. Some folks allowed sales of fireworks from tents, some of them had no limits to the size of the tents or the square footage, some of them had very restrictive ones, some had age limits, some didn't have age limits, it was pretty much all over the board. So, one of the things that we did was we tried to get the fire departments to unit, so that we had a standardized approach to dealing with fireworks and firework vendors and that took us several months of meeting with the fire departments to work through all those issues and we now believe that we have a pretty successful model there and those are the things that you see in the ordinance. I can also tell you that we met with the firework vendors themselves or at least those that we know that have done business in Meridian in the past or the ones that we were able to get their names from the state fire marshal's office, because maybe they had signed up with the state fire marshal's office for one of these wholesaler permits and we listened to their concems and we listened to their issues also and I have to tell you for the most part the firework vendors are responsible people and they are trying to do the right thing and just like many of us, they are great Americas and they believe in patriotism and all those kind of things and, you know, they certainly don't want to see anybody injured by the fireworks that they sell, but I can also tell you that it was interesting in talking with those folks, because some of the folks who traditionally have always sold the safe and sane fireworks, as a result of this change in the Idaho law and the loop hole that has been created, numerous firework vendors now sell the non -safe and sane, the dangerous fireworks that we are talking about and most people would love to buy those, instead of the safe and sane. And so folks who used to be legitimate firework vendors selling the safe and sane only, the kind that you didn't mind if your kids lit off, have now had to resort to selling the dangerous ones just like everybody else, so that they compete business -wise and so it's been one of those problems that has compounded itself. This law has only been on the books now for ten years and I can tell you in that ten years time the number of firework vendors that have switched over from selling the old safe and sane to the dangerous one is probably in the neighborhood of about 90, 95 percent at this point. And it's getting worse and worse. The problem is as firefighters we go out there and we try to enforce the ordinances that are on the books and I can tell you, you know, we are -- it's like beating our heads against a wall, because there are not enough firefighters, if we recalled every firefighter that we have in Meridian and Boise and Nampa and Caldwell and everywhere else, and every law enforcement officer, we still couldn't cover all the fireworks -- the illegal fireworks that are being set off on the Fourth of July. One year in Nampa when I worked over there, we tried to from an enforcement end and you couldn't even get from one call to the next call that you had been dispatched on without getting shot at by illegal fireworks from about five or six different directions while you were driving to the next call. And Dave Heineman from Boise tried a similar technique last year and he can testify to the results of that. And I liken this I guess to the problem of -- it would be as if we were to legalize marijuana or cocaine or some illegal drug and, then, you ask the law enforcement officers to go out and make sure that nobody uses those illegal drugs. And that's what we have in Idaho right now. We have a loop hole in our state law that allows 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 75 of 100 0 people to buy these, they can possess them, they are just not supposed to set them off. Well, the only way that we can enforce that is if we happen upon the scene the minute they are holding the match to the fuse. So, you're asking us to enforce something that's virtually impossible to do. But I can tell you that the safety concerns are real and it's just a matter of time, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when, when we bum somebody's house down who is just sitting there minding their own business on the Fourth of July and no fault of their own, somebody shoots a firework into their shrubbery or onto their roof and bums their house down. And, hopefully, nobody gets killed or injured when that happens. But this problem is getting worse and worse and we need to do something about it. The approach that we have come up with and that we are taking, because, to be honest with you, we haven't had a lot of success at the legislature and the reason we haven't is -- as you all know, Idaho's legislature pretty much is hands off and they believe in less government and less regulations and that's the answer that we have been given so far in our attempts to get legislation passed there. And so I challenge you that this is similar to the problem that the cities faced with meth a few years ago and the answer was you couldn't get anything done at the state legislature, so you had to take that problem on on a county -wide basis and you took that challenge and you passed some ordinances that took care of the meth problem and that became the model that was, then, used in the rest of the state. And that's what we are proposing here tonight is the ordinance that you have before you as a model ordinance, we have worked extensively with the surrounding fire departments to come up with an ordinance that everybody, including the county, would be willing to adopt. We have taken this to the Treasure Valley Partnership, which is a representative group of the cities and the counties in Treasure Valley, we have got good support and good feedback from them that support this. Meridian is going to be the first city, you are going to be the test case, if you will, on this particular ordinance and if it passes here, the other cities in the Treasure Valley are all looking at within the next few months holding public hearings and considering this same ordinance for passage in their towns, as well as the county. And the idea is that we take control of the situation here locally and we do what we can to eliminate these dangerous fireworks and it's time that there is a voice of reason here and if Meridian has to be the one who is that voice of reason and we step to the plate, then, I think we need to do that, but somebody has to look out for the protection of folks, because the firework problem is a growing problem and it is totally out of hand. And with that I will turn it over to Deputy Chief Silva and ask him to give you some of the nuts and bolts of the ordinance. Silva: Thank you, Chief Anderson. I'd like to just first of all start with kind of an overview. The chief has touched on some points, but I want to just kind of -- we, basically, worked within the state statute with the definitions for both novelty items and for non -aerial fireworks the chief alluded to that explains that. Dangerous fireworks, obviously, anything that goes outside of 15 foot diameter circle or emits sparks outside of a 20 foot diameter circle or shoot above a height of 20 feet, those are the things that seem to be most troubling for our citizens and those are the things that seem to be most troubling for our -- for our citizens and those are the things that stimulate all the citizen complaints to dispatch. As these things do include things like -- commonly referred to as bottle rockets and firecrackers, M80s, things like that. As the chief alluded to, there Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 76 of 100 i 0 is a flaw in the state law that's the most troublesome and it's a huge enforcement problem when we are faced with working on the Fourth of July. The dispatch -- we have a representative from dispatch and she will talk about some of the -- the numbers of calls that we get about illegal fireworks coming out of neighborhoods. One of the things that the chief talked about, which is extremely important, we are all Idahoans and this one thing -- the careless act of one Idahoan can put another Idahoan's property at risk and we can't underestimate that and it's really sad. Speaking for myself, it's -- after we all have worked a long day on the Fourth of July holiday, when I go home and I see sticks from bottle rockets this far on my roof and my yard, that's very troubling, you know, in doing my part trying to protect the citizens in Meridian, but when you experience that at a very personal level, it makes it very hard to deal with, you know, to have your own property exposed while you're out protecting somebody else's property. And we can't lose sight of the fact that it's a Class C explosive and I relate to you, as I have in previous work sessions, that we had two casino workers killed in Worley, Idaho, this past summer. Our solution is we are going to try to limit the availability of dangerous fireworks and their being discharged within our community. We are going to require that non -aerial common fireworks, those safe and sane things that the chief alluded to, are purchased under the supervision or guardian or parent. The reason why we are doing this is they, in tum, are used under that same level of supervision and holding the parents accountable for any damages that may result as a result of a fire. This is something that exists in our present ordinance and we are going to continue to enforce and it's present in the 2003 International Fire Code as in the 2006 International Fire Code, should the elected officials choose to adopt a new code, this same provision still exists in the code. No changes. One of the issues, as the chief alluded to, we had some large super stores, if you will, of fireworks that were proposed and put in front of Council for a hearing and one thing we were able to come to consensus with the other fire departments is we would limit the size of the stand to 600 square feet. We would strictly prohibit the sale, storage, possession and use of dangerous fireworks within the City of Meridian. Short term sales of non -aerial common fireworks will not be conducted from a permanent structure. We had one vendor who approached us about selling out of a permanent vacant warehouse structure and, obviously, the building had not been designed and the fire sprinkler system not designed to cant' that kind of fire load, so we were able to deny it on those grounds. One thing that we did work with the vendors -- we had originally as fire agencies throughout the valley had proposed that the age to purchase be 18 and that you be 18 to work within the stands. One thing we were able to come to consensus with -- each side gave a little bit on this and you have to be age 16 to purchase fireworks or you have to be accompanied by a parent and you have to be age 16 to work inside a firework stand. The reason for this requirement is that we actually had some stay-at-home moms who were taking care of their small children who were in playpens inside of a fireworks stand and we didn't think that was necessarily a good combination, so that's why this particular provision was included in our ordinance. And we also removed the cap for the damages that may be caused by fire -- a fire resulting from misuse of fireworks by a minor. And, essentially, what we have done is we have met with the Treasure Valley Partnership, taken this same ordinance to the Treasure Valley Partnership was received and supported very well initially. They actually made a motion in effect to request the -- that the county visit this exact same 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 77 of 100 Is ordinance that we are -- that's in front of you this evening and it's currently under legal review by counsel at Ada County. And with that I will stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Joe. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing and I do have a number of people that have signed up to indicate their support or opposition. So, as I read through -- and I apologize for the time of the evening. It's been a long night. D. Scott Beal signed up against. Beal: Madam Mayor, Councilmen. My name is Donald Scott Eugene Beal and I'm here representing Celebration Corp. I own a fireworks company and I do business in the City of Meridian. My address is 7088 East Stratford Lane, Nampa. First, to start with, my attorney -- we were provided with this -- with the recent revision about -- I received it from Chief Silva four days ago in the mail, five days ago I believe it was via the internet. My attorney has not had any time at this point, he has not had sufficient time to review this revised ordinance and I would like to ask for -- to start with, if we can, a -- just to stay on 30 to 60 days and give my attorney an opportunity to really take a look at what's going on and, actually, come forward in my stead with the right type of, you know, stuff in his head in order combat this. Is that at all possible? De Weerd: Mr. Nary, if you will explain the process that we go through on these ordinances. Nary: Certainly, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The process normally -- and this is a Public Hearing for comments. This is a legislative action of the Council. It doesn't actually require any public input, I mean the Council could take action separately. There normally is a three reading process by statute. That can be waived to only one or two hearings, but there is normally a three reading process for ordinances of this nature. Certainly, your attorney has time to submit any written comments that he wants to make, but statutorily it's not required to take public comment or to take public input or to alter the ordinance based on the public's response, because it is a legislative decision of the Council. So, your attorney -- your attorney probably knows the same thing, but he has time in which to submit comments between now and if we -- whenever the first reading gets put on at the Council's direction, within that two to three week period he certainly has time to submit any comments or concerns he might have. Beal: Thank you. Can I still make my comments at that point, then? De Weerd: At any point in those three readings, yes. Beal: Can I still now? 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 78 of 100 De Weerd: Pardon? Beal: Can I still make comments at this point, then? De Weerd: Yes. 0 Beal: Okay. Great. For the record, I am a certified pyrotechnician. I handle fireworks on a regular basis and I was at one point -- after the military I was a fireman as well, EMT. Fireworks, just for your information, they are built on a standardized basis, whether it is a safe and sane level or an aerial level. Fireworks, whether you're talking about a cap gun, a pulling firework, a firecracker, they all have a specific amount of powder in them. The government mandates what type of -- how much powder can be in a specific size of firework. And 500 grams is the maximum that they allow to have in a safe and sane fountain or in an aerial cake for that matter. So, whether you're going to be talking about a safe and sane firework or simply what the fire department likes to call dangerous fireworks, there is no danger difference between the two fireworks. You still have 200 grams of powder, a hundred grams, 500 grams of powder in a safe and sane fountain, as you do in an aerial cake that might shoot something into the sky. They are both highly explosive and one thing is not going to cause anymore damage than another thing when it comes to either fire or explosion. Excuse me. The Consumer Product Safety Commission -- I don't know if you're aware of what the CPSC is. They control a lot of what is going to be on the market and what's not going to be on the market, whether it comes to a toaster oven or fireworks, it doesn't really matter, they are a huge mandate for what is safe and what is not safe for the American people. There is 300 million people in this country and the Consumer Product Safety Commission mandates fireworks as well. One of the things that they mandate is whether or not we are going to be able to sell M80s, cherry bombs, dynamite, you know, out of our fireworks stands or on the intemet or what have you. They have, obviously, banned the M80, cherry bombs, et cetera, because they are highly dangerous -- very highly dangerous fireworks that should not be in the hands of pretty much anybody, as far as I'm concerned, unless you are a pyrotechnic expert or an explosive expert, for that matter. But in 2004 is the newest update that we have concerning injuries, which they track across the country, and 2004 is the newest we have. We will have 2005 probably anytime soon will be available for us. And what they have tracked is simply the fact that I think the highest in the past 15 years was about 16,000 injuries that required a medical -- any type of medical attention, whether it was 911 on site or actually going to the hospital. It was just over 15,000. In 2004 there was just over 6,000. 1 believe it was 6,236 injuries that were reported across the nation to various agencies that required some sort of medical attention, whether that was going to be a bum or missing limb or what have you. And, honestly, there was fireworks, you know, M80s blowing hands off and such as that. They are not legal in the first place in this country. The majority of the injuries that were caused by those were from sparklers and hand-held items. Generally children. Okay? Local fire agencies are trying to say that they are doing a lot of change on a safety level. There is really no difference in safety when it comes to whether I sell my fireworks out of a stand, whether they are safe and sane, or whether they are going to be a dangerous firework, quote, unquote. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 79 of 100 De Weerd: Sir, if you could summarize. Beal: Sure. • De Weerd: And if you have written testimony, we certainly would enter that into the record as well. Beal: I appreciate that. The way I look at it, honestly, is they are trying to -- what Joe Silva didn't -- Chief Silva did not put up there -- they are trying to make us sell our aerial fireworks out of a permanent structure. If that happens, the Council here is going to start the position of a monopoly in our area, because there is, honestly, only one company pretty much that I have been able to find in the state of Idaho that is able to sell fireworks out of his permanent structure, being as he has been approved for that and that is Rick Handke that owns Fat City Fireworks. He's in a separate county. What that's going to do is simply create a monopoly and people will still continue to go buy fireworks either at Fat City or they will go out of state, like I have a couple of my friends do, they don't even buy from me, and they will still bring them into the City of Meridian, the City of Boise, as well as every other city in our area. And as for the counties backing them, the last word I heard from Canyon County is they were -- they were not -- on a commissioner level they were not backing what the deputies -- the marshals had to say and I know that Ada County Commissioners are also questioning -- not necessarily not backing, but they are questioning what is going to be happening at this time. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Zaremba: Question, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Mr. Beal. If we could ask a question. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I need to make sure that -- to clarify something for me, so that I understand. Beal: Yes, sir. Zaremba: When you say that certain fireworks are -- have specific amounts of gun powder or other energy in them -- Beal: Yes, sir. Zaremba: -- Am I understanding you to say that you don't believe there is -- you have one set of fireworks that expend all of that energy in one spot and do not move or shoot anything. Are you saying that those are no safer than the ones where they expend energy actually moving and -- Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 80 of 100 Beal: I don't believe that they are -- I believe that the danger value is still there. I have - - I have 500 gram fountains. I like fountains. You know, when I put on a show I get a permit, you know, and I got the insurance and everything, so I do everything legal. But the fact is I light off fountains as well during my shows and, you know, I have had fountains that have exploded out the bottom. There is -- you know, and things happen, you know. I can get in my truck and my seat belt will fail, you know, so things just happen. The fact is is they are still volatile, you know, no matter how you look at it, you know, you can have a cap gun, shoot the cap gun, and it's just got a minute amount of powder in it, and you can still take somebody's eye out, you know, and it's still a firework. But the fact is is there is really no -- there is no difference in the amount of powder or the amount of explosiveness of any specific type of firework when we start talking on a large scale level, because we can still -- mandated by federal government, we can still buy 500 gram fountains in my stands if I don't sell anything but safe and sane. Zaremba: But you don't consider it any greater danger to something that can move its energy, start a fire over there, as opposed to being contained -- Beal: No. I agree completely. I mean I think it would be foolish for anybody to stand up and say that, you know a rocket or what have you is not more dangerous. But the majority of injuries that are tracked by the Consumer Products Safe Commission come from safe and sane fireworks. When I say majority, I have calculated, you know, anywhere from 60 to 65 percent and those are products, you know, that are on a safe and sane level. Like sparklers, for example. I personally -- I have a five year old daughter and I am an advocate for safety. Chief Silva knows that. We have talked a lot about it. I don't sell fireworks to anybody under 16, even though that's not what the law is at this point. You know, I have a huge concern for that, but my daughter doesn't play with sparklers. I think it's the most dangerous firework on the market. But the -- because I see those injuries that happen. So, I don't think that there is going to be any way for anybody to say that they are not dangerous if they go into the air, but the fact is when you talk about on a national level, 300 million people, there is just over 6,000 injuries being reported that needed to be reported, start coming -- the majority are coming from safe and sane. That's not my opinion, that is a fact that the Consumer Product Safety Commission has put together, which, obviously, isn't controlled by my opinion. You know, I'm not trying to be a smart-alec or anything, but the fact is is they are all dangerous and no matter whether the fire marshals consider us to be selling through a loop hole or not is beside the point. I don't sell through a loop hole, I follow the letter of the law and if I'm able to sell what I am able to sell, it is all dangerous. It doesn't matter. When I go to Sportman's Warehouse and I can pick up a -- you know, a bottle of their gun powder, you know, which I do some reloading, I can walk right up there and I can pick it right up. Who's to say I don't have a match, who's to say that's not going to explode, take everything out on the shelf and kill 15 people in their store. It's all explosives and it's dangerous, but I also believe one of the things that I like that they are doing is they are lifting the bar on what the cap is for the damage amounts, et cetera, from the fireworks. When the kids do something, the parents are liable. They should be liable anyway. But if we are going to remove that cap that's good, but the fact • 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 81 of 100 is it's still dangerous no matter how you look at it, you know. I carry a gun when I go hunting, you know, there is just -- there is different dangers that are going to be available in everything that we do, but we can't -- you can't just stop one thing because you think it's dangerous, but they are all dangerous. All fireworks are dangerous. But the fact is used in the right environment they are not dangerous. You know, they are not as dangerous I should say when they are used correctly. That's why there is a label on every firework and I'm sure you have all lit off fireworks. There is a label and there is a direction on that label as to what you should be doing with that firework and I know two years ago there was a smoke bomb a kid lit off in east Boise that about burned down fire or six houses and it was a smoke bomb. And they said it on the news, they are safe and sane fireworks that almost burned down -- it burned down a whole big field over there by Columbia Village and it could have killed, you know, tens of twenties of people and it was from a safe and sane firework. So, you know, on that level they are all dangerous, it doesn't matter what it is, whether it puts out smoke, sparks, bombs, it doesn't matter, they are all dangerous. Zaremba: Thank you. Beal: Yes, sir. Any others? Bird: I have none. Beal: Thank you. De Weerd: I'm going to step outside of protocol and ask the couple with the child. Would you like to provide testimony? I don't know where you are on my list, but we want you to testify. Collie: My name is Holly Collie and I live at 1911 West Tracy Court in Meridian. And I guess as a parent I'd like the opportunity for my son to be able to work in a fireworks business and this eliminates him from that. I think it teaches him to work with people, to count money, to have a work ethic, and I guess that was what I would like to put my -- against the ordinance. De Weerd: Against the age limit? Collie: Pardon? De Weerd: Against the age limit? Collie: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Collie: Thank you. 0 • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 82 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Bob Brown signed up against. Brown: Madam Mayor and Members of the City Council, my name is Bob Brown, T&T Fireworks, 5305 Diamond in Boise. If I may first, with respect to Chief Anderson and Chief Silva, I just wanted to comment on a couple of comments they made. Regarding the accident in Worley, Idaho, last night on the reservation -- last year, excuse me, on the reservation, if I do recall properly, that was a Class B 1.3G fireworks that were involved in that and not 1.4G is what we are talking about here tonight. And, then, the other thing is the ordinance in respect to -- De Weerd: Sir, could you use English? Brown: Oh, I'm song. De Weerd: I'm sorry, I just -- if you want us to follow what you just said. Brown: Oh. Okay. I said 1.4G and 1.3G. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Brown: Okay. Well, that's DOT terminology that used to be Class B and Class C. Okay. So, what we sell here is Class C. De Weerd: So, legal, illegal. Brown: Class B is the aerial, that's the 1.3G. De Weerd: The aerial. Brown: Okay. Does that help you? The more dangerous stuff. Okay. De Weerd: Thank you. Brown: I'm sorry. I thought -- De Weerd: I just wanted to make your testimony meaningful. Brown: Okay. Thank you. And, then, in regards to the ordinance, this ordinance, I want to say right up front, does not address interstate commerce, it doesn't address the sale of special fireworks or bottle rockets, firecrackers, the motars, or anything like that. What this ordinance does is it makes the safe and sane sales -- the legal sales in the state of Idaho more restrictive for us and, therefore, we have serious problems with this ordinance and I'd like to share a few of those -- some of those that we see. And Section 5-4-02G, short term storage container. The way this definition reads, it does not seem to work. The only time that something is a short-term container is when the operation is closed and the fireworks are not being offered for sale. We want the short term -- Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 83 of 100 excuse me -- short term storage container to be available all the time, when stand or the tent is open, so that we can restock our product in there, not having to have all our product in the facility at one time. Another area is Section 5-4-02H and I. The selling season in H and I are both shortened one day. They should be changed from 12:01 a.m. on July 5th and July 1st to 11:59 p.m. on those days, bringing them back to where they have been, instead of pushing them up actually to the Fourth of July. Section 5-4- 03B and 131 contains the word and/or discharge appearing to mean the discharge in the City of Meridian would only be allowed or legal and subject to a permit, is the way we interpret that language. Section 5-4-4C requires the operator to present any records. We would ask this be changed that they must produce those records, because when they are out there on the retail site, you don't always have all those records readily available with them, but they will have them back at their home or their place of business and have them be able to produce them. 5-4-05C, two and three. These two sections allow the City of Meridian to deny applications purely because of a belief that does not need to be proven and what does will likely endanger and what does will serve the best interest of the city mean? These phrases allow arbitrary, unpredictable and impulsive use of the city authority we believe. On 5-4-05D and E, the deadlines for applications are April 15th and October 15th. These are way too early with all the paperwork, the leasing and signing up with customers that we need to have to get our permits done in time. To maybe jump ahead. Again, 5-4-05H, in the paragraph there, it says the action of the City Council shall be final. We feel there certainly is a right of appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction regarding any of these matters when a permit is denied or such. Maybe I probably should summarize up here, so I'll skip over some of my other ones. We do disagree with the provision that limits to 600 feet MFPA and any other organization does not restrict that. We have been doing it for over 25 years without any problems. I'm going to go ahead and summarize here. It is important for the City Council to understand that we met on more than one occasion with representatives of the City of Meridian fire department. Other fireworks vendors were also present at these meetings. However, two important points have to be made here. First of all, we had not seen this proposed ordinance until just a few days ago. Some of us didn't get it until today and were unaware of it, which did not give us the opportunity to review and testify as to our objections to many of the provisions in this draft ordinance. We do, indeed, want the City Council to know that this draft ordinance is very different from any version of any proposed ordinance ever shown to us in any and all of our meetings with the City of Meridian fire department. We do not support this proposed ordinance. It is overly restrictive and imposes conditions upon legal fireworks retailers and has, in our opinion, no foundation and reasonable regulation. This proposed ordinance is harsh, unfair, and destructive to our legal business. Secondly, we agreed to meet and talk about a model ordinance and we want the City Council to know that any representation that this proposed ordinance is in any way the result of our meetings with the Meridian fire department is simply not true. Most of our key suggestions we made have been excluded from this proposed ordinance. This ordinance would only result in increased sales of the full C and reduce the sales of the safe and sane as we see today. We urge the City Council to reject this proposed ordinance and let us present a draft ordinance to you that embodies what we believe should be the requirements for all fireworks vendors. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 84 of 100 De Weerd: Sir, do you have that in writing? Brown: You know, it's kind of a messy copy, but I can get a copy to you tomorrow if you'd like. De Weerd: That would be excellent. And I guess my question to you is -- and, then, I'll ask Joe, but you have been working with these -- fire marshal groups and with Deputy Chief Silva, so you have seen drafts. What is so different about this one that you say you haven't seen it? Brown: Well, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, I believe our last meeting, chief, was back in October and we had some original drafts that some of the language I started covering you -- with you was not even in there. De Weerd: I have been seeing representatives from -- that representative the fireworks industry for the last three months in a row at the Treasure Valley Partnership meetings. So, I don't know how they get the word out, but I do know the industry has been present at those meetings. Brown: Well, Madam Mayor, I can't address that, because we were not part of that notification or invited to those meetings. All I can say is that we did not have any copies of any changes in a draft until just a few days ago. The last copy of a draft I have actually ever received was back in October. De Weerd: Okay. Joe, can you respond to that before we get further testimony, just to maybe -- Silva: We have been working with the Treasure Valley fire marshals. We have had two meetings with the vendors and T&T was invited to both of those. The format of our ordinance that's before you this evening hasn't changed. It's changed in where things are located, that is absolutely true. However, the key provisions of it, the 600 square feet, age 16 to purchase, those things -- the storage in an inter -mobile container that properly secures the product during after hours and that can't be tampered with. Those sort of things have not changed. We sent it to legal to have it legal reviewed and that's when the format change occurred and that's -- I think that's what Mr. Brown is referring to. Brown: Madam Mayor, if I may. I would say the language regarding the 16 years of age had not changed. We had discussions regarding the 600 square feet and to my knowledge that was never resolved. But a lot of the issues that have apparently been added on that I was covering, if you notice I didn't even really bring up the 16 years of age. I talked about storage issues and measurability and things like that of the ordinance and how it would be enforced and such. And so those other issues we never did really finalize where we would be on them and what we would agree to or not agree to, so -- Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 85 of 100 De Weerd: Yes, if you could get us your comments that would be very helpful. Brown: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Steve North signed up for. Thank you for hanging in there with us. Oh, you're time's up. Sony. North: I can be bribed for brevity with the City of Meridian. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Steve North, I live at 944 North Middlemist Place in the McHale Meadows Subdivision in Meridian. I'm speaking tonight very briefly on behalf of the ordinance. I have read the ordinance and I just received it last night and I got an e-mail copy a few days ago, but it's pretty intense and there is a lot of things in it I think that are good. From a standpoint of a member of the neighborhood watch association and also as a recent graduate of the Meridian Public Safety Academy, I know what the police and the fire department are going through for enforcement. I think this ordinance is a large step to helping them to enforce the -- some of the rules and regulations out there, helping them to enforce the control of illegal fireworks. And on that note I think it's just an excellent ordinance. But I just want to bring up one quick story that I mentioned to Chief Silva. About three years ago I was standing in my front yard in the subdivision and was with all the kids in the little cul-de-sac where I live at. About two feet from where I was standing landed a three and a half foot bottle rocket with a very large stick, about an inch and a half stick, that was shot from across the common area in the subdivision. Ten feet from where I was standing were probably maybe a total of about ten or 15 kids, all neighborhood. Two of them were my next door neighbors. Those two little girls were also there, along with other members that -- you know, of the homeowners association. So, we eventually called the police and had them come out and they talked to the people who we knew who fired them off. They were cited and they were confiscated. But I think we need to get some of those things out of the area. I know their hands are tied, they have got a gazillion calls to make, but anything we can do to help them to make their enforcement easier needs to be done, so these things aren't flying around the skies landing on little kids, adults, houses, whatever. But I do think they need to go away. So, I will be brief. De Weerd: Thank you very much. And you did earn your pin, just because you lasted all evening. Anyone else who would like a pin just let me know. I will hand them out. Usually, the high school students that last this long they automatically get one. So, just let me know if you want a pin. Okay. Virginia Fife? Okay. If you will, please, come forward. And she signed up for the ordinance. Campbell: Yes. She was very much in favor of the ordinance. Her main concern is -- Nary: Name and address, please, ma'am. Campbell: Mine? Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 86 of 100 Nary: Yes. Campbell: I'm Wendy Campbell. I live at 207 West Sissa Drive and I also am signed up to speak for, but I think I'm probably last on the list. De Weerd: No, you're doing good. Campbell: Have I been promoted? De Weerd: You have. Campbell: Jenny's main concern is she has a shake roof and she has had some instance of fireworks landing on that shake roof, so she's very concerned about fire damage to her home. And, then, speaking for myself, I am actually an occupational and safety and health professional and I'm here tonight as a private citizen, I'm not here representing my employer, I'm not here speaking for OSHA or anybody such as that. I did submit written testimony, I'm not sure -- De Weerd: We did get your e-mail. Campbell: Okay. You got my big long -- long story. I would like to reiterate that some of the information I'm using is from the United States Consumer Products Safety Commission. There is data that is later than 2004. It is true that there are a range of injuries associated with fireworks that happen from all spectrum of fireworks. There were about 6,500 injuries reported. Those are the ones that required emergency room treatment. So, anything that didn't go to the emergency room was not reported in that statistic. But if you look at the breakdown, I really am for this ordinance, because if you notice that 40 percent of the injuries reported were in minors for 14 years of age -- or 15 years of age, excuse me, or younger. That's a huge percentage. If you add in young adults 19 and under, it goes up to 55 percent. So, I really think that the 16 year old age limit is a great thing in this ordinance. Other than that -- and I have forgotten most of my main points, but if you folks would like a copy of that, I believe it's 2005 or 2006 safety report data on fireworks, I can certainly e-mail that to you. I have it in a pdf format. I'd be more than happy to provide that for you. De Weerd: We appreciate that. Campbell: I would love a pin. Thank you. De Weerd: Reggie Edwards. Or Regina. Reggie. Edwards: Madam Mayor and City Council, my name is Reggie Edwards and I'm here representing the City of Nampa and the Nampa Fire Department and I'm a resident of Nampa. I was asked by Chief Silva to just come and speak to you just to say some of the views that we have at the Nampa Fire Department. First of all, we are very much in favor of this ordinance. Chief Anderson is absolutely correct in that -- his quote was this • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 87 of 100 moves us down the road to a solution for this fireworks problem and I think we all can agree that there is a problem and that -- and hopefully -- it's not a perfect solution, it's not going to solve everything, but it's differently getting us in the right direction to solve the problem. So, we are very much in support of it and I have been authorized to state that the Nampa city will be adopting this ordinance pretty much verbatim, word for word. We might make a final -- a few minor changes to fit local conditions or protocols on a few things, but for the most part the ordinance will be presented and most likely passed in its present form. So, this is a well written ordinance and Chief Anderson is correct, this has been worked on by all the local fire departments in the area. Some of the key things that we are looking at here is just fairness and consistent rules and enforcement. Right now in Nampa some of these rules are already in place. Not the full ordinance that's written, but some of them are in place. And what happens is it's just a short drive from Nampa to Meridian and they can come over here and buy their stuff and, then, come back to Nampa and shoot them off. And so what we are looking for is we want, hopefully, in -- we were asking that you pass this ordinance and support this ordinance, so that as the first step in this Treasure Valley, so that we can have consistent rules that -- and consistent enforcement throughout the Treasure Valley, so that we are all singing off the same page and doing the same thing and -- and so we don't have to worry about citizens or taxpayers just jumping over to another jurisdiction that doesn't have the rules and buying whatever they want and coming back in your jurisdiction and firing these fireworks off. So, it's just -- just consistency and fairness. And I think the vendors would appreciate that, too, because where ever they set up their booths there is one set of rules and that's one of the benefits of this. Just to talk about a couple parts of this ordinance. For example, the 16 year old age limit to purchase the fireworks. The argument against that -- in Nampa we have been doing this for a couple years now and the argument against that at first was -- is that it was going to limit or hurt sales and we found that not to be the case. Virtually every vendor, virtually every booth told us that their sales actually increased, because instead of the young child riding up with their bicycle with one dollar wanting to buy one or two pieces of fireworks and, then, unsupervised go light them off in a back alley somewhere, they were coming back with an adult, their parent or a guardian, and these parents and guardians were bringing their checkbooks and their debit cards and they were buying 25 or 50 dollars worth. But the good point of it is is that the parents knew exactly what these children were buying and they were able to supervise the use of these fireworks and that's one of the best benefits of that. And so as a result of that, in the last few years -- De Weerd: Sir, if you can, please, summarize. Edwards: I have got to summarize. Okay. I got a lot of things to talk about. But, anyway, the benefit of that -- De Weerd: If you will submit all of your comments in writing that would be great, too. Edwards: Well, to summarize, we have had less fires, we have had less property damage, we have had less injuries and every one of these booths that reported that they had sold all their stuff out and it hasn't hurt their sales whatsoever. And the bottom Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 88 of 100 line is our communities are safer, we believe this ordinance will make the whole Treasure Valley safer and it's the right thing to do. So, I just ask you to, please, support it and support your -- Chief Silva and Chief Anderson in this cause and let you know that Nampa is following suit, we are going to -- you're the first step, we are the next step. So, thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Any questions? Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would just like to comment that I appreciate the cooperation between our two cities and thank you for spending your time to come over here tonight. Edwards: Thank you. De Weerd: Would you like a pin? Edwards: You know, if I wore a Meridian pin they'd probably think I was a traitor, like the chief over here. But I could -- De Weerd: I had to offer. Please wear it and go meet with Mayor Dale tomorrow. Say we are very friendly over here. Okay. Dave Heineman. Heineman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Dave Heineman. I reside in Boise. Am the Boise City Fire Marshal and thank you for letting me testify tonight. I'm here in support of this -- De Weerd: What is your street address? Heineman: I live at 3543 Chatterton in Boise. De Weerd: Thank you. Heineman: I'm here in support of this ordinance as discussed earlier from the fire chiefs. We worked pretty hard together to come to a standardization ordinance here that would help us enforce these laws and the vendors come together also and I think we have done that pretty well here. I think the other issue that we are asking for -- and I from Boise am asking all your support in is that we don't stop here, but we have created, as Chief Silva said, we have created an ordinance to take to Ada County. We think that is needed with the city's ordinances also to be able to help that situation. All the cities right now already have the sale and use of dangerous fireworks as illegal activity within the cities. Where we really need to deal with that is at the county level also. This helps -- the city ordinances help us identify how to make our current ordinances safer and the safe and sane fireworks safer. We need to with other pieces, too. And as Chief 0 • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 89 of 100 Anderson said, to give you a perspective of what we did in Boise last year, I put out eight teams of two in my city to try to enforce our ordinance and deal with the illegal fireworks and in that time we had about a four hour period where we had a police officer and a fire inspector together. We handed out 122 citations or warnings in a matter of four hours, seeing somebody about every ten minutes. We literally targeted several neighborhoods and could not get out of those neighborhoods. We estimate after the night was done that we had impact on less than 1/10th of a percent of illegal activity going in Boise. So, without the help of changing these ordinances, both at the city and the county level, from our perspective it's non -enforceable. We just can't -- don't have enough people to do that. So, again, we stand in support of this from Boise City. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Dave. Any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I, again, would like to thank you for the cooperation between the cities and coming out of Boise to come here. Thank you. De Weerd: He wants me to give you one for your mayor. Bird: No. The chief or mayor. De Weerd: I think you live in Meridian; right? Heineman: I used to. I live right on the border. Zaremba: Well, we can move the border. Heineman: I live behind Lowe's at Eagle and Ustick. Right on the comer. De Weerd: Okay. Linda Lyons signed up for. Lyons: Madam Mayor, Council members, my name is Linda Lyons. I live at 2889 Bryson Avenue in Boise and I appreciate the opportunity to talk with you this evening. I am your 911 manager for our community and in one capacity or another I have been employed as a 911 dispatcher in our county for over 28 years. The Fourth of July is our busiest day of the year in the dispatch center. We take more calls on the Fourth of July than we do any day the rest of the year. It's busier than New Year's Eve. It's busier than spring break. The Fourth of July is the only day that we double our staffing on fire side with overtime. I know it's a late hour and looking at numbers at this late hour it might be confusing, but for Meridian city police, your hardworking police officers average 988 dispatch calls a week and the week -- this last week, July 2nd through July 8th, they responded to 1,087 calls. Your hardworking fire department responds on average of 76 calls a week and during the Fourth of July week they responded to 106 calls. I have some stats here for the Fourth of July day, so that you can take a look at the numbers and the increase from 2005 to 2006. Our call center, the dispatch center, routinely handles 1,500 to 1,800 -- just under 2,000 calls a day and this last Fourth of • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 90 of 100 July we handled almost 2,500 calls. The increase -- the only reason for that increase is fireworks and firework complaints. Your community -- their three most common concerns that are addressed for the dispatch center are -- other than fires and medical calls, are the fear of losing their house or their property to fire, noise complaints from the fireworks after hours. They have children. They have animals. They have whatever reason that they are complaining against the noise. And, then, you have a large group of people that are frustrated over the -- watching their neighbors participate in unlawful activity and want something done about it. For every one of these incidences that are dispatched, we take probably 10 to 20 or more calls for that single incident. If there is a party at the end of the street where they are shooting off these fireworks, we will take 20 calls on that party. In closing, the Fourth of July is our busiest day and we like to not be busy and we generate or we take a lot of complaints over fireworks the week of the Fourth of July and the total for a two week -- little over two week period during the sales of fireworks this last year was 1,305 actual dispatched incidents for illegal fireworks. And I am available for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Ma'am -- and this will be part of the public record. You used the phrase illegal fireworks. Are you able to make the distinction between instances that are caused by illegal fireworks versus those caused by sparklers? Lyons: We use the standard description. If you were to call in a firework complaint during this time period, we will ask you if it's left the ground, if you can see it, and if it's -- if you -- if it does not meet the criteria that it's left the ground and -- then, we will not dispatch an officer on that. They can take a noise complaint, but we will not dispatch an officer on an illegal firework for that call. So, generally, if they see -- if they -- if they see the display up over their head and they can describe that to us, that they did see these fireworks up in the air and describe them as -- sometimes they will describe just as far as the size, but generally over their rooftops, then, we will dispatch an officer to an illegal firework call. If it's -- if they can't describe that, if they are just complaining about the noise, then, those calls are actually noise complaints and they are not shown here. Borton: Madam Mayor? So, are these complaints for aerial illegal fireworks only? Lyons: Then, yes, we could make that assumption. Illegal fireworks is a call type that we use in the dispatch center that justifies a police officer's response. If it's not illegal, then, it wouldn't necessitate a police response. So, you'd make the assumption, but there could be some -- they could describe something other than that it is over their house top. • Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 91 of 100 Borton: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Doug Brown signed up for. • D. Brown: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Doug Brown, I work at 310 South 7th in Caldwell, Idaho. I am the Deputy Chief and Fire Marshal for the Caldwell Fire Department. I'm also president of the state fire chiefs association. I'm speaking to the fireworks issue out of experience, many years of experience. I think the fireworks industry said it best tonight. All fireworks are dangerous. If we had our druthers, we wouldn't have consumer fireworks. We'd have public displays or shows where professionals -- trained professionals can do those and it's highly regulated by our industry. But we are a country of freedom and the Fourth of July is a time of freedom. We have a whole culture of doing some wild and crazy things in this country and the Fourth of July kind of echoes those sentiments. Through the fireworks law of '97 we had kind of something ugly foisted upon the fire service of this state, that being that we are trying to go out and enforce laws that are practically unenforceable. It's almost like handing out speeding tickets at a NASCAR race. You can just forget about it. There is no point in trying to do it. Boise has tried to do it. Nampa's done it. Meridian has done it. And we have even tried it. But you're barely scratching the surface of the problem. I think the true problem is how do these illegal fireworks get in these people's hands and why are they all going off in Idaho and they all should have been exported and it gets back to the loop hole in the state law. And we have tried legislatively to do that. We don't have the money that the fireworks industry has to hire lobbyists to kill legislation before it even gets introduced. That's what happened last year. We had a solution to the loop hole and it was to create an exporter license. Importers have to have a license, why don't the people purchasing these fireworks, then, in the state have to have a license to take them out of state and we can track them, we have a paper trail. The paper trail now is a joke. You have heard people exporting to Pluto or Mars, Mickey Mouse buying fireworks. Half the forms you can't even read them. So, the whole system's a farce. We have done sting operations in Caldwell. We have spent time with the police department, the fire department, to go out and identify who is doing this, who is selling these. When I look at an interstate commerce, I think wholesale. And it even mentions wholesale in that. We have documented evidence of people selling a single unit -- single cherry bomb, a single M80, a single bottle rocket. That's not wholesale, that's retail. And kids any age were going in buying these. So, this law is a big step in going the right direction. It won't solve the problem, it's not a panacea, but we are going to do what they are doing here in Meridian, we are going to take this and we are going to adopt it almost verbatim in Caldwell and we are going to see how much mileage we get out it. But I think it's a big step in the right direction and I commend you, Joe for all of his work, and all of our peers in the valley here for working together on this. I'm sure the rest of the state's watching it to see what we do and there is other cities that will jump on board as well. But I appreciate your support of this and your support of the fire department in enforcing it. I'd stand for questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Any -- Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 92 of 100 Zaremba: Madam Mayor, just my comment that I'm thrilled to have Caldwell joining us as well. I think this is wonderful. Great cooperation. D. Brown: Thank you. I will take a pin. Thank you. De Weerd: Anytime. Okay. Jim and Alisha Cromis. Cromis: Good evening. My name Alisha S. Cromis and I live at 3297 West Kirkham Lane, Meridian, Idaho. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I would like to say that I would vote for the Meridian Fireworks Ordinance. I have no objection to the legal fireworks being sold, but I would like to see the availability of aerial fireworks stopped. The danger of aerial fireworks to life, limb, and property is immeasurable. My personal experience is that so far, fortunately, nothing has landed on our roof during the fireworks season, but every year it is a fear that we won't be so lucky one day. On July 5th, 2006, our next door neighbor found the following: Three eight to ten inch long rocket casings and burned out charcoal end pieces. These items had bounced off her garage roof and the casings were imbedded in the ground three to four inches. They landed between she and her neighbor to the west, just missing her motorhome parked in her driveway. The charcoal end pieces landed by our mail boxes. Being a newer community, our homes are very close together. It is scary to think what could have happened. We live in a senior community and have had not -- had not anyone in our community setting off fireworks. The illegal fireworks being shot off are coming from the subdivision to our southeast. What amazes us is the fact that our community is situated directly behind Meridian Fire Station No. 2 and, yet, homeowners in the area are brazen enough to continue to ignite these illegal fireworks. I would like to ask all of you to vote yes for the Meridian Fireworks Ordinance as presented to you. Thank you for allowing me to speak. De Weerd: Thank you. Cromis: Any questions? J. Cromis: My name is Jim Cromis. Same address. That's good. De Weerd: That's good. J. Cromis: I wasn't going to speak tonight, but listening to some of the conversations before, I learned a couple of things. - I didn't know that sparklers were the most dangerous and that's — I learned something about that. But when they can -- when they -- when they can put on the instructions how to use it, but it also tells me where it's going to go, I will be satisfied. And that's all I have to say. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. These are not bribes. Burnell against. E Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 93 of 100 r�L Lee: Burnell Lee. 5660 Becky Drive here in Meridian. Madam Mayor and Council members. I am against this ordinance as a business person, not as a person person. It appears that this ordinance was written by fire chiefs for the savior of fire chiefs and not for the benefit of anyone in business with the fireworks. There are several things that brought me to this conclusion. Page nine, part E, says that sale of fireworks shall be prohibited in residential districts. Nowhere does it say what a residential district is. I am also against the age of 16, not as a purchaser, but as a seller. My experience has been -- and I guess maybe I should tell you what my experience has been. I started selling fireworks here in Meridian in 1974. We didn't have any paper to follow at that time and so you can maybe kind of understand my frustration when we now have 23 pages of what we can and can't do. My experience has been -- not only with my own family, but with kids that have worked -- helped me sell fireworks. Those kids go on to get really good jobs. They develop a good work ethic. They understand how to talk to people and count money at the same time. That age limit prohibits Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, school groups, church groups, from selling fireworks. On page 11, part nine, it's a little confusing to me when it says any and all temporary firework stands shall be emptied of their fireworks when not open for business. This provision shall not apply where the operation is not open for business and so on and so forth. It's kind of contradictory I think. On page 12, item 13, they want me to put a no smoking sign inside on my -- all interior walls of my fireworks booth. That takes up space for what I would ordinarily use for stocking -- excuse me -- stocking inventory. And number 14 on that same page says no operator shall allow fireworks to be discharged in or within 300 feet of a temporary fireworks stand. That means the house across the street I am to monitor. I can't do that. And, then, on page 13, the storage of fireworks shall be prohibited in residential districts. There, again, I don't know what a residential district means. And number two under I, does not address what long storage fireworks would be. I have fireworks left over, I don't sell it all every year. I'd love to, but it doesn't always happen. So, where can I legally store them? It does not address that. So, I have become, according to this ordinance, an unpaid city code enforcer, because I now have to monitor a lot of things for the city. So, from a business person's point of view I cannot support this. Thank you. And I would like to have a pin. De Weerd: Thank you. Darin Drinkall. Drinkall: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Darin Drinkall and I live at 4145 West Moon Lake Drive here in Meridian and I am here in opposition to this proposed -- now, one thing I'm a little confused about is this proposal, from what everybody's testifying about, is to eliminate the illegal fireworks that are getting lit off in Meridian, along with Boise, Nampa, Caldwell, so on. From what I understand, the current laws that we have already make those illegal here and make them illegal to sell here within the city limits. So, why are we doing more laws to eliminate it when we already have it, is my question. The next thing I have is about safety. And with all of these fire departments that are involved and all of this talk about safety, not one of these agencies has been able to produce any statistical data regarding injuries that have happened over the Fourth of July. There is no statistical data provided here as far as fires, any homes that have burned down or anything like that. They have absolutely Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 94 of 100 nothing. Nothing at all for this area. So, they have put a lot of effort into this with no foundation, other than to eliminate the aerial fireworks. That seems to be the main cause here. You know, as mentioned by Chief Silva -- or Deputy Chief Silva, along with Chief Anderson, when you look around the area during the Fourth of July, they said it looks like a war zone. It's looks like the first night of Baghdad. And they are right, it does. But I think that says a lot. If you look around the valley when that's going on, those are the citizens of this area, the residents of this county and of this city speaking to you and what they are saying is they are very patriotic, they love America and they love our freedoms. They are saying that they like to celebrate. They like to celebrate the Fourth of July and they like to celebrate the fact that we are Americans and we have a tradition of celebrating on the Fourth of July and they are also saying they like fireworks, just by virtue of the fact that these guys can't get to -- what did they say, ten percent of the people out there that are doing it, that are lighting these fireworks off. That says a lot about the people. Sorry, I'm a little tired tonight. Trying to get things together here. One thing about passing this law that has also been mentioned is if you pass this ordinance here, it's not really going to change the one that we already have in place as far as the aerial fireworks. This is 23 pages, this new proposal, which is about -- I think it's about 12 pages more than what we already have. It's very restrictive. And my understanding and all of this from comments that Joe Silva has made in other meetings that I have been to, they look through all the different fire codes that they can find, the International Fire Code, State Codes, so on and so forth, and from my understanding he picked the most restrictive codes that he could find in any of those code books to combine here in this new ordinance and I'm asking why. I want to know what is he trying to solve with this. It's almost like there is a -- a certain animosity towards the fireworks business in this area and the fact that we put together all of these different fire agencies from Boise, Nampa, Caldwell, Meridian, based on no foundation of safety and that has to do with the statistical data that I mentioned before, this is all based purely on what could possibly happen and I know we have got a lot of hunters and fishermen here in Idaho, right here in this room. This is very similar to coming along and saying, you know what, we are going to have to pass some laws -- De Weerd: Sir, we need you to summarize. Drinkall: I am summarizing. I'm sorry. De Weerd: Okay. Drinkall: This is just a quick analogy. It's like saying we are going to pass some laws here regarding fishing, because we are worried you are going to fall out of your boat or you're going to fall off the shore and drown, so we are not going to let you fish anymore. This is like saying we are not going to allow anybody to hunt anymore, because we are worried somebody might get shot in the woods, which has happened. The key thing here is I'm against this. If there were some statistical data to back all this up, I might be more open to it, but there is no data that anybody's provided. There is nothing as far injuries, fres, and so on. The only thing I have seen is calls. So, I am against this. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 95 of 100 De Weerd: Thank you. Drinkall: Any questions? De Weerd: Okay. Laura Yelton signed up against. And I'll still give you a pin if you don't want to testify, so -- Yelton: My name is Laura Yelton. I live at 3565 West Murfield in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Yelton: Madam Mayor, Council. I would just like to go on record saying I oppose the ordinance. That's all. De Weerd: Okay. Yelton: And I'd like my pin. De Weerd: You certainly paid for it. Thank you. Came Moss. We apologize for the late night. And Will is back there, he will give you a pin if you would like one. Richard Handke. Handke: Members of the Council, how are you this evening. Zaremba: Good morning. Handke: I got three minutes. It's 12:25. My name is Richard Handke. I live at 3565 West Murrield Drive. I'm the owner of Fat City Fireworks and I don't have much to say, because Bob Brown and Dan Drinkall, this gentleman here, I know he sells fireworks, but I can't remember his name. De Weerd: Mr. Lee. Handke: I just want to back everything they said. I just want to say a few things that Bob Brown had mentioned that we did have some meetings with the fire department and we all got together and we agreed upon a lot of things and disagreed upon a lot of things. Everything that's in there was not agreed upon by me or Bob Brown or -- I don't want to speak for him, but one thing I do want to mention that Ron Anderson, Joe Silva, I like you guys, but I mean this is my business. I just wish if they went and got affidavits -- they came to me finally last year, looked at five of them and left. The affidavits that they got from these Venus and Mars and Jupiter and in the trunk of the car, they got those affidavits from a vendor that's been in business two years. Okay? Why didn't they come to him and get his affidavits. Did your affidavits say that? I doubt that. Mine don't say that. We look at everything, you know, and that's about all I have to say and I'm totally, totally against what they are doing here. :7 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 96 of 100 De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Handke: Any questions? De Weerd: Would you like a pin? Handke: Yes. De Weerd: Bob Ingersol signed up against. Ingersol: My name is Bob Ingersol. I live at 4387 West Moon Lake Drive and I'm against this. I think all the fireworks are dangerous like the other guys, you know, have said. And one of the angles that I thought is if this passed -- I lived in Las Vegas and you can't buy fireworks within hundreds of miles of Las Vegas. On the Fourth of July it looks like a war zone. It's worse than here. That stuff comes in over the internet. I don't know how it gets to these cities, it's coming in. You can't get rid of it. It's going to be there. No matter what you do, those aerials and all that stuff, it's coming in. It's just - - I don't know how it gets there. Las Vegas was horrible. This is nothing compared to there. And you can't even buy anything illegal there. Nowhere around there. California. Nobody -- Arizona. Nobody sells the stuff. How about an angle of maybe a permit, you could come down and buy a permit. Hey, Joe Blow, he's letting off aerials, he's got a permit, pay a fee. This way you know he's got them. That's all I have to say. De Weerd: Thank you. Ingersol: Okay. Thanks. De Weerd: And last, certainly but not least, Jamie Drinkall. J. Drinkall: My name is Jamie Drinkall. I live in Kuna, Idaho. My address is 8955 Greenhurst Road. De Weerd: Thank you. J. Drinkall: I just wanted to come out and say I was opposed to this. I kind of feel like that the city -- or the people speak by -- by lighting off their fireworks and showing their patriotism and so forth and I feel like, you know, we have enough of our rights taken away as time goes on and I don't want to see anymore taken away. And that's, basically, all I have to say. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Those are the names on our sign-up sheet. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony? Ralph? Ralph is our regular. He bears with us every week. I know. I think he needs a life. Thank you all for joining us here today. Again, this is -- this is the public testimony part of it. We will have three Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 97 of 100 readings and so written testimony and -- certainly can be taken to the third reading. Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that would be my suggestion, that if they have any additional comments. What I would suggest we do is if there is any written comments, if they could get those to the City Clerk's office the end of the week, what I could do is next Tuesday get your direction on a reading schedule that we could put this on probably the follow week for the first reading, that way the Council has opportunity to review all the written comments. It is very late tonight, so they have had -- if that's the direction that you have after you have done that, if there is any amendments you want to the ordinance, there is a couple of things. Chief Silva has read and reread and redrafted this ordinance a number of times with -- with my -- one of my attorneys. I have reviewed it a number of times, and we still find a couple of things that we need to do some clean up and clarification and those kinds of things, some that have even been raised tonight. So, if that's all right with the Council, that would be my recommendation, is that we get your comments in from the public of any type by the end of this week, so Mr. Berg can get that delivered to all of you. Next Tuesday I'll ask for just a brief department report for any direction you may have and, then, probably suggest that the following week we have our first reading and that way the readings can be done through the month of March. Bird: Sounds like a winner. De Weerd: Okay. Council, does that sound fair? Okay.Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Do we need to close -- do we need to close the Public Hearing? Nary: You do not need to close the Public Hearing, since you will be taking written comments, and maybe taking additional comments if there is any changes of any significance to the ordinance on the reading calendar. De Weerd: Chief, do you have anything you or Joe would like to add? Anderson: Madam Mayor and Council -- De Weerd: Sorry, it is late. Anderson: I guess we won't try to tie you up anymore tonight, but if you'd like we can put comments in writing and there was a number of questions raised tonight and we wanted the opportunity, I guess, to clarify some of those for you, and we can either do that here or we can do it in written testimony, whatever you'd prefer. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 98 of 100 Nary: Or next Tuesday, even, as pa provide written testimony, which would night if Deputy Chief Silva is here, then, Council's direction. • rt of that report, maybe if they wanted to either allow the public to see it, or also next Tuesday we could certainly do that as well in getting the De Weerd: That would be great. I think, Joe, it would probably be helpful to -- any of the comments that you feel need to be responded to, if you could just kind of do a question/answer thing and post it on the website, that way the folks here that have testified and maybe want some of the comments that -- or clarifications we can -- we can have that available online, too, if that would be helpful. Nary: And also, Madam Mayor, if he could also provide that to the clerk, so we could have that all part of this package of this record, so -- Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I don't know whether this is a question or a statement, but for those who have suggested that they might like to put together an alternate draft or a different ordinance for us to consider, I would ask that instead of doing something where they start from scratch, would they go through the ordinance that we have presented -- or has been presented to us, rather, and comment on that ordinance and those comments could include something that you also feel was left out, rather than start from scratch and have us trying to read two separate kinds of documents, it's easier for us to consider comments to be made on what's before us, even if some of those comments are additions to it. Am I the only one that feels that way? I saw some heads nodding. That would be my suggestion. De Weerd: I think they were falling asleep. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: My answer on that, Dave, is -- David, is with their comments and stuff coming in they are going to offer some alternate views, which we can either incorporate or do whatever we want, whatever. I just encourage them all to get in some written comments. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: With that I move we continue the Public Hearing for the proposed fireworks ordinance until March 5th -- or, no, 6th, 2007. Borton: Second. Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 99 of 100 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue to next week. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 22: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c) — (to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency): Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c) and fast. Borton: Second. Berg: I'll take roll call on the motion. Roll Call Vote: Bird, aye; Borton, aye; Zaremba, aye; Rountree is absent. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. EXECUTIVE SESSION: De Weerd: Okay, I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. Borton: So moved. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Motion to adjourn. Borton: So moved. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 0 Meridian City Council February 27, 2007 Page 100 of 100 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:30 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: Cell,��1�UIBIIIH///l� MAYOR T Y de WEERD��`^�°q ®,,R `ew "' °j 7 �lT 1 E ® � r IS � o DATE APPROVED G. BERG JR.,IVCITY CLERK February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of January 23, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See Attached Minutes CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: 4F CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -B REQUEST Tabled from January 23, 2007: Resolution No. Adoption of Records Retention Schedule 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 Previous Item Packet Tp.�d e. +v 3-z7 OTHER: Clerk is meeting with departments -- table to March 27, 2007 Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 AZ 06-045 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Wirt Edmonds ITEM NO. 5-C REQUEST Findings for Approval -- Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.556 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdivision -- 4515 South Locust Grove Road WC14,1116yo CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Findings Nr",-,V,A_, Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 7.56 acres from RUT to R-4 AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 24 single family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.56 acres, for Eastwood Subdivision, by Majestic, Inc. Case No(s). AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 For the City Council Hearing Date of: February 13, 2007 (Continued from February 6, 2007) (Findings on the February 27, 2007, Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 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 February 13, 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 § 11-5A 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 27, 2006, and stamped REVISED on February 7, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. All homes on Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 1, shall be restricted to a single story and be subject to, at minimum, a 20 -foot rear setback. Lot 10, Block 1, shall also be restricted to a single story. 3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Twelve (12) Month 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, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 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 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 may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 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. E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 0 0 By action of the City Council at its regular eeting held on the 2,7 72 day of 122 .124 2007. w 14,101 COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) William G. Berg, Jr., City Copy served upon Applicant, The Attorney. By: Sh 6A 0 sau�-IVI Dated: 03-0(0-0') City Clerk tment and City CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: Continued From: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: 2/13/2007 2/6/2007 e IDAHO Mayor & City Council Amanda Hess, Associate City Planner Eastwood Subdivision • AZ -06-045 Annexation and Zoning of 7.56 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zone • PP -06-047 Preliminary Plat of 24 single-family building lots and 3 common lots on 7.56 acres in a proposed R-4 zone 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicants, Wirt and Francis Edmonds, have applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 7.56 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) and Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single family residential lots and 3 common lots for Eastwood Subdivision. The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is located on the west side of Locust Grove Road, approximately 1/5 mile north of Amity Road in Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B.M., and is currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Numbers S1130449600 and S1130449650. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Eastwood Subdivision subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 21 2006 At the Public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City Council a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Becky McKay (Applicant) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Pat Sturgis iv. Written testimony: Pat & Jim Sturgis v. Staff presenting Wlication: Amanda Hess vi. Other Staff commenting on application• Caleb Hood b. Kev Issues of DicenWan by (nmmiccinn- i. What is an appropriate transitioning between the lots at the south property boundary and those within East Slone Subdivision c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. The Applicant will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City of Meridian Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 1 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 ii. A maximum of 24 units can be constructed on this site iii. All homes on Lots 11 12 and 13 Block 1 are to be restricted to a single story and be subject to, at minimum, a 20 -foot rear setback iv. The west lot line of Lot 14 Block 1 shall be adjusted to align with the west lot line of Lot 17, Block 1 East Slope Subdivision d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Proposed density and transitioning of lot sizes a. i. In favor: Shari Stiles (Applicant's Representative); Wirt Edmonds (Applicant) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Scott Stewart: Amy DeWeir iv. Written testimony: None v. Staff presenting application: Anna Canning; Caleb Hood vi. Other Staff commenting on application• No b. Key Issues of Discussion ion by ounc'1: i. Elimination of one lot at the south property line ii. Also restricting Lot 10, Block 1. to a single story c. Key Council Changes to Commission Recommendation: i. Restricting Lot 10, Block 1, to a single story ii. Approved revised pre iminary plat dated Febnzry 7 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ - 06 -045 and PP -06-047, as presented in the staff report for the hearing dates of February 6, 2007, and February 13, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ - 06 -045 and PP -06-047, as presented in the staff report for the hearing dates of February 6, 2007, and February 13, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the annexation and/or preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 4515 S. Locust Grove Road; Section 30, T3N, R1E b. Owner / Applicant: Wirt & Francis Edmonds and Shain & Rhonda Urwin 2297 N. Chandra Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Meridian, ID 83642 c. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions d. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential f. Description of Applicant's Request (See Exhibit A): 1. Date of Preliminary Plat: Stamped REVISEDFebruary 7 2007 2. Date of Landscape Plan: REVISED October 27, 2006 g. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The gross density of the proposed development is 3.18 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density is in accord with the proposed R4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zoning district and complies with the Comprehensive Plan for the site which designates the area as "Low Density Residential." The subdivision will provide five common lots including a central common area, and a mix of lot sizes ranging from approximately 8,000 square feet to 22,580 square feet. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, 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, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: December 4, 2006; December 18, 2006 (P & Z Commission) January 15 2007• January 29 2007 (City Council) d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: November 22, 2006 (P & Z Commission) January 12, 2007 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 11, 2006 (P & Z Commission) January 27, 2007 (City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing home, outbuilding, and vacant land. All existing structures will remain. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: A mix of single family residential and vacant agricultural land, some of which has recently been proposed for residential development. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Proposed single-family, Reflection Ridge Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Single-family homes, Estancia Subdivision, zoned R4 Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 3 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3. South: Estate residential, zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Estate residential, zoned RUT (Ada County) d. History of Previous Actions: The subject applications, AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047, were scheduled to be heard before the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 19, 2006. Prior to said meeting, the Applicant and Staff were made aware that ACHD refused to grant direct access to the site from Locust Grove. This ultimately prompted a substantial redesign preliminary plat. The new plan proposes two additional lots for a total of 24 building lots, and eliminates subdivision access to Locust Grove Road. This warranted re -noticing the neighboring property owners of the changes and publishing the new notice in the media. Staff believes the revised preliminary plat is more compatible with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: This property is proposing connection to sewer planned to be constructed in E. Wrightwood Drive by neighboring development. Location of water: This property is proposing connection to water planned to be constructed in E. Wrightwood Drive and the proposed subdivision to the north. Issues or concerns: The need for an off-peak pumping station if they plan on sewering prior to the Black Cat Trunk connecting to the Glacier Springs Diversion Manhole. 2. Vegetation: Existing trees on site will be retained, relocated, or mitigated for. 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches/Irrigation: N/A 5. Hazards: N/A 6. Proposed Zoning: R-4 7. Size of Property: 7.56 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 24 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 24 4. Common Lots: 3 5. Total Lots: 27 6. Open Lots: 0 7. Residential Area: 7.56 acres 8. Gross Density: 3.18 units per acre (4.26 net density) 9. Lot Sizes: Lot sizes range from approximately 8,000 to 22,580 square feet. The average lot size is approximately 8,950 square feet. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 4 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): Locust Grove Road is classified as an arterial road. The UDC (Table 11-2A-5) requires a 25 -foot wide street buffer adjacent to arterials. The landscape plan (Sheet L1.0) proposes a 25 -foot wide buffer along Locust Grove. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.389 acres (5.15%) 4. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micropaths should comply with UDC 11-3B-12. Common / open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11 -3G -3-E2). h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks: As per the R-4 zone for detached single family dwellings. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The sole access to the development will be from East Wrightwood Drive, a through -street provided by Reflection Ridge Subdivision. South Carina Avenue connects to E. Wrightwood Drive at the north boundary of the subject property. City Staff is supportive of the proposed street layout. ACHD Staff is also supportive of the proposal as long as all Site Specific and General Requirements are met (See Exhibit B-7). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 1, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain single family residences at densities up to three dwelling units per acre. (See Page 95 of the Comprehensive Plan) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 24 residential building lots on 7.56 acres for a gross density of 3.18 dwelling units/acre. The gross density exceeds the range outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application: • 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 (ACIID). This service will not change. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 5 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change 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 5 - Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to Reflection Ridge Subdivision via the proposed sidewalks and stub street. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 - Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. Staff finds that the residential development to the north is compatible with the proposed subdivision. To the east and south are existing single-family dwellings sited on one -acre lots within Ada County. Staff believes Eastwood transitions well with these lots to the east. However, Staff believes that the lot sizes proposed along the southern boundary should be increased. Although attached single-family and detached single-family dwellings are compatible land uses, Staff does not consider locating four 8, 000 square foot lots adjacent to a one -acre lot an appropriate transition. A neighbor has voiced concern over this issue, as well. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-4 zone. The subject property is located adjacent to lands zoned R-4. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. • Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 — Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 6 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 One street connection is proposed to connect with the Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north. Staff finds that the zoning proposal is generally harmonious with the surrounding area and with the Future Land Use Map designation for this site and generally meets the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 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. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists single-family developments as a Permitted Use in the R4 zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation ANNEXATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed single-family development. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application, prepared by The Idaho Survey Group on August 14, 2006, shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. All. ftAiwe uses on this pfepe#y sheWd net imfolve uses, @f l t a + t aetivkies, pfeeesses, , . meat and een.dikiena_nf_. operation fl t will # y a.--vv-acrr�citcuc F cr✓-any -PciooaJ�roP zcx �vt- Q3 genefal welfiwe by reason of emeessive pmdueti6sof t ae�R}s and sheuld be eenstmeW i-13 aerordanee with City of-Mer-idian dev@1Apaent: ordimmes ,@, smoke, •i in - -- la -e o, edvrr , b , effeet at the time e A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of annexation of this property. Prior to annexation approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridianthe property owner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process The DA shall include at minimum, the following_ Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 7 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 • All future uses shall not involve uses activities processes materials equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic noise smoke fumes glare or odors • All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development • The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. • Anv existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic serviceper City Ordinance Section 5-7-517 when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic ppmoses such as landscape irrigation. • The following shall be the only allowed uses on this property Detached single family homes and allowed accessory uses of the R-4 zone • A maximum of 24 units be constructed on this site. • All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living area • All homes on Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 1, shall be restricted to a single story and be subject to, at minimum, a 20 -foot rear setback. Lot 10 Block 1 sha 1 al o be restricted to a single tory. Place a note on the final plat o indicate this. • Prior to issuance of any building permit the subject proporty shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code • The five-foot sidewalks and a 25 -foot landscape buffer, constructed in accordance with City Code, shall be installed along Locust Grove Road prior to occupancy of any new dwelling units. PRELEMIINARY PLAT ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed single-family residential products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings for a preliminary plat. Access: The Reflection Ridge Subdivision, just north of the Eastwood Subdivision, has been granted road access to Locust Grove Road at the V4 -mile mark. West Wrightwood Drive, a public street provided by the Reflection Ridge Subdivision, runs approximately parallel to Eastwood's north property line. South Carina Avenue, a local public street within Eastwood, intersects W. Wrightwood and will serve as the sole access to the proposed subdivision. The access to Locust Grove Road for the existing house that is to remain, should be abandoned as proposed. Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road should be prohibited. 2. Internal Streets: Internal streets sections are proposed to be 36 -feet wide with 5 -foot wide attached sidewalks for a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. 3. Density: This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain single family dwellings at densities up to three dwelling units per acre. The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 24 residential building lots on 7.56 acres for a gross density of 3.18 dwelling units/acre. The gross density exceeds the range outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant has not proposed a "step up" to medium density for the site, nor would Staff be supportive of said "step." Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 8 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 In order for the project to better comply with the density policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff is supportive of eliminating one building lot at the south property line. This reduction in the number of lots, from 24 to 23, would not only address Staff's concerns over transitioning of lot sizes in that area, but would lower the gross density of the project from 3.18 dwelling units/acre to 3.05 dwelling units/acre. 4. Landscaping: The Applicant has provided 0.636 acres (8.4%) of landscaping on site, including the required street buffer along Locust Grove Road. The standards for open space apply to single-family developments of five acres or more. As the subject property totals 7.56 acres, the Applicant has set aside 0.389 acres (5.15%) for usable open space, including a centrally located common area, meeting the 5% minimum required by UDC 11 -3G -3A-1. All common areas approved as open space shall be vegetated and usable by residents. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Eastwood Homeowners Association. 5. Pressure Irrigation; The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single - point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 6. Fencing: Excepting where fencing currently exists along the western boundary, perimeter fencing is not shown on the submitted landscape plan or preliminary plat. At the public hearing, the applicant should state whether or not permanent fencing is proposed around the development. The Applicant should submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All perimeter fencing must be completed prior to issuance of building permits. Fencing should taper down to a 3 foot maximum within 20 feet of all rights-of-way. Fencing adjacent to the drainage swale access is also required. Said fencing can be up to six feet in height, if open vision. If closed vision is used, it cannot exceed four feet in height. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: As per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways and waterways being used as amenities, which intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Tree Mitigation: Any existing, on-site tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of those removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department. 9. Existing Structures: The site currently contains multiple buildings. All existing structures that are to remain, shall comply with the dimensional standards (setbacks, house size, etc.) of the R-4 zone. Prior to signature of the fmal plat, all structures that do not meet the dimensional standards should be removed. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 9 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds that applications AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047 substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of said AZ and PP applications subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on December 21, 2006. At the Public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City CouncilThe Meridian City Council heard these items on February 6 2007 and Feb is 13 2007 At the February 13 2007 public hearW2 the Council approved the subject applications 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat , Stamped REVISED on February 7, 2007) 3. Landscape Plan (REVISED October 27, 2006) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Services Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8 Nampa Meridian Irrigation District 9. Central District Health Department C. Legal Description and Annexation Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 10 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 4 �` ♦ RUT ♦ i 11����p�; a+•I R-4 s�Dttli � 71� F-1 x t F R-4 IT EI t w [r R1 f w R1 vX,Q=T8 loom S'T111 OOD SUBDMSIONWmN& MSG U=g= [N,TM SEgra OF SECT ry A T.M:, I.IE,. B.RL OHM, M8WUkKMAC0UffffMAWviclN VICIN" MM�$ : a emat Hca n..cnn� *ora►, Exhibit A 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (Stamped REVISED February 7.20071 Exhibit A EEO 0 0 CIW OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Landscape Plan (REVISED October 27, 2006) Exhibit A 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (dated August 14, 2006, and stamped by Terry Peugh, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 Any future subdivision, uses, and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of permit submittal. 1.1.3 The Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the following provisions: • All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. • The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. • Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic pu poses such as landscape irrigation. • The following shall be the only allowed uses on this property: Detached single family homes and allowed accessory uses of the R-4 zone. • A maximum of 24 units be constructed on this site. • All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living area. • All homes on Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 1. shall be restricted to a sinrle story and be subiect to, at minimum, a 20 -foot rear setback. The home on Lot 10, Block 12, shall also be restricted to a singe sto , Place a note on the final DIM to indicate this. • Prior to issuance of any building_ permit, the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code. • The five-foot sidewalks and a 25 -foot landscape buffer, constructed in accordance with City Code, shall be installed along Locust Grove Roadprior to occupancy of any new dwelling units. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet PRE, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, and d Amgus* 3, , STAMPED February 7.2007, is approved with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 Eastwood Subdivision shall be subject to the UDC standards of the R4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zoning district. 1.2.3 A maximum of 23 24 single family residential dwellings may be constructed on site. One of lots iner-eased in square footage. 1.2.4 Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road shall be prohibited for this site. The Applicant shall be required to dedicate the right-of-way, construct landscaping, pathway(s), and noise mitigation along Locust Grove, as required by ACRD and the City of Meridian. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 1.2.5 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the existing access to Locust Grove Road shall be abandoned. All homes within Eastwood shall take driveway access internal to the subdivision. Place a note on the final plat to reflect the access restrictions. 1.2.6 Dedicate and construct all public internal roadways to meet ACHD's road design standards. 1.2.7 Provide a street connection (Carina Avenue) to the proposed Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north, as depicted on the preliminary plat. 1.2.8 All existing 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. 1.2.9 All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living area. 1.2.10 The west lot line of Lot 14, Block 1, shall be adjusted to align with the west lot line of Lot 17 Block 1, East Slope Subdivision. L2.11 11 The Applicant shall note on the face of the final plat that the homes on Lots 10-13 Block 1 have a single -story restriction and that Lots 11-13, Block 1, have a minimum 20 -foot rear setback. 1.2.12 The landscape plan prepared by Harvest, Design on October 27, 2006, revised on October 27, 2006, and labeled Sheet LS -1, is approved with the following modifications / notes: • Provide 0.389 acres (5.15% of the site) for landscaped open space. • As required by UDC 11-2A-5, provide a 25 -foot wide street landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road. Said buffer shall be constructed wholly outside of any right-of-way. • Per UDC 11 -3A -7A -7b, all fencing adjacent to common shall be either four feet (4') in height, if closed vision, or six feet (6') tall if open vision fencing is used. Modify the applicable areas on the landscape plan to reflect this requirement. • Coordinate a tree mitigation/preservation plan with Elroy Huff of the Meridian Parks Department. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council signature of the Final Plat. 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). 1.2.13 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Eastwood Subdivision Homeowners Association. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 Sidewalks/walkways shall be installed within the subdivision and on Locust Grove Road pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.2 All lot lines common to a public right-of-way shall reserve a 10' utility easement. 1.3.3 The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The Applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 1.3.5 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. 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. 1.3.6 The Applicant shall submit a fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 1.3.7 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.3.8 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation / preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.9 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 planned in E. Wrightwood Drive. These mains are temporarily flowing out of shed. If this development intends on sewering this property prior to the Black Cat Trunk connecting to the Glacier Springs Diversion manhole the Applicant shall be responsible to install an off-peak pumping station. The stations design and location shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. 2.2 The Applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 2.3 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. 2.4 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Reflection Ridge Subdivision. The Applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. A second water connection to the main in Locust Grove shall be required to ensure adequate fire flows; location of this connection shall be coordinated with Public Works prior to construction elan approvalThis main shall be placed in a common lot, a minimum of 20 feet wide, and covered by a City of Meridian water easement. 2.5 The existing house shall be required to connect to City services. The Applicant shall be responsible for payment of the assessments prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall be responsible for the actual physical connection to the services prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. 2.6 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 94-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement Exhibit B • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. 2.7 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). 2.8 The Applicant has the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development is to be maintained as a private system. Since it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.9 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 or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.10 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. 2.11 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. 2.12 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-14 and 94-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.13 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. 2.14 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. 2.15 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. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.20 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.21 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. 2.22 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. 2.23 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. 2.24 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two -hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require a fire -flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %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. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads, and cul-de-sacs shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 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. 3.6 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one- and two-story construction. 3.7 The existing home shall herein be addressed off of North Carina Avenue. 3.8 All portions of the buildings located on this project, including the existing home, must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. Exhibit B 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3.9 There a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 M). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 Any interior fencing adjacent to common areas and micropathways, including along the drainage swale access, shall allow visibility from the street and shall not exceed four feet in height is solid fencing is used. 4.2 The common lot on Block 2 will not be adequately lit. Provide street lamps at the north and south boundaries instead of one centralized lamp at the eastern boundary. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of Trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 6. SANITARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6.1 SSC has no comments related to the application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 7.1.1 This portion of Locust Grove will develop to be a 3 -lane arterial roadway within 70 -feet of right- of-way. Twenty-five feet of right-of-way currently exists, so the applicant may do one of the following: a. Do not dedicate right-of-way and construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk not closer than 28 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road and provide an easement for the sidewalk. b. Dedicate 10 -feet of additional right-of-way and construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk not closer than 28 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road. The District will buy the additional right-of-way from the applicant. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 7.1.2 Construct a 5 -foot attached concrete sidewalk 41 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road (measured face of walk to centerline). 7.1.3 Locate and construct the internal roadways as a 36 -foot street section within 50 -feet of right-of- way complete with curb, gutter and a 5 -foot attached concrete sidewalk, as proposed. 7.1.4 Construct a stub street to the north, North Orion Avenue, located approximately 520 -feet west of the centerline of Locust Grove Road (measured centerline to centerline). This stub street shall Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 align with and connect to Dazzle Way, within Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north of this site, and will provide principal access to the subject site. Actual alignment is required and the applicant is directed to work with the northern development for the exact location of the two roadways. 7.1.5 Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 7.2.1 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 ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The Applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless Exhibit B • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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. NAMPA / MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 8.1 Coordinate with John Anderson, Water Superintendent for NMID, concerning installation of the underground, pressurized irrigation system. 8.2 All storm drainage shall be retained on-site. If surface drainage cannot be contained on site, contact Donna Moore at 466-7861, as a Land Use Change Application must be filed for review prior recording of the final plat. 8.3 All laterals and wasteways must be protected. 8.4 The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 9. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 9.1 After written approvals from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 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. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit B i • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 C. Legal Description and Annexation Map Ef7�,AMC 14SO Rasvam%mw sL SURV9Y F�erF Sn.Idtiho63642 dRouP Phone Pq 94&" Fhx (48) 000M PWjcct No. 't}i-f ? AU9W 14, 2006 Eastwood Snbdividon A. parcel of Wbft irs the North 500 fist ofthe East 112 of the SE V4 of the S_ X1+1 ref Seodcm A T.3N., XIE.,, B.M,, Ada Cow% Xe Aho mm pmdailarly dewrilmd as follows, Commencing st 111P Comer mmm to Soodgm 31, 32, 29, and the eaid Se.ctiott 3A, from W" the.1/4 coinermm>atam to mid. Suctions 29 and 30 Worth #Ibti30'01":9�eat, 2651.89 Twee North 00°30'01" 9 ade 132$.80 feet to theSoili. 1/16 mon to said Sedans 29 � 30, said 1 beWg REAL POINT Soi* 01030'01" East, 500.04 fem Thmm Soth 8 *AWSr West and along a y bo Bary oflla& Slope SO&VIdM 89 same is r000r&d in hook 54 of Plats atPw 4939, records ofA& CY. 1*0. a &Wtam of 058.61 feet to art an le. nff is 8 Powaaan; Thmm along an msterlybotmdatyofmid suhd'tvimaXmh 00°25'ir West, ipo.00.fa�t to a Noftma auuw of aid mb& on Iyitlg on the Nom ljme ofthe SE 1/4 ofthe SE 1/4, Mime iOmg said line North 991146'52" 6"X feat to theFamt of Co . 7.56 aupcs, more or Iess. 'Pm pmmedpy, Mato SumgyC,WUP, P.C. $ , 1' D.T=YPmou FIS Professional Land Surveyors Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20.2006 Exhibit C • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to zone the subject property R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential). 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 this Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Council finds that single-family residences are allowed within the requested zoning district of R-4 as a Principally Permitted Use. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with varying lot sizes and other dimensional requirements which conform to the proposed zoning designation. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site, as conditioned in the staff report. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11 -5B -3.E). Council finds that all essential services 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 compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and this is a logical expansion of the City limits. Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property is 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: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is generally compatible with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Council generally supports the proposed plat layout, with recommended changes, as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate Exhibit D s 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 the proposed development; Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their own cost, Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission and Planning Staff recommends that Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this fording. (See Exhibit B, Agency Comments and Conditions, for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Council is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to Council's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that 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. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council fords that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that 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 the Commission and Planning Staff is unaware. Exhibit D February 23, 2007 PP 06-047 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Wirt Edmonds ITEM NO. 5-D REQUEST Findings for Approval -- Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.556 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Eastwood Subdtvtsion -- 4515 South Locust Grove 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 Findings In AZ Packet Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Mateddis presented at pubNc meeflngs shalt become properly of the CIIy of Meddlan. • CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER MY 41F ,w A In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 7.56 acres from RUT to R4 AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 24 single family residential lots and 3 common lots on 7.56 acres, for Eastwood Subdivision, by Majestic, Inc. Case No(s). AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 For the City Council Hearing Date of: February 13, 2007 (Continued from February 6, 2007) (Findings on the February 27, 2007, Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4_ Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 0 • 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 February 13, 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 § 11-5A 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 27, 2006, and stamped REVISED on February 7, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. All homes on Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 1, shall be restricted to a single story and be subject to, at minimum, a 20 -foot rear setback. Lot 10, Block 1, shall also be restricted to a single story. 3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Twelve (12) Month 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 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 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 may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 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. E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 By action of the City Council at its regular eeting held on the 2 day of fnb7K. A^- - 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_of COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_Pr ..rte MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) William G. Berg, Jr., City Copy served upon Applicant, The Attorney. Works Department and City By: Dated: 0 - City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-045 & PP -06-047 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 2/13/2007 Continued From: 2/6/2007 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Amanda Hess, Associate City Planner SUBJECT: Eastwood Subdivision • AZ -06-045 MY XV 4 IDAHO .Og Annexation and Zoning of 7.56 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zone • PP -06-047 Preliminary Plat of 24 single-family building lots and 3 common lots on 7.56 acres in a proposed R-4 zone 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicants, Wirt and Francis Edmonds, have applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 7.56 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) and Preliminary Plat approval of 24 single family residential lots and 3 common lots for Eastwood Subdivision. The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is located on the west side of Locust Grove Road, approximately 115 mile north of Amity Road in Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B.M., and is currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 51130449600 and 5 1130449650. This property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Eastwood Subdivision subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning. Commission heard these items on December 21, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City Council. a. Summary of Public Hearin: i. In favor: Becky McKay (Applicant) ii. In opposition: No iii. Commenting_ Pat Sturgis iv. Written testimony: Pat & Jim Sturgis v. Staff presenting application: Amanda Hess vi. Other Staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. What is an appropriate transitiowing between the lots at the south property boundary and those within East Slope Subdivision c. Key Co scion Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. TheApplicant will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City of Meridian Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 1 0 ! CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 ii. A maximum of 24 units can be constructed on this Sit iii. All homes on Lots 11 12 and 13 Block 1 are to be restricted to a sipple story and be subject to at minimum a 20 -foot rear setback iv. The west lot line of Lot 14 Block 1 shall be adjusted to align with the west lot line of Lot 17, Block 1, East Slope Subdivision d. Ougqgu&qg Issue(s) for CLq Coundt i. Proposed density and transi .ioning of lot sizes a. i. In favor-: Shari Stiles (ApWicant's Renresentativel Wirt Edmonds (AnnlicanA ii. hnjonnosition: None iii. Commenting, Scott_Stewart; Amy De. iv. Written testimony: None v. &uff presofimCanninb Hood vi, Qd= Staff commen� on aonhgation: None b. Ka Issues of Discussion by Cour& i. Elimination of one lot at the south vronertv line ii. Also restricting Lnt 10. Block 1, to a s g e story c. i. Restricting Lot 10, Block 1, to a single story ii. A wmr d revised nrehminary plat dated FebruarK7, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ - 06 -045 and PP -06-047, as presented in the staff report for the hearing dates of February 6, 2007, and February 13, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ - 06 -045 and PP -06-047, as presented in the staff report for the hearing dates of February 6, 2007, and February 13, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the annexation and/or preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 4515 S. Locust Grove Road; Section 30, T3N, RIE b. Owner / Applicant: Wirt & Francis Edmonds and Shain & Rhonda Urwin 2297 N. Chandra Eastwood Subdivision: AZ406-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 2 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Meridian, ID 83642 c. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions d. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential f. Description of Applicant's Request (See Exhibit A): 1. Date of Preliminary Plat: Stamped REVISED Gowba 27, Februar 72007 2. Date of Landscape Plan: REVISED October 27, 2006 g. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The gross density of the proposed development is 3.18 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density is in accord with the proposed R4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zoning district and complies with the Comprehensive Plan for the site which designates the area as "Low Density Residential." The subdivision will provide five common lots including a central common area, and a mix of lot sizes ranging from approximately 8,000 square feet to 22,580 square feet. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, 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, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: December 4, 2006; December 18, 2006 (P & Z Commission) Jan44U 15, 2007; January 29.2007 (City Council) d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: November 22, 2006 (P & Z Commission) January 12, 2007 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 11, 2006 (P & Z Commission) Jammy 27, 2007 (City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing home, outbuilding, and vacant land. All existing structures will remain. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: A mix of single family residential and vacant agricultural land, some of which has recently been proposed for residential development. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Proposed single-family, Reflection Ridge Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Single-family homes, Estancia Subdivision, zoned R-4 Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY l3, 2007 3. South: Estate residential, zoned RUT (Ada County) 4. West: Estate residential, zoned RUT (Ada County) d. History of Previous Actions: The subject applications, AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047, were scheduled to be heard before the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 19, 2006. Prior to said meeting, the Applicant and Staff were made aware that ACI ID refused to grant direct access to the site from Locust Grove. This ultimately prompted a substantial redesign preliminary plat. The new plan proposes two additional lots for a total of 24 building lots, and eliminates subdivision access to Locust Grove Road. This warranted re -noticing the neighboring property owners of the changes and publishing the new notice in the media. Staff believes the revised preliminary plat is more compatible with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: This property is proposing connection to sewer planned to be constructed in E. Wrightwood Drive by neighboring development. Location of water: This property is proposing connection to water planned to be constructed in E. Wrightwood Drive and the proposed subdivision to the north. Issues or concerns: The need for an off-peak pumping station if they plan on sewering prior to the Black Cat Trunk connecting to the Glacier Springs Diversion Manhole. 2. Vegetation: Existing trees on site will be retained, relocated, or mitigated for. 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches/hrigation: N/A 5. Hazards: N/A 6. Proposed Zoning: R4 7. Size of Property: 7.56 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 24 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 24 4. Common Lots: 3 5. Total Lots: 27 6. Open Lots: 0 7. Residential Area: 7.56 acres 8. Gross Density: 3.18 units per acre (4.26 net density) 9. Lot Sizes: Lot sizes range from approximately 8,000 to 22,580 square feet. The average lot size is approximately 8,950 square feet. . Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): Locust Grove Road is classified as an arterial road. The UDC (Table 11-2A-5) requires a 25 -foot wide street buffer adjacent to arterials. The landscape plan (Sheet L1.0) proposes a 25 -foot wide buffer along Locust Grove. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.389 acres (5.15%) 4. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micropaths should comply with UDC 11-3B-12. Common / open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11 -3G -3-E2). h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks: As per the R-4 zone for detached single family dwellings. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The sole access to the development will be from East Wrightwood Drive, a through -street provided by Reflection Ridge Subdivision. South Carina Avenue connects to E. Wrightwood Drive at the north boundary of the subject property. City Staff is supportive of the proposed street layout. ACHD Staff is also supportive of the proposal as long as all Site Specific and General Requirements are met (See Exhibit B-7). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 1, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain single family residences at densities up to three dwelling units per acre. (See Page 95 of the Comprehensive Plan) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 24 residential building lots on 7.56 acres for a gross density of 3.18 dwelling units/acre. The gross density exceeds the range outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application: • 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 SherV'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 (ACRID). This service will not change. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 + The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. + The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change 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 R, 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. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to Reflection Ridge Subdivision via the proposed sidewalks and stub street. + Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 - Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. Staff finds that the residential development to the north is compatible with the proposed subdivision. To the east and south are existing single-family dwellings sited on one -acre lots within Ada County. Staff believes .Eastwood transitions well with these lots to the east. However, Staff believes that the lot sizes proposed along the southern boundary should be increased. Although attached single-family and detached single-family dwellings are compatible land uses, Staff does not consider locating four 8, 000 square foot lots adjacent to a one -acre lot an appropriate transition. A neighbor has voiced concern over this issue, as well. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-4 zone. The subject property is located adjacent to lands zoned R4. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. + Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 — Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 One street connection is proposed to connect with the Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north. Staff finds that the zoning proposal is generally harmonious with the surrounding area and with the Future Land Use Map designation for this site and generally meets the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 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. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists single-family developments as a Permitted Use in the R-4 zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation ANNEXATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed single-family development. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application, prepared by The Idaho Survey Group on August 14, 2006, shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. TRi F!I!�i P!T!7"f A Development Agreement fDA) will be required as part of annexation of this property. Prior to annexation approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the prope�rt awner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption. and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall include, at minimum the following: Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 7 A Development Agreement fDA) will be required as part of annexation of this property. Prior to annexation approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the prope�rt awner(s) at the time of annexation ordinance adoption. and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall include, at minimum the following: Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 7 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 • All future uses shall not involve uses activities mrrocesses materials equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to an�pers0 property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic noise smoke, fumes Glare or odors • All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development • The av_plicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. • Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517 when services are available from the Citv of Meridian. Wells may be used for pan -domestic purposes such as landscape irri ation. • The following shall be the only allowed uses on this property Detached sin lei family homes and allowed access= uses of the R-4 zone. • A maximum of 24 units be constructed on this site. • All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living area • AU homes on Lots 11, 12, and 13 Block 1. shall be restricted to it single story and be subject to, at minimum. a 20 -foot rear etback, Lot 1% Block 1. sha 1 al. o b restricted to a singJe atom_Place a note on the final plat to indicate_t> . • Prior to issuance of my buildin Rermit, the sub'ect MRqg1y shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code • The five-foot sidewalks and a 25 -foot landscape buffer constructed in accordance with City Code, shall be installed along Locust Grove Road prior to occupancv of anv new dwelling units. PRELIIYIINARY PLAT ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed single-family residential products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings for a preliminary plat. Access: The Reflection Ridge Subdivision, just north of the Eastwood Subdivision, has been granted road access to Locust Grove Road at the '/-mile mark West Wrightwood Drive, a public street provided by the Reflection Ridge Subdivision, runs approximately parallel to Eastwood's north property line. South Carina Avenue, a local public street within Eastwood, intersects W. Wrightwood and will serve as the sole access to the proposed subdivision. The access to Locust Grove Road for the existing house that is to remain, should be abandoned as proposed. Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road should be prohibited. 2. Internal Streets: Internal streets sections are proposed to be 36 -feet wide with 5 -foot wide attached sidewalks for a total of 50 feet of right -0f --way. 3. Density: This property is designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Low density residential areas are anticipated to contain single family dwellings at densities up to three dwelling units per acre. The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 24 residential building lots on 7.56 acres for a gross density of 3.18 dwelling units/acre. The gross density exceeds the range outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant has not proposed a "step up" to medium density for the site, nor would Staff be supportive of said "step." Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 8 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 In order for the project to better comply with the density policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff is supportive of eliminating one building lot at the south property line. This reduction in the number of lots, from 24 to 23, would not only address Staff's concerns over transitioning of lot sizes in that area, but would lower the gross density of the project from 3.18 dwelling units/acre to 3.05 dwelling units/acre. 4. Landscaping: The Applicant has provided 0.636 acres (8.4%) of Iandscaping on site, including the required street buffer along Locust Grove Road. The standards for open space apply to single-family developments of five acres or more. As the subject property totals 7.56 acres, the Applicant has set aside 0.389 acres (5.15%) for usable open space, including a centrally located common area, meeting the 5% minimum required by UDC 11 -3G -3A-1. All common areas approved as open space shall be vegetated and usable by residents. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Eastwood Homeowners Association. 5. Pressure irrigation; The City. of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single - point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 6. Fencing: Excepting where fencing currently exists along the western boundary, perimeter fencing is not shown on the submitted landscape plan or preliminary plat. At the public hearing, the applicant should state whether or not permanent fencing is proposed around the development. The Applicant should submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All perimeter fencing must be completed prior to issuance of building permits. Fencing should taper down to a 3 foot maximum within 20 feet of all rights-of-way. Fencing adjacent to the drainage swale access is also required. Said fencing can be up to six feet in height, if open vision. If closed vision is used, it cannot exceed four feet in height. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 7. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: As per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways and waterways being used as amenities, which intersect, cross or he within the area being subdivided shall be covered. 8. Tree Mitigation: Any existing, on-site tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of those removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department. 9. Existing Structures: The site currently contains multiple buildings. All existing structures that are to remain, shall comply with the dimensional standards (setbacks, house size, etc.) of the R-4 zone. Prior to signature of the final plat, all structures that do not meet the dimensional standards should be removed. Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP -06-047 PAGE 9 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TIM HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds that applications AZ -06-045 and PP -06-047 substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of said AZ and PP applications subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Plannina and Zoning Commission heard the item on December 21 2006. At the Public ILearingthey moved to recommend agyroval to the City Council. e ' City Council h hese itetps on February 6 2007 and February 13, 7 At e Fel�n��ry 13 2007 pubfic hearing t C Gil approved the subiect apulicatigM., 11. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat RWAq8ED Getober X!, 2N6) (Stamed REVISED on February 7 2007) 3. Landscape Plan (REVISED October 27, 2006) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Services Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8 Nampa Meridian Irrigation District 9. Central District Health Department C. Legal Description and Annexation Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Eastwood Subdivision: AZ -06-045, PP46-047 PAGE 10 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map RUT N R*4 f havpnr ww Exhibit A R.4 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (Stamped U— LSED February 7 2007) Exhibit A 0 r CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Landscape Plan. (REVISED October 27, 2006) Exhibit A 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval I. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (dated August 14, 2006, and stamped by Terry Peugh, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridiani. 1.1.2 Any future subdivision, uses, and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of permit submittal. 1.1.3 The Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the following provisions: • All future uses shall not involve uses, activities processes materials equipment and conditions of oneration that will be detrimental to any_persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic noisesmokefumes glare or odors • All future development of the subiect property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of develo went. • The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. �– • Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this _project will have to be removed from their domestic service. per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517 when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. • The followin shall be the QWy allowed uses on this pro : Detached singe family homes and allowed accessga uses of the R4 zone. • A imum, of 24 units be constructed on this site. + All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living_area. • All homes on Lots 11 12. and 13 Block 1 shall be restricted to a single story and be sub iect to, at minimum. a 20 -foot rear setbac, L The home on Lot 10. Block t 2_ . hay also be restricted to a single story. Place a note on the final plat to indic•*e this • mor to issuance of any building_ permit. the subject property shall be subdivided in accordance with the City of Meridian Unified Development Code • The five-foot sidewalks and a 25 -foot landscape buffer constructed in accordance with City Code. shall be installed along Locust Grove Road Dior to occupancy of any new dweUm units. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS—pRELIMINARy PLAT 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet PRE, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, and dates ti:; SICAAVED Feb 7 2 , is approved with the conditions listed herein 1.2.2 Eastwood Subdivision shall be subject to the UDC standards of the R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) zoning district. 1.2.3 A maximum of 23 24 single family residential dwellings may be constructed on site. One -0 the -pr -. I I I Z --he sou-t—hern beandapy of Block 1 should be elindnated� and adjar. 1.2.4 Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road shall be prohibited for this site. The Applicant shall be required to dedicate the right-of-way, construct landscaping, pathway(s), and noise mitigation along Locust Grove, as required by ACHD and the City of Meridian. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 1.2.5 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the existing access to Locust Grove Road shall be abandoned. All homes within Eastwood shall take driveway access internal to the subdivision. Place a note on the final plat to reflect the access restrictions. 1.2.6 Dedicate and construct all public internal roadways to meet ACHD's road design standards. 1.2.7 Provide a street connection (Carina Avenue) to the proposed Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north, as depicted on the preliminary plat. 1.2.8 All existing 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, 1.2.9 All homes within the subdivision shall contain at least 1,200 square feet of living area. 1.2.10 The west lot line of Lot 14, Block 1, shall be adjusted to align with the west lot line of Lot 17 Block 1, East Slope Subdivision. 1.211 The App—hoant shall note on the face of the final plat that the homes �, Lots 1 n t � R1nrk 1 h vP --- a_s ngl -se t_ ory � gl on nd that"J -,] JXLpj*, have a minimum 20 -foot rear setback. 1.2.12 The landscape plan prepared by Harvest, Design on October 27, 2006, revised on October 27, 2006, and labeled Sheet LS -1, is approved with the following modifications / notes: • Provide 0.389 acres (5.15% of the site) for landscaped open. space. • As required by UDC 11-2A-5, provide a 25 -foot wide street landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road. Said buffer shall be constructed wholly outside of any right-of-way. • Per UDC 11 -3A -7A -7b, all fencing adjacent to common shall be either four feet (4') in height, if closed vision, or six feet (6) tall if open vision fencing is used. Modify the applicable areas on the landscape plan to reflect this requirement. • Coordinate a tree mitigation/preservation plan with Elroy Huff of the Meridian Parks Department. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council signature of the Final Plat. 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). 1.2.13 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Eastwood Subdivision Homeowners Association. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 Sidewalks/walkways shall be installed within the subdivision and on Locust Grove Road pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.2 All lot lines common to a public right-of-way shall reserve a 10' utility easement. 1.3.3 The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The Applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 1.3.5 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. 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. 1.3.6 The Applicant shall submit a fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 1.3.7 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.3.8 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation / preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.9 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 planned in E. Wrightwood Drive. These mains are temporarily flowing out of shed. If this development intends on sewering this property prior to the Black Cat Trunk connecting to the Glacier Springs Diversion manhole the Applicant shall be responsible to install an off-peak pumping station. The stations design and location shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. 2.2 The Applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 2.3 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. 2.4 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Reflection Ridge Subdivision. The Applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. A second—water connection to the main in Locust Grove _shall be re1&sd to ensure adenuate fire flows location of this Connection Shall be egg dlnated With Public Works prior to ion plan anrnnval Thio mfl,,, shall be placed in a common lot a minimum of 20 feet wide and covered by a City of Meridian water easement. �� 2.5 The existing house shall be required to connect to City services. The Applicant shall be responsible for payment of the assessments prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall be responsible for the actual physical connection to the services prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. 2.6 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 Exhibit 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. 2.7 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). 2.8 The Applicant has the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development is to be maintained as a private system. Since it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.9 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 or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.10 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. 2.11 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. 2.12 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from 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. 2.13 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or he 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. 2.14 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. 2.15 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, waxer, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 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. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.20 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.21 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. 2.22 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. 2.23 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. 2.24 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require a fire -flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %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. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads, and cul-de-sacs shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 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. 3.6 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one- and two-story construction. 3.7 The existing home shall herein be addressed off of North Carina, Avenue. 3.8 All portions of the buildings located on this project, including the existing home, must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3.9 There a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 Any interior fencing adjacent to common areas and micropathways, including along the drainage Swale access, shall allow visibility from the street and shall not exceed four feet in height is solid fencing is used. 4.2 The common lot on Block 2 will not be adequately lit. Provide street lamps at the north and south boundaries instead of one centralized lamp at the eastern boundary. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of Trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 6. SANITARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6.1 SSC has no comments related to the application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 7.1.1 This portion of Locust Grove will develop to be a 3 -lane arterial roadway within 70 -feet of right- of-way. Twenty-five feet of right-of-way currently exists, so the applicant may do one of the following: a. Do not dedicate right-of-way and construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk not closer than 28 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road and provide an easement for the sidewalk. b. Dedicate 10 -feet of additional right-of-way and construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk not closer than 28 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road. The District will buy the additional right-of-way from the applicant. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACRD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 7.1.2 Construct a 5 -foot attached concrete sidewalk 41 -feet from the centerline of Locust Grove Road (measured face of walk to centerline). 7.1.3 Locate and construct the internal roadways as a 36 -foot street section within 50 -feet of right-of- way complete with curb, gutter and a 5 -foot attached concrete sidewalk, as proposed. 7.1.4 Construct a stub street to the north, North Orion Avenue, located approximately 520 -feet west of the centerline of Locust Grove Road (measured centerline to centerline). This stub street shall Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 align with and connect to Dazzle Way, within Reflection Ridge Subdivision to the north of this site, and will provide principal access to the subject. site. Actual alignment is required and the applicant is directed to work with the northern development for the exact location of the two roadways. 7.1.5 Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 7.2.1 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 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 ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The Applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAR[NG DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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. NAMPA / MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 8.1 Coordinate with John Anderson, Water Superintendent for NMID, concerning installation of the underground, pressurized irrigation system. 8.2 All storm drainage shall be retained on-site. If surface drainage cannot be contained on site, contact Donna Moore at 466-7861, as a Land Use Change Application must be filed for review prior recording of the final plat. 8.3 All laterals and wasteways must be protected. 8.4 The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 9. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 9.1 After written approvals from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 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. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit 13 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 C. Legal Description and Annexation Map :1C?A Q 14S.0� vW 4t W" one GILOUP %.fl6rI2? AWd 14, 30. T4Xj Ada plkAK WWM AW paw pf °+l •924 074 :.MAOs. P.C. I �'r�f+���fo�:�1 ��ad S��tt�r�'��►� Exhibit C 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 10 so I* KT0220 > RAW ow wool, "' GRlt�f Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall mare a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to zone the subject property R4 (Medium Low -Density Residential). 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 this Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Council finds that single-family residences are allowed within the requested zoning district of R4 as a Principally Permitted Use. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with varying lot sizes and other dimensional requirements which conform to the proposed zoning designation. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, Council fords that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site, as conditioned in the staff report. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-513-3.E). Council finds that all essential services 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 compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and this is a logical expansion of the City limits. Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property is 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: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is generally compatible with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Council generally supports the proposed plat layout, with recommended changes, as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate Exhibit D 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 the proposed development; Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their own cost, Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Commission and Planning Staff recommends that Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B, Agency Comments and Conditions, for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Council is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to Council's attention. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that 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. L The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. The Commission and Planning Staff recommend that 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 the Commission and Planning Staff is unaware. Exhibit D February 23, 2007 PP 06-063 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT W.H. Moore Company ITEM NO. 5-E REQUEST Findings — Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 14 building lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G zone for CentrePointe Subdivision No. 2 (North) — northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle Roads AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Findings CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: VAI MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: krr SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER n CITY nF �$F In the Matter of Preliminary Plat approval of 14 commercial lots on 18.7 acres in the C -G zone, for Centrepointe North Subdivision, by Winston H. Moore. Case No(s). PP -06-063 For the City Council Hearing Date of. February 13, 2007 (Findings on the February 27, 2007, Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP -06-063 - 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. 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 February 13, 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 § 11-5A 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 27, 2006, by Quadrant Consulting, Inc., is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The 10 -foot wide landscape buffer along the western boundary of the site, where lots abut residentially zoned property, shall be installed as part of the Certificates of Zoning Compliance process. 3. If approved by City Council through the variance process, fifteen (15) feet of the required thirty-five (35) feet of landscaping buffer may be constructed within Eagle Road's right- of-way; and 4. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP -06-063 - PAGE 2 of 4 within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11 -6B -7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council 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 timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty- eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 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 February 13, 2007. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 2-7 ' day of � 11 COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED 4G COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED %7 jw COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__VGw MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) May r T y de Weerd CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP -06-063 - PAGE 3 of 4 0 • Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., City Copy served upon Applicant, Th e Attorney. .,``++++IIIIIIIIrllr Vj ` s1N, `a i �y t� Planning Department, Public Works Department and City By: r Y � � � n 1��"� L 41 Dated: �� �2 - �Z City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP -06-063 - PAGE 4 of 4 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 2/13/2007 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Amanda Hess, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Centre Pointe North (#2) Subdivision • PP -06-063 r wai ��� %0 tIJAH 1 +� d Preliminary Plat for 14 commercial lots on 18.7 acres in the C -G zone, by Winston H. Moore 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicant, Winston H. Moore, is requesting preliminary plat approval for 14 commercial lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G (General Retail and Service Commercial District). Centre Pointe North will be the final phase of the 59 -acre Centre Pointe Marketplace development. The subject application includes a proposal to construct parking areas, one public street, and private drive lanes as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. The subject site is located on the northwest corner of the Eagle Road / Ustick Road intersection, in Section 32, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, B.M., and is currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Number S0532417600. The site has not been previously platted. The subject site is currently within the corporate boundaries of the City of Meridian and the city's Urban Service Planning Area. NOTE: The submitted landscape plan depicts a 35 -foot wide landscape buffer along Eagle Road, where 15 feet of the buffer is located within Eagle Road's right-of-way. Staff has spoken with the Applicant, and the Commission should note that the Applicant is preparing to submit a variance application requesting to allow right-of-way along Eagle Road to count towards the required landscape street buffer of 35 -feet (as was approved with Centre Pointe Subdivision No. 1). Staff does not believe that the approval or denial of the variance request by the Council will have a major impact on the layout of the proposed subdivision. The subject report does not assume that a variance by the Council will be granted. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Preliminary Plat application. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Centre Pointe North Subdivision (PP -06-063) with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 4, 2007. At the public hearing, they moved to recommend approval to the City Council. a. Summary of Public Hearing i. In favor: Jonathan Seel (Applicant's Representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None V. Staff presenting application: Amanda Hess vi. Other staff commenting on application: Mike Cole; Caleb Hood b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission i. Cross -access; and ii. Public turnaround at the terminus of CentrePointe Way. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page I 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 i. Eliminated the requirement for a public turnaround at the terminus of CentrePointe Way. d. Outstanding Issues) for City Council i. The Applicant requested and the Commission agreed that Lot 3, Block 1, not be required to supply cross -access to adjacent lots. In addition, the Commission noted that Lots 1 & 2 Block 1 should share a driveway access. However, the motion did not reflect this Nonetheless Staff did modify Condition of Approval 1.1.12; ii. The Applicant requests modification of Condition 1.1.4 so that the 10 -foot landscaping buffer adjacent to residential uses be installed at the time of submittal for Certificates of Zoning_ Compliance and not with the subdivision improvements as currently required; and iii. The Applicant requests modification of Condition 1.1.4 and 1.1.6 regarding construction of the 35 -foot landscaping buffer entirely outside of the riga-of-way. On January 26 2007 the Applicant has submitted a landscaping variance to the Planning Department to allow a portion of the rit-of--way along Eagle Road to count towards the required street landscape buffer. The landscaping variance is scheduled to be heard before Council on March 6, 2007. I i. In favor: Jonathan Seel (Applicant's R_enresentativel ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None V. Staff presenting application: C Caleb Hood vi. Other Staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issues of Discussion by Council i.Applicant's request to allow a portion of the right-of--wav along Eagle Road to count towards the required street landscape buffer: and ii. Applicant's request that the 10 foot landscaping buffer adjacent to residential uses be installed as part of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance process. c. ICU Council Changes to Commission Recommendation i. Modify Condition 1.1.4 so that the 10 -foot landscaping buffer adjacent to residential uses be installed as part of the Certificate of Zoning Compliance process (to be completed prior to occupancy): and ii. Modify Condition 1.1.4 to allow 15 feet of the required 35 feet of landscaping buffer to be constructed within Eagle Road's ri_ ght-of-way. if approved by City Council through the variance process. 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and Public testimony, I move to approve File Number PP -06- 063, as presented in staff report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications) Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and Public testimony, I move to deny File Number PP -06-063 as presented during the public hearing of February 13, 2007, 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) Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 2 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Continuance I move to continue File Number PP -06-063 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: Northwest corner of Ustick Road and Eagle Road (North of Centre Pointe Subdivision No. 1) Section 32, T4N, R1E b. Owner: Blue Marlin Investment, LLC 1940 Bonito Way, #160 Eagle, ID 83616 c. Applicant: Winston H. Moore 1940 Bonito Way, #160 Meridian, ID 83642 d. Representative: Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Co. e. Present Zoning: General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Regional g. Description of Applicant's Request: 1. Date of Site Plan (See Exhibit A): October 27, 2006 2. Date of Landscape Plan (See Exhibit A): November 6, 2006 h. Applicant's Statement / Justification: This plat represents the final phase of the 59 -acre Centre Pointe Marketplace development. The project will include continuation of Centrepointe Way to the north property boundary. The parking area will be constructed as proposed on the submitted site and landscaping plans. A plaza, accessed by an 8 -foot east -west walkway, will be constructed within the parking area. The parking lots will be landscaped, and the required buffer along Eagle Road installed. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: December 18, 2006 and January 1, 2007 (Planning & Zoning Commission) January 22 2007• February 5 2007 (City CounciD c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: December 8, 2006 (Planning & Zoning Commission) Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 January 19, 2007 (City Council) d. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 25, 2006 (Planning & Zoning Commission) February 3, 2007 (City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Vacant agricultural land. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Mixed-use area with big box commercial, retail, and residential uses. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Residential, Ada County; Residential, City of Boise 2. West: Champion Park Subdivision, zoned R-8 3. South: Centre Pointe Subdivision, zoned C -G 4. East: Smitchger Subdivision, Lowe's Home Improvement, zoned C -G d. History of Previous Actions: The majority of this site was annexed into the City in 2004 (Blue Marlin — AZ -03-025). A smaller piece of Centre Pointe was recently annexed into the City (Nesmith — AZ -05-065). The proposed subdivision does not include 8.33 acres previously approved for a Kohl's Department Store, and 31.37 acres approved under Centre Pointe Subdivision (PP -06-020). The entire Centre Pointe Marketplace development (59 acres) is zoned C -G. Until recently, the recorded Development Agreement (DA) for the Centre Pointe development required CUP or PD approval for all uses on the subject site because a detailed concept/re- development plan for the site was not provided when the annexation application was processed by the City. Some of the buildings on the Master Site Plan have already received approval by the City through the CUP process, including Kohl's Department Store, G.I. Joes Sporting Goods, and Retail Buildings `B" and "I" as identified on the Master Site Plan. In October of 2006, the Applicant was granted approval to modify the existing DA (MI -06-008) for Centre Pointe to allow the construction and commencement of principally permitted uses in the C -G zone, without CUP/PD approval. The Applicant, Winston H. Moore, submitted a Master Site Plan which defined building layout and pad locations for the development (See Exhibit A-2). The Applicant is now only required to submit Certificate of Zoning Compliance and Design Review applications prior to building construction within the Centre Pointe development. The Commission and Council should also note that, in November of 2005, the Center Pointe Marketplace development received approval for three (3) access points to/from Eagle Road (VAR -05-021). Two are right -in / right -out only accesses and one is a full driveway access. Additionally, in June of 2006, the Applicant was granted a variance (VAR -06-013) from UDC Table 11-2B-3 and UDC 11 -3B -7C2 which require: 1) 35 -foot wide landscape buffers along entryway corridors; and, 2) the entire landscape buffer along streets to be on a common lot or within a permanent easement. Said variance allowed the Applicant to count adjacent ITD right- of-way towards the landscape street buffer width for Centre Pointe Subdivision. The landscaping buffer was approved at 20 feet, with 15 feet constructed within said right-of-way. The Commission should note that the Applicant has not yet, but is preparing to submit a variance application which proposes to reduce width of the landscaping buffer for Centre Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 4 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Pointe North to 20 feet along Eagle Road in a similar manner. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: This property will sewer to mains installed in the previous phase. Location of water: This property will receive water service from mains installed in the previous phase. Issues or concerns: None 2. Vegetation: Agricultural 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There are a couple of irrigation/drainage ditches that bisect the property. 5. Hazards: N/A 6. Size of Property: 18.7 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: The submitted plat proposes 14 commercial lots on 18.7 acres within the C -G zone. The first phase of the Centre Pointe development, which encompassed 31.37 acres, and the 8.33 -acre Kohl's site are not part of the subject plat. g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): Per the Future Land Use Map, both SH 55 / Eagle Road is designated an "Entryway Corridor." As such, the UDC (Table 11-2B-3) requires a 35 - foot wide street buffer adjacent to said roadway. The landscape plan (Sheets L1.0 and L1.1) proposes a 35 -foot wide buffer along Eagle Road. However, the UDC requires landscaping buffers along public streets to be either placed in a separate common lot or a landscape easement. Additionally, the UDC requires 10 feet of landscaping along all commercial streets. The landscape plan proposes 10 -foot wide landscaping buffers on both sides of North Centrepointe Way. 2. Percentage of site as open space: The UDC does not require open space or site amenities for commercial subdivisions. However, as per the conditions of approval for MI -06-008 by City Council allowing construction and commencement of principally permitted uses without CUP/PD approval for the entire Center Pointe development, the Applicant was required to supply three (3) public gathering areas with continuous internal walkways on site. One (1) of said gathering areas is proposed within Centre Pointe North. 3. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping within the proposed parking lot areas should be constructed in compliance with UDC 11-3B-8. The Applicant was granted alternative compliance from the standard requirement to construct a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Champion Park (residential) to the west. A 10 -foot wide landscape buffer should be constructed adjacent to the future single-family uses to the west. See Section 9 below for more information. h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Parking: One off-street parking space is required for every 500 square feet of gross floor area. Also, one "Type A" and one "Type B" parking space required for the loading areas (per UDC 11-3C-8). No buildings are proposed with the subject Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 5 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 application. However, the Applicant is proposing to construct the main parking lot and drive aisles with the subject plat. Staff will monitor the square footage of each building as it is submitted for CZC approval to ensure that adequate parking is provided. i. Proposed Street System: Three access points to Ustick Road and three access points to Eagle Road have been approved for the Centre Pointe Marketplace development by ACHD, ITD, and the City of Meridian. One of the approved right -in / right -out only accesses falls within the Centre Point North Subdivision. N. Centrepointe Way, a public street, will run the entire length of the Centre Pointe development and will eventually connect with Wainwright Drive further to the north. All other accesses to Ustick Road and Eagle Road are proposed as driveways. Staff is recommending that a cross access / ingress -egress easement be provided so that each lot within the Centre Pointe development, as well as the Kohl's site, has access throughout the site and, thus, the public street system. As of the print deadline for this report, Staff has not received comments from ACHD or TTD. 7. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On December 15, 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, Meridian Police Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject site is designated `Mixed Use — Regional' (MU -R) on the Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, this designation is defined in part as an area that is situated in highly visible or transitioning parts of the City where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The MU -R has no upper limit on the square footage of non-residential uses and is intended to allow a broad range of uses. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (Staff's 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 subdivided in the following manner. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • 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 (ACBD) and the Idaho Department of Transportation (ITD). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Municipal, fee -supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B — Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. Staff finds that the site is designated for MU -R on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Staff believes that a variety of commercial and retail opportunities will be provided on this site. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D — Encourage appropriate land uses along transportation corridors. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is located appropriately on the SH55 / Eagle Road transportation corridor. Staff supports the proposed uses at this site as they are consistent with the Mixed Use — Regional district and the approved development agreement. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 — Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. ACBD and ITD evaluate access points. The proposed access point to the arterial street generally complies with ITD's standards. The Idaho Transportation Department (ND) has a policy for access to a Type IV Principal Arterial will be at intersections only, and spaced at one-half mile intervals in urban areas. ITD allows approaches (other than intersections) in special cases and on a temporary basis. The Eagle Road access has been approved by the City Council through the variance process. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 5 — Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridor (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.). The Applicant is proposing to construct 35 foot wide street buffers along the adjacent arterial street (Eagle Road). By Ordinance, a minimum 35 foot wide landscape buffer along entryway corridors is required. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists the permitted uses and uses conditionally allowed in the C -G zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to streets and highways. C -G General Retail And Service Commercial District: The purpose of the C -G district is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the municipal water and sewer systems of the City, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. c. General Off -Street Parking Standards (UDC 11-3C-5): The following standards shall apply to off-street vehicle parking for non-residential uses: In all Commercial Districts the requirement Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 7 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 shall be one (1) space for every five hundred (500) square feet of gross floor area. d. Structures Subject to Design Standards (UDC 11 -3A -19B5): All structures on property adjacent to an entryway corridor (Eagle Road) are subject to the design standards listed in this section of the UDC. e. Outdoor Storage / Refuse Areas (UDC 11-3A-12): Outdoor utility meters, HVAC equipment, trash dumpsters, trash compaction and other service functions shall be incorporated into the overall design of buildings and landscaping so that the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets. f. Development along State and Federal Highways (UDC 11-3H): The Applicant shall construct a street, generally paralleling the state highway, be designed to accommodate future connectivity and access to all properties fronting the state highway that lie between the applicant's property and the nearest section line road and/or half mile collector road. The intent of this section is to provide for future connectivity and access to all properties fronting the state highway that lie between the applicant's property and the nearest section line road and/or half -mile collector road. The applicant is proposing driveways, rather than a street, that will collect and distribute traffic as envisioned with the subject section of the UDC. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed development. Please see Exhibit C for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for a preliminary plat. The PP application substantially complies with the Unified Development Code (UDC). Below, Staff details some of the more significant changes that should be required with the approval of the preliminary plat. Future Uses: The subject property shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) approval from the Planning Department prior to construction of any building. Further, each building proposed on a lot adjacent to Eagle Road shall also be subject to Design Review approval. Landscaping: Staff is generally supportive of the proposed landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., labeled Sheets L1.0 and L1.1, and dated 11/6/2006. The plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following standards. UDC 11-2B requires a 35 -foot wide street buffer along entryway corridors. SH 55 / Eagle Road is an established entryway corridor. On the submitted landscape plan, the Applicant proposes to construct a 40- to 45 -foot wide street buffer along Eagle Road. However, in June of 2006, the Applicant was granted a variance (VAR -06-013) from UDC Table 11-2B-3 and UDC 11 -3B -7C2 for Centre Point Subdivision No. 1 which requires: 1) 35 -foot wide landscape buffers along entryway corridors; and, 2) the entire landscape buffer along streets to be on a common lot or within a permanent easement. Said variance allowed the Applicant to count adjacent ITD right- of-way towards the landscape street buffer width for Centre Pointe Subdivision. The landscaping buffer for Centre Pointe Subdivision No. 1 was approved at 20 feet, with 15 feet constructed within said right-of-way. However, the Applicant has not yet, but will submit a variance application proposing to reduce the landscaping buffer for Centre Pointe North to 20 feet along Eagle Road in a similar manner Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 8 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Chapter 2 of the UDC also requires a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer along both sides of the proposed North Centrepointe Way, a commercial street. Per UDC 11-3B, the Applicant should be required to depict the required street buffers on the face of the final plat in the form of easements or common lots. All landscaping adjacent to public streets should conform to the requirements of UDC 11-3B-7. UDC 11 -3B -8C-2 prohibits linear groupings of parking spaces in excess of 12. There are several groupings of parking spaces that exceed 12 in a row. Therefore, in accordance with UDC policy, landscape planters, including trees and groundcover, shall be placed within the proposed parking areas. See Parking Lot analysis below. UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25 -foot wide land use buffer between C -G zoned property and residentially zoned property. However, the Applicant previously applied and received approval for a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the residential uses in Champion Park Subdivision to the west. A 10 -foot wide common lot or landscaping easement should be placed on the face of the final plat where this site abuts residentially zoned property. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are several irrigation laterals that bisect this parcel. Per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (UDC 11-3A-15). The Applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -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 City Code. Fencing: The Applicant is not showing any fencing on any of the submitted plans. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat (UDC 11-3A-7). If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code. See Exhibit B below. North Centrepointe Way: Staff is supportive of the general location and design of North Centrepointe Way, a public local street. Currently, N. Centrepointe Way dead -ends at the north property boundary. Until N. Centrepointe Way is extended further to the north, a temporary turnaround and associated easement should be provided. Internal Cross -Access: There are some proposed commercial lots that do not have frontage on a public street. Also, there are shared driveways to Eagle Road and shared parking areas. Because of this situation, the Applicant should provide a cross parking/cross access agreement for all of the lots within the Centre Point development to use and share the parking areas and drive aisles. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, a copy of a recorded cross -access / ingress -egress and parking maintenance agreement should be provided to the City. Parldng Lot: UDC 11 -3C -6B requires off-street loading spaces for commercial uses at a rate of 1 per every 500 square feet of building. UDC Table 11-3C-1 requires all 90 -degree parking stalls to be at least 9 -feet wide by 19 -feet long adjacent to 25 -foot wide drive aisles. Further, UDC 11- 3B -8C-2 prohibits linear groupings of parking spaces in excess of 12. Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARI• ATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 There are several groupings of parking spaces that exceed 12 in a row depicted on the site and landscape plans. In accordance with UDC 11 -3B -8C2, landscape planters, including trees and groundcover, shall be placed within the proposed parking areas. All parking should comply with UDC 11-3C-5 and UDC 11-3B-8. To ensure that the proposed parking lot is constructed in accordance with the UDC, the Applicant shall submit ten full-size copies and one 8.5" x 11" copy of the updated landscape plan to the Planning Department at least 10 days prior to the City Council hearing. Refuse/Service Area Screen: Neither the submitted site plan, preliminary plat, nor the landscape plan depict where the refuse / service areas will be. UDC 11-3A-12 requires the visual and acoustic impacts of these functions are fully contained and out of view from adjacent properties and public streets. All future CZC applications should clearly demonstrate how this standard is met. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds the Preliminary Plat application generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards, as well as the Development Agreement in effect for this site. Staff recommends approval of PP -06-063 subject to the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 4, 2007. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City Council. The Meridian City Council heard the item on February 13 2007. At the public hearing the Council moved to annroye the subject application, 11. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Centre Pointe Marketplace Concept Plan 3. Subdivision Phasing Map 4. Preliminary Plat (Dated October 27, 2006) 5. Landscape Plan - Not Approved (Dated November 6, 2006) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Services 7. ACHD 8. Central District Health Department C. Required Findings from the UDC 1. Preliminary Plat Centre Pointe North — PP -06-063 Page 10 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map Exhibit A 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Centre Pointe Marketplace Concept Plan Exhibit A a}' CentrePoin UkRYETPLACE CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3. Subdivision Phasing Map Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING ATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 4. Preliminary Plat (Dated October 27, 2006) z9289f[AR fill p Exhibit A o r� z9289f[AR fill p Exhibit A f;Y z9289f[AR fill p Exhibit A 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 5. Landscape Plan — Not Approved (Dated November 6, 2006) Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING ATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Z SS84d ` g ;uiod 84USO 411_ Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as C-1 and prepared by Quadrant Consulting, Inc., dated October 27, 2006, is approved with the conditions listed herein. The Applicant shall comply with all previous requirements of this site associated with AZ -03-025, VAR -05-021, MI -06-008, as well as the Development Agreement (Instrument No.105048793) in effect for the Centre Pointe Marketplace development. 1.1.2 All future construction on the subject lots shall be required to obtain Certificates of Zoning Compliance prior to building construction. Further, all structures located adjacent to Eagle Road shall be subject to Design Review approval. 1.1.3 Access to Eagle Road and N. Centre Pointe Way shall be consistent with the approvals of ACHD, ITD, and the City of Meridian. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting direct lot access to the classified roadways. 1.1.4 The landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., labeled Sheet L1.0, dated 4-5-06, is not approved. The following revisions shall be made: • Construct a 35 -foot wide street buffer along the entire frontage of Eagle Road. if approved by City Council through the variance process fifteen (15) feet of the required thirty-five (35) feet of landscaping buffer may be constructed within Eagle Road's right - All landscaping adjacent to public streets should conform to the requirements of UDC 11-313-7. • Construct a 10 -foot wide street buffer along Centre Pointe Way, as proposed. Per UDC 11-313-7, the minimum density of one (1) tree per thirty-five (35) linear feet is required for all landscaping buffers along streets. Provide three (3) more trees within the landscape buffer west of N. Centrepointe Way and three (3) more trees in said buffer east of N. Centrepointe Way. • In accordance with UDC 11-313-8C2, landscape planters, to prevent linear groupings of stalls in excess of 12, shall be placed within the proposed parking areas. • The 10 -foot wide landscape buffer along the western boundary of the site, where lots abut residentially zoned property. shall be installed as part of the Certificate o Zoning Compliance process (prior to occupancy of the adjacent buildingl. • Mitigate or protect any existing trees on this site. Coordinate a plan with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff. Submit ten (10) revised copies of the landscape plan with the changes listed above no later than ten (10) days prior to the hearing before City Council. 1.1.5 Provide a public gathering area and associated pedestrian walkway on site, as required per MI -06- 008. 1.1.6 Graphically depict on the face of the plat the ' landscape buffer along Eagle Road. Graphically depict on the face of the plat a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer along both sides of N. Centre Pointe Way. Said buffers shall either be easements or within separate common lots. 1.1.7 Graphically depict a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer easement along the western boundary of the site, adjacent to residentially zoned property. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 1.1.8 Construct a public stub street to the north, as proposed. Way: 1.1.9 UDC Table 11-3C-1 requires all 90 -degree parking stalls to be at least 9 -feet wide and 19 -feet long adjacent to 25 -foot wide drive aisles. Further, UDC 11 -3B -8C2 prohibits linear groupings of parking spaces in excess of 12. In accordance with UDC 11 -3B -8C2, landscape planters, including trees and groundcover, shall be placed within the proposed parking areas. All parking shall comply with UDC 11-3C-5 and UDC 11-3B-8. To ensure that the proposed parking lot is constructed in accordance with the UDC, the Applicant shall submit an updated landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to the City Council hearing this project. 1.1.10 The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.1.11 Prior to the City Engineer's signature of the final plat, any existing structures shall be removed from the site. 1.1.12 Prior to the City Engineer's signature of the final plat, provide the City with a copy of a recorded cross -parking / cross -access agreement for the lots within the development to use the proposed driveways and parking areas. Lot 3 Block 1 shall not be required to supply cross -access to ad jacent lots. Lots 1 & 2 Block 1, should share a driveway access. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, a copy of a recorded cross -access / ingress -egress and parking maintenance agreement should be provided to the City. 1.1.13 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. 1.1.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 1.1.15 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. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.2.1 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to City Code. 1.2.2 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 11-3A- 18. 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 fmal construction. 1.2.3 The Applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code. 1.2.4 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.2.5 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved Preliminary Plat 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 11-6A. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension of mains installed in a previous phase. The Applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; Applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub -grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains installed in a previous phase. The Applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 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. 2.4 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). 2.5 The Applicant has indicated the required pressurized irrigation system in this development is to be owned and maintained as a private system. Since it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. 2.6 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, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 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. 2.8 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. 2.9 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-14 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.10 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 Exhibit B 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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. 2.11 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The Applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. 2.12 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. 2.13 Sewer, water, pressurized irrigation, and any life safety development improvement shall receive final approval prior to occupancy. Other required development improvements, such as fencing, micropaths, and landscaping may be bonded for prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy 2.14 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. 2.15 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. 2.16 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.17 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.18 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. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two -hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department 3. Meridian Fire Department 3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %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. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 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 turnaround. Phasing of the project may require a temporary approved turnaround on streets greater than 150 feet in length with no outlet. Provide an updated plan to Deputy Chief Joe Silva of the Meridian Fire Department which indicates turning radii, drive aisle, and docking details for loading areas on Lots 9 & 10, Block 6, at the time of submittal for Certificates of Zoning Compliance for the structures on the aforementioned lots. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 All internal roadways within the subject development shall be, at minimum, 20 feet wide and are considered fire lanes. Provide signage "No Parking — Fire Lane." 3.6 D '.7 a b.l;e a,......«...,n.7 at the n....tl, end Lo f N Gei#fene;nte II7.,. 3.7 The Meridian Fire Department requests that the northernmost driveway which accesses SH 55 / Eagle Road be restricted to right -in / right -out only, as proposed. 3.8 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.9 Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire -flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 3.10 The 14 office/commercial lots lot will have an unknown transient population and will have an unknown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2612 responses in the year 2004. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3 800 by the year 2010. 3.11 The Fire Department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. The cost of this installation is to be bome by the developer. 3.12 Maintain a separation of 5' from any buildings to dumpster enclosures. 3.13 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 3.14 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 3.15 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.16 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a) For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 Exhibit B 0 i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 m). b) For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.17 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all Fire Department connections. 3.18 Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with Appendix D Section D105. 3.19 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 4. Police Department 4.1 The Meridian Police Department requests that a maximum of 3 -foot tall shrubs be used along walkways within the parking lot. Shrubs in excess of 3 feet create potential hiding spots. 4.2 The loading areas shall be separated from all public parking areas. 4.3 The Meridian Police Department requests that the northernmost driveway which accesses SH 55 / Eagle Road be restricted to right -in / right -out only, as proposed. 5. Parks Department 5.1 The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 SSC has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.1.1 Continue the north/south public collector roadway previously approved with the Centre Point Subdivision No 1 to the north proRerty line in alignment with the ACHD parcel purchased (located to the south of Wainwright Drivel It should be constructed as a 40 -foot street section within 50 feet of right-of-wgy with vertical curb gutter, and 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks. Install a sign at the terminus that states: "THIS ROADWAY WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." A temporary turnaround easement should also be provided over the northernmost proposed drive aisle intersecting Eagle Road The Applicant is required to construct the roadway abutting this parcel ONLY with the application. 7.1.2 Eagle Road is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department. The City of Meridianthe Applicant and ITD should work together to determine if additional right-of-way or improvements are necessary on Eagle Road (SH 55). Access points should be approved in accordance with the Eagle road Corridor Study. 7.1.3 All access to the site should be no greater than 36 feet wide meet District offset policies, be paved the entire width and at least 30 feet into the site. The ideal location of access to this site is from the previously pproved driveway at the south property line. All access to Centre Pointe Way will be reviewed by the ACHD Development Review (with the submittal of construction drawings). 7.1.4 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 Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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 are 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 DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The Applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the Applicant or the Applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the Applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. 8. Central District Health Department 8.1 After written approval for appropriate entities are 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 breeding problem. 8.4 We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: food establishments, beverage Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 establishments, swimming pools or spas, grocery stores, or child care centers. Exhibit B 0 i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 C. Required Findings from the UDC 1. Preliminary Plat Findings (UDC 11-613-6): In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission and Council shall consider the objectives of this Title and at least the following: a. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, `Mixed Use — Regional' is defined as areas including commercial and residential development which are consistent with auto and service oriented uses. The City Council finds that the existing General Commercial (C -G) zoning designation is in accord with the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map, which delineates the subject property as "Mixed Use — Regional." The purpose of the C -G district is "to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public." The City Council finds that the proposed subdivision is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. (See Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific Comprehensive Plan Action Items that apply to this development.) b. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; The site is intended for commercial uses which, based on the Comprehensive Plan description, may include retail, wholesale, service and office uses, as well as appropriate public uses such as government offices. The Applicant will be responsible for the extension of all utilities necessary to serve this proposed development. All urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the Applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. The Applicant and/or future property owners will also be required to pay park and highway impact fees. AC14D has yet to r r r report is reeeWed by City Staff-, B. Based on the joint agency/department meeting and other comments received from agencies/departments, the City Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. Staff and the Commission recommend the Council reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police and school facilities and services. Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed zoning and subsequent development will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. c. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the City Council finds the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments. Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 e. Other health, safety or environmental problems that should be brought to Commission's and Council's attention; and The City Council is unaware of any health, safety or general welfare problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff and the Commission recommend the 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 or the Commission is unaware. L The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The City Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preservation on this site. Staff and the Commission recommend that the Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether there are any natural, scenic or historic features on this site of which Staff and the Commission are unaware. Exhibit C February 23, 2007 RZ 06-012 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Darren Blaser ITEM NO. 5-F REQUEST Findings -- Request for a Rezone of 1.69 acres from an R-4 to a C -C zone for Cherry Linder Rezone -- 1440, 1516, and 1528 West Cherry Lane AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: COMMENTS See Attached Findings Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER c cW DF�'�, In the Matter of a request to rezone 1.69 acres from R4 (Medium Low Density Residential) to C -C (Community Business District), for a new retail building, by Daren Blaser. Case No(s). RZ-06-012 For the City Council Hearing Date of. February 13, 2007(Findings on the February 27, 2007 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-012 +r WANO c cW DF�'�, In the Matter of a request to rezone 1.69 acres from R4 (Medium Low Density Residential) to C -C (Community Business District), for a new retail building, by Daren Blaser. Case No(s). RZ-06-012 For the City Council Hearing Date of. February 13, 2007(Findings on the February 27, 2007 City Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-012 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 and the Conditions of Approval in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 incorporated by reference. D. 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 may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 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. E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-012 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 2007. VOTED_9� COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) • 2 day of VOTED VOTED /"9'44`� VOTED 1 VOTED Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. The PlanniffgtDrpartm6it, Public Works Department and City i I r b V,�v l 1� Dated: By: City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-012 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 2/13/2007 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Justin Lucas, Associate City Planner 884-5533 SUBJECT: Cherry -Linder Rezone • RZ-06-012 (Try cad 19 q IDAHO Rezone of 1.69 acres from R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) to C -C (Community Business District) 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Darren Blaser, has applied for a Rezone (RZ) of 1.69 acres from R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential) to C -C (Community Business District). The Applicant intends to construct retail uses on this site that are not allowed within the R-4 zone, thus the request for a rezone. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road in Section 1, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, B.M. The subject property is composed of three parcels currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Numbers S1201336250, S1201336270 and S1201336280. The site currently contains three exiting homes and associated outbuildings that will be relocated/removed to accommodate the proposed multi -tenant retail building. This property is within the Urban Service Planning Area and the corporate boundaries of the City of Meridian. The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan and elevations for this site. The applicant is proposing to make site improvements (landscaping, street buffers, etc.) at the time of submittal for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). At that time, Planning Staff will require site improvements in accordance with the Unified Development Code, including but not limited to, parking and landscaping. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of RZ-06-012, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the Development Agreement provisions proposed in Section 10. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on Januar 4, 2007. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearin i. In favor: Bill Cafarelli ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: Justin Lucas v. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Ke v Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. None c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. None d. Outstanding Issues) for City Council: i. None Cheng -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 1 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 1 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number RZ- 06-012 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number RZ-06- 012 as presented during the hearing on February 13, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the annexation request.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number RZ- 06-012 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 1440, 1516, and 1528 West Cherry Lane Section 1, T3N, R1W b. Owner / Applicant: Darren Blaser 6732 W State Street Garden City, ID 83714 c. Representative: Bill Cafarelli d. Present Zoning: R-4 e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial f. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Darren and Kim Blaser are requesting a change of zoning for 1516, 1528 and 1440 W. Cherry Lane. We are requesting to change from residential to commercial in order to build a first class Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 i PAGE 2 r7lsTa 11 , I• i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � I I• 1 II 11 l l l' I rr ' T 1 1 1 �_ 1 1, �. I 1 1' I' 1 1 r l 1 1 • r, 1 l u l F, 1 I 1 11 1 I 11 1 1 I 1�� 111 �1_ 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number RZ- 06-012 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number RZ-06- 012 as presented during the hearing on February 13, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the annexation request.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number RZ- 06-012 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: 1440, 1516, and 1528 West Cherry Lane Section 1, T3N, R1W b. Owner / Applicant: Darren Blaser 6732 W State Street Garden City, ID 83714 c. Representative: Bill Cafarelli d. Present Zoning: R-4 e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial f. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Darren and Kim Blaser are requesting a change of zoning for 1516, 1528 and 1440 W. Cherry Lane. We are requesting to change from residential to commercial in order to build a first class Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 i PAGE 2 0 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 building to accommodate our expanding business. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11 -5A -2D, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: December 18th, 2006 and January lst, 2007 (Planning Commission); January 22°d, 2007 and February 5th, 2007 (City Council) c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: December 8th, 2006 (Planning Commission); January 19th, 2007 (City Council) d. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 260h, 2006 (Planning Commission); February 3`d, 2007 (City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Single family residential b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Commercial and Office Uses c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Christ Lutheran Church, zoned L -O 2. East: Christ Lutheran Church, zoned L -O 3. South: Cherry Lane and Commercial Development, zoned C -N 4. West: Linder Road and Cherry Crossing Commercial Development, zoned C -N d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: There is currently sewer in both Cherry and Linder. Location of water: There is currently water in both Cherry and Linder. Issues or concerns: This property is currently serviceable and capacity exists for this site. 2. Vegetation: There are various existing trees on the site that may need to be protected or mitigated for. 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: N/A 5. Hazards: N/A 6. Proposed Zoning: C -C 7. Size of Property: 1.69 acres f. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: As shown on the concept plan, the applicant is proposing to have one direct access to Cherry Lane; no access to Linder Road is proposed. Any existing access points to Cherry Lane or Linder Road should be abandoned with the first Certificate of Zoning Compliance application on this property. A maximum of one public street access should be allowed into this property Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 3 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 (as allowed/approved by ACRD). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 15, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions in the attached Exhibit A. Because this is only a rezone application, there are no conditions of approval. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject property is designated on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map as "Commercial." The Comprehensive Plan defines the Commercial district as: "This designation will provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area residents and visitors. Uses may include retail, wholesale, service and office uses, multi -family residential, as well as appropriate public uses such as government offices. Within this land use category, specific zones may be created to focus commercial activities unique to their locations. These zones may include neighborhood commercial uses focusing on specialized service for residential areas adjacent to that zone." The applicant is requesting to rezone this property to C -C, which is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for this area. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis below policy in italics): Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 5 — "Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas." The subject property has frontage on both Linder Road and Cherry Lane, which are both arterial roadways. This proposed commercial development will complement adjacent commercial uses and be located in an area that is accessible by residential development in the near vicinity. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 5 — "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors..." At the time of submittal for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance, Staff will require the applicant to provide landscaping per the UDC standards including, but not limited to, the required landscape buffers along Linder Road and Cherry Lane and landscaping within the parking area. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 — "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." As proposed in the applicant's concept plan and restricted by ACRID, only one access point will be allowed into this property. This one access point will serve the entire development. The three existing access points that serve the homes on this site will be consolidated into one. Staff is supportive of this access consolidation. 9. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Allowed Uses in Commercial Districts: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists the permitted, accessory, and conditional uses in the C -C zoning district. Retail stores, offices uses, and service -based industries are either principally or conditionally permitted uses within the C -C zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the retail Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to streets and highways. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation REZONING ANALYSIS: The applicant's request to rezone the property to C -C is generally compatible with the surrounding land uses, as there are extensive commercial developments at the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane. The other three corners of this intersection are zoned C -N (Neighborhood Business District). Staff considered recommending that this comer be zoned C N also, but after careful review three main reasons were identified as to why staff would support C -C on this site. First, unlike the other three comers, this proposed development is not directly adjacent to residential uses (L -O to the north and east), which is one of the factors that leads to C -N zoning. Second, there is a significant amount of property zoned C -C to the south east of this property. In other words the C -C zoning designation is not foreign to this area. Third, the proposed development has access to an arterial street, which is one of the location requirements of the C -C zone, as listed in UDC 11-2B-1. Based on the compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code and the general conformance with the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that rezoning the subject property from R-4 to C -C is justifiable. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for rezoning. The legal description for rezoning submitted with the application (prepared on October 6, 2006, by Colleen Marks, PLS) shows the property within the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1. Concept Plan: The applicant has submitted a concept plan for this site. Staff is generally supportive of the concept plan submitted with the rezone application with the following comments: Access: There is one proposed access point into this site from Cherry Lane, shown on the concept plan. Staff is supportive of the proposed single access point. No other public street access should be permitted with this development. The specific location of the proposed access should be approved by the Ada County Highway District. Landscaping: As required by UDC 11-2B-3 the applicant should construct, a minimum, a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer along Cherry Lane and Linder Road. The landscape buffer should be placed on the subject property exclusive of any right-of-way that may be required by the Ada county Highway District (ACRD). All parking lot landscaping should comply with UDC 11-3B-8. Cross Access: The concept plan submitted by the applicant shows two cross access points that could be provided to the Christ Lutheran Church parcel, which borders this property to the north and east. Staff is supportive of these two cross access points and recommends that the applicant submit a copy of a recorded cross access agreement that grants cross access to parcel number S1201336305 (Christ Lutheran Church) to the north and east. This agreement should be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the proposed building. Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 5 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 11 -5B -1A). To ensure that all of the provisions in the development agreement (see below) are complied with, Staff will require the applicant to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to building construction, where all site and landscaping improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. 2. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of rezoning of this property. Prior to rezoning approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) at the time of rezoning ordinance adoption, and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The DA shall include, at minimum, the following: • All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • All future development of the subject property shall comply with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. • The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with sewer and water service installation. • The following shall be the allowed uses on this property: Permitted and accessory uses within the C -C zone. All conditionally permitted uses in said zone shall be subject to CUP approval. • The applicant shall be responsible to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit from the Planning Department prior to construction on the subject site. • The applicant shall be allowed to construct only one driveway access to Cherry Lane, at a location to be approved by the Ada county Highway District (ACHD). No other public street access to Cherry Lane or Linder Road will be permitted to this site. • The applicant shall construct, at minimum, a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer along Cherry Lane and Linder Road. The landscape buffers shall be placed on the subject property exclusive of any right-of-way that may be required by the Ada county Highway District (ACHD). • The applicant shall submit a recorded copy of a cross access agreement that grants two cross access driveways (one to the north and one the east) to parcel number S1201336305. A copy of the recorded cross access agreement shall be submitted with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application for this property. • The applicant shall complete all required improvements prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development. • Any future building on this site shall be generally consistent with the elevations submitted by the applicant, drawn by Thomas R. Ensley & Associates, dated 10/11/2006, with the following additions: 1. All exterior building walls shall demonstrate the appearance of high-quality materials of stone, brick, wood or other native materials. Acceptable materials include, textured architectural coated concrete panels, tinted or textured masonry block, or stucco or stucco -like synthetic materials. Smooth -faced concrete block, tilt -up concrete panels, or prefabricated steel panels are prohibited except as accent materials. 2. At least two changes in one or a combination of the following shall be incorporated into the building design: color, texture and materials. Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 6 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3. The east and west building elevations shall contain architectural elements and windows similar to the front facade. 4. All ground level and roof top mechanical equipment shall be screened from view. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone (RZ-06-012), subject to the Development Agreement provisions listed above. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on January 4, 2007. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval. The Meridian City Council heard these items on February 13, 2007, At the public hearingthey approved the subject Rezone request 11. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity / Current Zoning Map 2. Conceptual Site Plan 3. Conceptual Building Elevations B. Agency Comments 1. Planning Department 2. Fire Department 3. Police Department 4. Parks Department 5. Ada County Highway District C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Cherry -Linder Rezone — RZ-06-012 PAGE 7 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity / Current Zoning Map Exhibit A PAGE 8 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Conceptual Site Plan 1!1 S?J�!'Hlfl 1�,- Exhibit A 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3. Conceptual Building Elevations and Floor Plan sele�ss�,+� �Ca�s,�3 •a seuloy j , , a3Zb'lB �{BaL�1•/Q :eoJ 0N1()1n8'11V13WM3NV Exhibit A i C • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 B. Agency Comments 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 The rezoning legal description submitted with the application (stamped on October 6, 2006, by Colleen Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.2 See section 10 above for analysis and comments. 2. FIRE DEPARTMENT 2.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 2.2 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. 2.3 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. 2.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 2.5 Private Alleys and Fire Lanes shall have a 20' wide improved surface capable of supporting an imposed load of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 2.6 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. 2.7 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 2.8 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 2.9 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 2.10 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). Exhibit B • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 2.11 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all fire department connections. 3. POLICE DEPARTMENT 3.1 The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. 4. PARKS DEPARTMENT 4.1 The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 5. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT This application is for a rezone only. Listed below are some of the site specific conditions of approval that the District may require when it reviews a future development application (additional site specific requirements may be levied with a specific redevelopment application). 5.1 Dedicate right-of-way from the centerline of Cherry lane to total 60 -feet from centerline. The right-of-way dedication at the intersection may include additional space for signalization equipment and/or additional turn lanes. The District will purchase the additional right-of-way to be dedicated from the applicant from available funds. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 5.2 Locate a full access curb -return type driveway in alignment with the driveway located to the south of the subject site, approximately 385 -feet east of Linder Road (measured near edge to near edge). In the future, the District may restrict this driveway to right-in/out only. 5.3 Dedicate right-of-way from the centerline of Linder Road to total 60 -feet. The right-of-way dedication at the intersection may include additional space for signalization equipment and/or additional turn lanes. The District will purchase the additional right-of-way to be dedicated from the applicant from available funds. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 5.4 Construct a 5 -foot wide detached concrete sidewalk not closer than 53 -feet from the centerline of Linder Road (measured centerline to face of walk). Connect this new sidewalk to the existing sidewalk on Linder Road. 5.5 Close all access points to Cherry Lane and Linder Road except the access specifically approved with this application: direct lot access to Cherry Lane and Linder Road is prohibited. 5.6 Comply with Standard Conditions of Approval Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 C. Legal Description MARKS LAND Colleen Marks, L.S. 7045 • 6405 Ustick Road • Boise, Idaho 83704 'IT"w"` Phone: (208) 378-7703 • Fax: (208) 378-7759 • Email: survey@markslandsurveying.com REZONE DESCRIPTION A parcel of land lying in the SW1/4 SW1/4 of Section 1, T.3N., RAW., Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a point marking the SW Comer of said Section 1, T.3N., R. 1W., Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and the centerline intersection of North Linder Road and West Cherry Lane, said point being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence N.00°27'20"W. 155.00 feet along the westerly boundary of said Section 1 and the said centerline of North Linder Road to a point; thence N.89°42'08"E. 475.00 feet to a point; thence S.00"27'20"E. 155.00 feet to a point lying along the said southerly boundary of Section 1 and the said centerline of West Cherry Lane; thence S.89"42'08"W. 475.00 feet along the said southerly boundary of Section 1 and the said centerline of West Cherry Lane to the point of beginning, containing 1.69 acres, more or less. SUBJECT TO AND/OR TOGETHER WITH: Any easements or rights of way of record or in use. 7045 10-o(0- RE OVAL By ev;�� ka& MERIDIAN ,ICS DEPT BLASER PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.dac Page 1 of 1 Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Exhibit C Ci a o O "7 \= Z p= m z O knci W N LuJ N C Q z 4 3' W rn a J U 2 Z W W H O m Z H�.! M 0 [g {� nm � OO > Q a 1 O J m ,0 Z d g C � m N (Y � C W U � N O m Z •tee 'z' w a tt ti z 111 z a - Q n "'� 3l.iand 1 O �qL �' Z W Eoe<- i� J 0 a ac) WW c U (� a NH o aIn m Jo��mw -j J m `• �LLZ Wo -:i a W J aIle I O J R w z Y o M g O w Q v 00 k X w0 LD1 N _ AO'SSl 33.0ZlZA0'S VV p 1� I 1 •.7 /OI C� W �- I� � n I I I w AOYZI 'M.OZ,LLDO�d� a Z • Q 1 z � I I$w cy- W� a 3 W Z h I m Ld 8I �"n Ig ' $' ; 2 I .-DU Z W' �1 IB I�U) E i � m -00'SZI 'M�OZ,LZAON Lu +III 1 I I C� I ddg� I / �I Ir I 0 - r --- J a .uOTll •r.Oz.L-La-O•N a n — — — J I$ a Y •IS'BZfI'MAZ,CMN i3o "N ad0�l �J34N1� HAON 11 Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Rezone Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to C -C. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment is generally compatible with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; The City Council finds that commercial are permitted within the requested zoning district of C -C. City Council believes that the existing parcels in the area have already developed in a nature that is harmonious and appropriate to the proposed zone. The City Council also fords that the proposed zoning and future uses on this site can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be harmonious with, and appropriate in appearance with, the existing and intended character of the surrounding area, if the applicant enters into a development agreement with the City. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on staff's analysis, public testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments regarding whether this property should be rezoned as proposed. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The City Council does not anticipate the proposed rezone and subsequent uses will create excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. Exhibit D February 23, 2007 AZ 06-060 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT CTD Development ITEM NO. 5-G REQUEST Findings — Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 acres from RUT to R-8 & R-15 zones for Arch Rock Subdivison — south of McMillan Road and east of Linder Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Findings CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: A/ CITY PARKS DEPT: (� MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ve 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: �3d2 Phone: �� 0 2'O Emailed: St ff Initials: Materials presented at public meefings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER 9 rJW nr � 2�1-16eridiaii-- �11 ti IDAHO ''t3�f�'n di511`�kH� In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 acres from RUT to R-8 and R-15 AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 19 single-family building lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone and 7 single-family building lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone, for Arch Rock Subdivision, by CTD Development Case No(s). AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 For the City Council Hearing Date of. February 13, 2007 (Findings on the February 27, 2007, Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 13, 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 § 11-5A. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061 (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. 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 February 13, 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 § 11-5A 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 September 1, 2006, STAMPED November 8, 2006, by the City of Meridian, 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 February 13, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Twelve (12) Month 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, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11 -6B -7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061 (PAGE 2 of 4) plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 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 may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real 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 February 13, 2007 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061 (PAGE 3 of 4) 0 • By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the Z 7 day of ;�j,. , 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_64G(- COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_Z��GIi VOTED VOTED_b"A— MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED !^ (TIE BREAKER) Copy served upon Applicant, The Attorney. ublic Works Department and City By: 3l I a/) LQ -i / 7 LA' Dated: ®Z-% �LQ-7 City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061 (PAGE 4 of 4) i • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 2/13/2007 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Amanda Hess, Associate City Planner (208) 884-5533 SUBJECT: Arch Rock Subdivision • AZ -06-060 lit z_.., CM6- IDAHO M Annexation and Zoning of 5.01 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zones • PP -06-061 Preliminary Plat of 19 single-family building lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone, and 7 single-family building lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The Applicant, CTD Development, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 5.01 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential); and Preliminary Plat approval for 19 single-family building lots and 2 common lots on 3.73 acres in the proposed R-8 zone, and 7 single-family building lots and 1 common lot on 1.02 acres in the proposed R-15 zone for Arch Rock Subdivision. The subdivision will include a 13,000 square -foot, central common area, and lot sizes ranging from approximately 3,600 square feet to 7,900 square feet The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is located on the east side of Linder Road, approximately 800 feet south of McMillan Road in Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, B.M., and is currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Number SO436223551. The subject property is within the City's Area of Impact and Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed Arch Rock Subdivision subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this proiect on December 21, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City Council. a. Summary of Public Hearin i. In favor: Rod Ra1p�Applicant's Representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting,: Tom Bevin iv. Written testimony: No v. Staff presenting application: Amanda Hess vi. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Fencing =A 1 icant proposes fencing to match Cobblefield Subdivision No. 1 c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. None d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 1 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 i. ACHD supplied a draft report for the Commission hearing. Any changes made to ACHD's report following said hearing are included for the benefit of City Council. a, Summary of Public Hearinu: i. In Favor: Rod Ralphs (Applicant's Re_nresentative) ii. In Opposition: None iii. Commenting: Scott Stanfield (AWlicant's Engineerl iv. Written Testimony: None v. Staff Presenting Application: C Caleb Hood vi. Other Staff Commenting on -Application: None b. jay Issues of Discussion by ounc'l: i. Provision of an emergency vehicle turnaround ii. Oren space iii. Transitioning of densities / zoning c. Ka Council Changes to Commission Recommendation: i. None 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ -06- 060 and PP -06-061 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 13, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ -06-060 and PP -06-061 as presented during the hearing on February 13, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the annexation and/or preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all Staff, Applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ - 06 -060 and PP -06-061 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: East of Linder Road and 800 feet south of McMillan Road Assessor's Parcel Number SO436223551 NWl/ NW %, Section 36, T4N, R1W b. Owner: RMC Construction 2053 E. Fairview Avenue, Ste. 101 Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: CTD Development Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 2 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3313 W. Cherry Lane, Ste. 437 Meridian, ID 83642 d. Representative: Scott Stanfield, Mason & Stanfield, Inc. e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use — Neighborhood g. Description of Applicant's Request: 1. Date of Preliminary Plat (See Exhibit A): September 1, 2006 — STAMPED 11/8/2006 2. Date of Landscape Plan (See Exhibit A): August 1, 2006 — STAMPED 11/8/2006 h. Applicant's Justification: The gross density of the proposed development is 5.27 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density is in accord with the proposed R-8 (Medium Low -Density Residential) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zoning districts and complies with the Comprehensive Plan for the site which designates the area as "Mixed Use — Neighborhood." The subdivision will provide 19 single family homes, 7 attached single family homes, with five common lots. The subdivision will include a 13,000 square -foot, central common area, and lot sizes ranging from approximately 3,600 square feet to 7,900 square feet. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before 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, a public hearing is required before City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: December 4, 2006; December 18, 2006 (Planning & Zoning Commission) January 22 2007 February 5 2007 City Council) d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: November 22, 2006 (Planning & Zoning Commission) January 19, 2007 (City Council) e. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 11, 2006 (Planning & Zoning Commission) February 3, 2007 City Council) 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing home and vacant land. Existing structures will be removed. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: A mix of single family residential and vacant agricultural land, some of which has recently been proposed for residential development. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Residential/Agricultural, zoned RUT (Ada County) Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 3 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. East: Single-family, Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision, zoned R-8 3. South: Single-family, Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Single-family, Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision, zoned R-4 d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: There is currently sewer in N. Linder Road. Location of water: There is currently water in n. Linder Road. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: Primarily vacant land. Existing trees will be retained or relocated on site. 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches/Irrigation: N/A 5. Hazards: N/A 6. Proposed Zoning: R-8 & R-15 7. Size of Property: 5.01 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 26 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 26 4. Common Lots: 3 5. Total Lots: 29 6. Open Lots: 0 7. Residential Area: 4.74 acres 8. Gross Density: 5.27 units per acre (R-8 - 5.18 d.u./acre, R-15 - 6.60 d.u./acre) 9. Lot Sizes: Lot sizes range from approximately 3,600 to 7,900 square feet. The average lot size is approximately 5,225 square feet. g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): Linder Road is designated as an arterial road. The UDC (Table 11-2A-5) requires a 25 -foot wide street buffer adjacent to arterials. The landscape plan (Sheet L1.0) proposes a 25 -foot wide buffer along Linder. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.75 acres (15%) 4. Percentage of site as useable open space: 15% 5. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micro -paths should comply with UDC 11-3B-12. Common / open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11 -3G -3-E2). Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 4 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks: As per the R-8 zone for detached single family dwellings, and R-15 for attached single family dwellings. i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The sole access to the development will be from Linder Road via Ann Taylor Way. At this time, alternate access is not an option, as no stub connections are available to the subject subdivision from the developed properties to the east and south. Arch Rock proposes a public street stub to the County parcel to the north. Arch Rock is dependent upon redevelopment of the County parcel to the north to provide said secondary access. When that parcel redevelops, access to McMillan Road will be provided to this site through Cobblefield Crossing. ACRD is supportive of the proposal as long as all Site Specific and General Requirements are met (See Exhibit B-7). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 1, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject site is designated "Mixed Use — Neighborhood" on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the purpose of this designation is to identify key areas which are either infill in nature or situated in highly visible or transitioning areas of the city where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The following standards will serve as general guidelines for development in these Mixed Use areas: • Where feasible, multi -family residential uses will be encouraged, especially for projects with the potential to serve as employment destination centers and when the project is adjacent to State Highways 20-26, 55 or 69; • Where mixed use developments are phased, a conceptual site plan for the entire mixed use area is encouraged with the development application or, depending on the scope of the development, prior to a formal development application being submitted; and • Where the project is developed adjacent to low or medium density residential uses, a transitional use is encouraged. The following standards apply to the Mixed Use — Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan designation: • Up to 10 acres of non-residential uses permitted within the Mixed Use — Neighborhood areas as shown on the Future Land Use Map; • Up to 100,000 sq. ft. of non-residential building area; and • Residential density of 3 to 15 units / acre. The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 26 residential building lots on 5.01 acres for a gross density of 5.27 dwelling units/acre. The gross density falls within the range outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application: • 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, property. The City of Meridian plans to provide annexed in the following manner. it planned to provide City services to the subject municipal services to the lands proposed to be • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 5 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 • 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 (ACHD). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change 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 5 - Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to adjacent subdivisions via the proposed sidewalks and stub street, and micropath. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 - Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. Staff finds that the residential developments to the south and east are compatible with the proposed subdivision, and the county residential property to the north is buffered appropriately with open space. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-8 and R-15 zone. Staff finds that the requested zoning designations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. • Chapter Vl, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 — Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. One street connection has been proposed to provide redevelopment potential to the county parcel to the north. Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 6 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 Staff, believes that the proposed density (5.27 d.u.'s/acre) and zoning (R-8 and R-15) for this property is appropriate and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists single-family developments as a Permitted Use in the R-8 and R-15 zones. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation ANNEXATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed single-family development. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application, prepared by Darin Holzhey of Mason & Stanfield, Inc., on September 29, 2006, shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. All future uses on this property should not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors, and should be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. Special Considerations: Development Agreement: UDC 11 -5B -3D2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the City the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City that may require some written commitment for all future uses. As there are no issues regarding annexation of the subject property which necessitate a Development Agreement, Staff believes that a DA is not required in this instance. All applicable conditions regarding the development of this property are contained in the preliminary plat approval. PRELl1VIINARY PLAT ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed attached and detached single-family residential products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings for a preliminary plat. 1. Access: The Applicant has proposed a public street from Linder Road as the primary access to the subject development. At this time, alternate access is not an option, as no stub connections are available to the subject subdivision from the developed properties to the east and south. A public street stub is proposed to the County parcel to the north. Arch Rock is dependent upon redevelopment of the County parcel to the north to provide said secondary access. When that Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 7 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 parcel redevelops, access to McMillan Road will be provided to this site through Cobblefield Crossing. 2. Internal Streets: As mentioned above, the Applicant is proposing a public street, Ann Taylor Way, to access the site directly from Linder Road. Said street is located at the northeast corner of the subject property. Internal streets sections are proposed to be 36 -feet wide with 5 -foot wide attached sidewalks for a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. Arch Rock Road will dead-end as a public stub street to the north. The Meridian Fire Department and Planning Staff are supportive of reserving Lot 8, Block 2, for an emergency vehicle turnaround on Arch Rock Road until such time that additional access is available to the subject development. 3. Homes / Lot Sizes: The application proposes 19 detached single family homes within the R-8 zone, and one detached- and 6 attached single single-family homes within the R-15 zone. Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 1, will house three duplex units. Lot sizes with the subject development range from approximately 3,600 square feet to 7,900 square feet and average roughly 5,225 square feet. 4. Common Driveways: Three shared driveways are proposed within this development; between Lots 3 & 4, Block 1; 5 & 6, Block 1; and 7 & 8, Block 1. Per UDC 11 -2A -3B-3, the street frontage requirement for two properties sharing a common drive shall be a minimum of fifteen feet for each property. UDC 11 -6C -3D7 requires setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures to be shown on the plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. Further, UDC 11-3C- 6 requires every single-family dwelling to have a two -car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad on the lot. The asphalt for the common driveway should not count towards the required parking pad area. Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11 -6C -3D. 5. Landscaping: The Applicant has provided 0.75 acres (15%) of landscaped open space, exceeding the 5% minimum required by UDC 11 -3G -3A-1. The majority of the open space is provided in a 250 -foot by 45 -foot common area located on Lot 1, Block 2. All common areas approved as open space shall be vegetated and usable by residents. No amenities are proposed. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Arch Rock Homeowner's Association. 6. Micropaths: One micropath connection is proposed to the Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision at the southeast corner of the subject property. This will provide pedestrian cross -access between the subject development and Cobblefield Crossing. All micropaths shall be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-8. Landscaping adjacent to all micropaths should comply with UDC 11-3B. Maintenance of all micropathways shall be the responsibility of the Arch Rock Homeowner's Association. The Police Department has concerns related to visibility of the micropathway from Arch Rock Road and requests the Applicant provide sufficient lighting along the micropathway. 7. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single - point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 8 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 8. Fencing: Perimeter fencing is not shown along the north property boundary on the submitted landscape plan or preliminary plat. Staff recommends that the applicant, at the public hearing, provide testimony as to whether fencing will be constructed along the northern property boundary. The Applicant should submit a detailed fencing plan with the fmal plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All perimeter fencing must be completed prior to issuance of building permits. Fencing should taper down to a 3 foot maximum within 20 feet of all rights-of-way. Fencing adjacent to the micropathway is also required. Said fencing can be up to six feet in height, if open vision. If closed vision is used, it cannot exceed four feet in height. All fencing shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 9. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: As per UDC 11-3A-6, all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways and waterways being used as amenities, which intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. 10. Tree Mitigation: Any existing, on-site tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of those removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those that are removed. The applicant should coordinate a mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department. 11. Existing Structures: The site currently contains multiple buildings. Prior to signature of the final plat, all existing structures are to be removed, as proposed. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds that applications AZ -06-060 and PP -06- 061 substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of said AZ and PP applications subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this proiect on December 21, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval to the City Council. The Meridian City Council heard these items on February 13, 2007. At the public hearing they moved to approve the subject applications. 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 1. Preliminary Plat (Dated September 1, 2006 and STAMPED 11/8/2006) 2. Landscape Plan (August 1, 2006 and STAMPED 11/8/2006) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Services Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Settler's Irrigation District Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 9 • 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 9. Central District Health Department C. Legal Description and Annexation Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Arch Rock Subdivision: AZ -06-060, PP -06-061 PAGE 10 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE DARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 1116111+ D: MAP -200' Exhibit A E3 i • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (STAMPED November 8, 2006) Exhibit A 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2. Landscape Plan (STAMPED November 8, 2006) Exhibit A ! • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS 1.1.1 The annexation legal description submitted with the application (dated September 29, 2006, and stamped by Darin Holzhey, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.1.2 Any future subdivision, uses, and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of permit submittal. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet No. 1, prepared by Mason & Stanfield, Inc., and dated September 1, 2006, STAMPED November 8, 2006, by the City of Meridian, is approved with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 Applicant shall be required to dedicate right-of-way, construct landscaping, pathway(s), and noise mitigation along Linder Road, as required by ACHD and the City of Meridian. 1.2.3 Arch Rock Subdivision shall be subject to the UDC standards of the R-8 (Medium -Density Residential) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zoning districts. 1.2.4 Lots 5, 6, 7, & 8, Block 1, do not meet the minimum frontage standard for lots located on cul-de- sacs or street knuckles. As indicated on the preliminary plat, the Applicant shall indicate on the final plat that Lots 5 & 6, Block 1, and Lots 7 & 8, Block 1, will share a common driveway. 1.2.5 Dedicate and construct all public internal roadways to meet ACI -ID's road design standards. 1.2.6 Provide a public street connection (stub) to the County parcel to the north, as depicted on the preliminary plat. 1.2.7 The Applicant shall reserve Lot 8, Block 2, for an emergency vehicle turnaround until such time that additional access is available to Arch Rock. Place a note on the final plat note stating said lot will be utilized for a turnaround and considered non -buildable until Arch Rock Road is extended. 1.2.8 All existing 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. 1.2.9 The landscape plan labeled Sheet No. 1, prepared by Mason & Stanfield, Inc., on August 1, 2006, STAMPED November 8, 2006, by the City of Meridian, is approved with the following modifications / notes: • Provide 0.75 acres (15% of the site) for landscaped open space. • As required by UDC 11-2A-5, provide a 25 -foot wide street landscape buffer along the Linder Road. Said landscape buffer shall be exclusive on any right-of-way. • The proposed micropathway shall be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-8. All landscaping adjacent to the pathway shall meet the requirements of UDC 11-313-12. • Per UDC 11 -3A -7A -7b, all fencing adjacent to micropathways shall be either four feet (4') in height, if closed vision, or six feet (6') tall if open vision fencing is used. Modify the applicable areas within the landscape plan to indicate fencing type and composition. • Coordinate a tree mitigation plan with Elroy Huff of the Meridian Parks Department. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council signature of the Final Plat. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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). 1.2.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Arch Rock Subdivision Homeowners Association. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS—PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 Sidewalks/walkways shall be installed within the subdivision and on Linder Road pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.2 All lot lines common to a public right-of-way shall reserve a 10' utility easement. 1.3.3 The Applicant shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards shown in UDC 11-3A-11. 1.3.4 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A-15 and MCC 9-1-28. 1.3.5 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. 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. 1.3.6 The Applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. Where permanent fencing is not proposed, temporary fencing shall be installed around the subdivision boundary perimeter to contain construction debris prior to issuance of a building permit. All permanent fencing shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3A-7. 1.3.7 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.3.8 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation / preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.9 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 sewer main in N. Linder Road. The Applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this subdivision; Applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub -grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N. Linder Road. The Applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 No manholes or water valves shall be allowed in the landscape islands. 2.4 As part of the City of Meridian's `to and through" policy, the applicant shall extend sewer and water service to the end of the stub street to the northern parcel on the east end of this property. And to the north at the intersection of W. Ann Taylor Way and Arch Rock Road. 2.5 With the final plat all interior lot lines not spanned by an attached structure shall have a 5 -foot wide Public Utilities, Drainage and Irrigation easement dedicated along each side of the lot line. 2.6 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. 2.7 The Applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system in this development shall be extension of the system to the south, which is a Settler's Irrigation System. Therefore a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of a pre -construction meeting. 2.8 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, a single -point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.9 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. 2.10 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. 2.11 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from 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. 2.12 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. 2.13 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. 2.14 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. 2.15 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micropaths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 2.16 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. 2.17 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. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 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. 2.21 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. 2.22 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. 2.23 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two -hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require a fire -flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %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. 3.4 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide. 3.5 The common drives shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 3.6 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. 3.7 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.8 The Applicant shall reserve Lot 8, Block 2, for an emergency vehicle turnaround until such time that additional access is available to Arch Rock. Additionally, said turnaround shall have a clear driving surface available at all times and be, at minimum, 120 feet deep by 70 feet wide. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 Any interior fencing adjacent to common areas and micropathways, including along the drainage swale access, shall allow visibility from the street and shall not exceed four feet in height is solid fencing is used. 4.2 The Police Department has concerns related to visibility of Lot 17, Block 1, from Arch Rock Road. Provide sufficient lighting along the micropathway. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 Pathway and Trail Standards: The proposed pathway shall be constructed in accordance with the Meridian Park Department's requirements. 5.2 Standard for Mitigation of Trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 5.3 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 6. SANITARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 6.1 SSC has no comments related to the application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 7.1.1 Construct the internal street, W. Ann Taylor Way, as a 36 -foot street section with rolled curb, gutter, and 5 -foot attached concrete sidewalk; within 50 -feet of right-of-way for the section internal of the westernmost stub street The first 200 feet of W. Ann Taylor Way (proposed as a %2 street section / entry road) should be constructed with a minimum 24 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, and 5 -foot concrete sidewalk on the south side and a 3 -foot gravel shoulder and barrow ditch on the north side within a minimum 40 feet of right-of-way. The right-of-way for W. Ann Taylor Way should be brought all the way to the north property line along the entry section (approximately the first 200 feet) to allow for future connectivity to the adjacent parcel. W. Ann Taylor Way should align with the existing entry road to the Bridgetower Subdivision to the west. 7.1.2 Construct a stub street to the north of the site located approximately 180 -feet east of the Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 intersection with Linder Road, with signage at the terminus stating: "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7.1.3 Construct a stub street to the north of the site located approximately 120 -feet west of the east property line (W. Ann Taylor Way) with a temporary turnaround at the terminus; AND signage stating: "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." Should the turnaround be located cross Lot 8 (proposed) it should encompass the entire lot until such time that a connection is made to the north. 7.1.4site's 41 fiaet &ein eenter4iae. if any peAien ef the sidewalk is leeated outside of the r -i& of way, then OR Provide ACHD with a road trust for the construction of sidewalk along Linder Road (approximately 315 -feet of frontage x $20/lineal foot = approximately $6300). 7.1.5 Coordinate the design of access to Linder Road (W. Ann Taylor Way) with the ACHD project manager for the noted McMillan & Linder intersection project in the FYWP (Gary Inselman: 208-387-6170). 7.1.6 Coordinate the design and radii of the meandering internal street section with District Development Review Staff and the Fire Department prior to submittal of construction drawings. 7.1.7 Construct two knuckles with islands for W. Ann Taylor Way. 7.1.8 Except to the access specifically approved with this application, no access is allowed to Linder Road; and a notation of this restriction should be made on the final plat. 7.1.9 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 7.2.1 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 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 Exhibit B 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 13, 2007 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 DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the Applicant or the Applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the Applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the Applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the Applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. 8. SETTLER'S IRRIGATION DISTRICT 8.1 All irrigation / drainage facilities along with their easements must be protected and continue to function. 8.2 A Land Use Change Application must be on file prior to any approvals. 8.3 A license agreement MUST be signed and recorded prior to construction of any S.I.D. facilities. 8.4 Any changes to the existing irrigation system such as relocation, tiling, and landscaping must be approved by Settlers Irrigation District. 8.5 All storm drainage must be retained on-site. 8.6 The development must supply irrigation access to all lots within the above-mentioned subdivision. If the developer wishes to have Settlers Irrigation District own, operate, and maintain the pressure irrigation system an agreement needs to be in place prior to the pre -construction meeting. 9. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 9.1 After written approvals from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve the proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 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. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit B 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 C. Legal Description and Annexation Map ason Professional Enonears, Land & veyvrs and Peters 314 Bal dida, St Udmil, 10 l nf e1jr I$n Ph (208) 454-10Fax (208) 454-0979 e-mail. dlsctzhea.u�nn ng �us FOR: CrT.I#. JOB NO.: 3N1306 DATE- September V. 2006 ANNEXATION BOUNDARY An annexation parcel of lodbeing a poitionof the N1ia't14 NRa'114 of Section 36, Township 4 North, image 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corer of said NW 41VWI/4; Tice S 00* 14142" W for -a distance of 686.89 few along the west boundary of said N4' IA NW 114 to the POINT 'OF BEGINNING; Tbence 8 89®25' WE for adistance of 787.97 feet to a: paint on the westerly boundary of Cobblefield Crossing on; Thi S 26* 09' 18" W for a 4stance of 33893 feet along said westerly boundary to a point; Thence bt 89P 26143" W for a distance of 639.96 fesa along the north boundary of Cobblefleld Subdivision to a paint on the west boundary of said NWI14NQd'I14; Thence K 00* 14'42" E a distance of 305-80 feet along the west boundary of said NWI/4 NW 114 to the POINT OF BEGIN?MG. This parol cow 5.011 ams more nor less. SUBJECT TO: All existing Yights of way and twements of record or implied appeasing on tht above'iescri"bed pWWj of laud. Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 to i...!6'vsS.�..t 'A Al_9d%.C�i•'.df e_ !x, FW, C.T.U. W F Tit. a 09 A paW qfWd beim &pordOu Oft`Iw. iU4T1'W114 af:S M,X T . * 4i�strtl�, Range 1 �N� a Mme, Cotte Iii, lY as Wows: COMMMOing at the northwest mmer ofs d lqWV4IrJW114; S 00* If 42" W fora ifigtm= of W- feei along the w=t boundary of said NWV4 N1W114 to a paini; ThOnm S 89° 26 f 8'° B for a distance of 178.00 fere -to the POINT OF B% 1',NjN Thence S 89°.2+6' 1 8" E for a ftarm of 699:97 feast to a1 p 3W on the Wei bomdaq of Cobblef dd C Thesm S 268 08'18" W for a digacc of3.38.93 fmt gmW sald weswly boundary `ve a p N W 26' 47 W for a &tante of 461.91 feet along tba of Cobblefield cr seting to a point; N OV 46'45"E for a.&M=e of 96.42 fes► the-bqIhming ofa terms, Thmm 9235 ket along said owm ting to ft d& thmugh an atwe of 1050 49' 19, have a radius Of 50.00 feat, and Whm long dad bum N 25-4 27 2r W .fora diftace of 79.77 lbetto a point. 9,50 feet at* sdd curve tares to the leis am angle *f 2r 12' 30-, ha,, g a adius of 20,00 fed..md whose l mg, mrd beets N 13' 5W 57" Efo r a,disUrice of9 4I fOd to a poim rx4a x,�. Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 Exhibit C E hr Exhibit C 0 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 Exhibit C • i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: a. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Applicant is proposing to zone the subject property R-8 (Medium -Density Residential) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential). 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 this Staff Report. b. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Council finds that single-family attached and detached dwellings are allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8 and R-15 as Principally Permitted Uses. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with varying lot sizes and other dimensional requirements which conform to the proposed zoning designation. c. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. However, Staff and the Commission recommends that Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. d. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site, as conditioned in the staff report. e. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11 -5B -3.E). Council finds that all essential services 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 compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and this is a logical expansion of the City limits. Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property is 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: a. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is compatible with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Council supports the proposed density and proposed plat layout, with recommended changes, as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. b. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Exhibit D 0 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) c. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their own cost, Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. d. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff and the Commission recommend Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this fording. (See Exhibit B, Agency Comments and Conditions, for more detail.) e. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and Council is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to Council's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff and the Commission recommend 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 and The Commission are unaware. f. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council fords that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Staff and the Commission recommend 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 and the Commission are unaware. Exhibit D February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27,2W7 APPLICANT ITEM NO. Jr -I REQUEST Approve New Beer and Wine Licenses for Health Nuts Natural and Organic Market by Denise Stevenson at 1756 W. Cherry Lane, Ste 110: 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 Refer to Distributed Application See Attached Approval See Attached Approval See Attached Approval Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-1 REQUEST Approve Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Jayo Construction: 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 Agreement / Memo Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. 1:1 Memo 1-:1 L City of Meridian Public Works Dept. To: Mayor De Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn CC: File Date: 2/20/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for 2/27/07 City Council Meeting FEB 2 � 200 City of Meridian City Clark Office The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the follovAng items be placed on the 2/27/07 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Jayo Construction. Typical Streetlight Agreement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Streetlight Agreement for Hacienda Subdivision by Jayo Construction and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. 0 Page 1 �Fe6. 15. 2007 12:48PM Aligay Electric Nn_ 5379 P. 7 ADA COUNTY RECO41U. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 3 BOISE IDAHO 03/08/07 01:36 PM DEPUTY PW -RECO QED- REQUEST OF III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111I III City of Merldlan 107033600 STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Jayo Construction Inc., pertaining to the street lights in Hacienda Subdivision #1, a residential development in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows- Jayo Construction Inc. has provided 19 street light poles, concrete pole bases, fixtures, bulbs, and components to the residential development known as Hacienda Subdivision #1 in Meridian, Idaho. The parties acknowledge that the 19 street light poles and appurtenances were specially ordered items, not customarily used in residential developments in Meridian, Idaho. 2. Jayo Construction Inc., or it's assigns, agree to replace, repair and provide any required maintenance of any of the above mentioned street lights, and/or appurtenances thereof, that may hereafter be broken, damaged, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agreed that, or its heirs, successors and assigns, shall keep the lights operational at all times, it being understood by the City that bulbs, and/or, ballast, do bum out and that the City will allow reasonable time to replace them. 3. It is agreed that the City of Meridian authorize and pay for the electrical service to be supplied to the 19 street lights located in Hacienda Subdivision #1 in the usual and customary manner. 4. It is agreed that the City of Meridian, because Idaho Power Company will not maintain the bulbs and ballast or provide any maintenance, will cuter into a Schedule 40 Agreement with Idaho Power Company, and not a Schedule 41 Agreement, which in proper cases provide that Idaho Power Company would provide maintenance, bulbs, and ballast. It is also agreed that lighting served under the Schedule 40 Agreement must be controlled by a photo electric device of the "fail off' type, S. It is understood and agreed that Jayo Constriction Inc. will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to Hacienda Subdivision #1 H.O.A. when said Homeowners Association is formed and operational. STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 1 ,Feb, 15. 2007 12:49PM A4ay Electric • No, 5319 F, 3 This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Jaya Construction Inc. its heirs, successors and assigns, and the CITY OF MERIDIAN. ATTEST: Dated this rw day of ` 20 CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and Political subdivision of the State of Idaho By Mayor DeWeerd. .L = William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk V, r 191 ATTEST: Secretary Jayo Construction Ine. By President STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 2 t'o Feb, 15. 2007 12:49PM Al llooway Electric No. 5319 P. 4 STATE OF IDAHO, ) a ss. County of Ada, ) On this Aqday of &/1 20, C7. before me, the undersigned, a, Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Mayor DE MY -RD, and W'ILLYAM G. BERG, JR., ]mown to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk 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 fust above written. SEAT. STATE OF ,) ss. County of ) 6�4 ti&'Zd ` v- NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT -M, 1,Id MY CohMSSION EXPIRES On this . day of 20kL, before me, the undersigned, a Notary .Public in and for said State, person appeared ,��"� ra. and �-- lyknown to me to be thPresident an ecretary of Jayo Construction Inc., arW who executed the within instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WDEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. 40 p NOTARY PUBLIC FOR �]D 0 j Att p- RESIDING AT A��A T ' to MP*dp * a MY CONMSSION EXPIRES pusv*C C 7's 0V STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT L�i February 27, 2007 ITEM NO. 9. REQUEST Approve Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Reflection Ridge Subdivision by Corinthian Communities, Inc.: 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 Agreement / Memo ,� K 9 V%�/ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. a Memo To: Mayor De Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn CC: File Date: 2/20/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for 2/27/07 City Council Meeting • City of Meridian Public Works Dept, CE FEB 2 -o 2007 City of Meridian City Clerk ®fficc The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the 2/27/07 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Refelction Ridge by Corinthian Communities Inc. Typical Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Temporary Sanitary Sewer Easement for Refelction Ridge by Corinthian Communities Inc and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. 0 Page 1 ADA COUNTY RECURUER J. UAVIU NAVARRU AmUUNI A BOISE IDAHO 03/08/07 � PM DEPUTY Pato Thompso III 111111f11111II'I('I'I�IIIII(II I SII RECORDED—REQUEST OF 1��035 City of Meridian TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT Ctr. vthi cx✓� Covnvuua�� s Mnc THIS INDENTURE, made thi& day of � 07between 91 West State Street Suite E Eagle Idaho 83616 the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors,. and the City of Meridian, Ada. County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a temporary sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline and pump station to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline and pump station from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for a temporary easement for the operation and maintenance of a sewer pump station and sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A -Legal Description, and B -Drawing) The temporary easement hereby granted is for the purpose of operation of a sanitary sewer pump station and sewer line and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times until the sanitary pump station and related lines are no longer required. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said temporary easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, or until the off-peak pumping station is no longer which shall be upon the Black Cat Trunk connecting to the Glacier Springs Diversion Manhole and accepting influent. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the temporary easement will be released back to the Grantor at such time that the Black Cat Trunk connects to the Glacier Springs Diversion Manhole, and is accepting influent. This connection will remove the need to provide the sanitary sewer service through the sanitary pump station and associated pipe lines. Sewer Main Easement Temp-EASMT SWR rev.doc ! 0 THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this temporary easement, which would interfere with the use of said temporary easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and temporary easement hereby granted shall become part of, or he within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and temporary easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said temporary easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. Sewer Main Easement Temp-EASMT SWR- rev.doc Pama- OL.0 • 0 GRANTOR: W�W'Rress- i - Secretary STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this day of 2007 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared j IAAy► and . known or identified to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, 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 fist above written. (SEAL) NOTARY PU14LI FOR IDAHO ®.� Residing at: (� Commission Expires: (,�•r'� Q 01Z 19 Sewer Main Easement Temp -EA P ^ rev.doc .1..,i.. GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN \>�v Tammy de We ayor ®ORAL Attest by William G. Berg, City Clerk�����d" �® Approved By City Council On: STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada ) On this 2 day of In (tiATI: i , 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. (SEAL) �A� " NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: �-Vf W c- , , ) 6� Commission Expires:_ 10 - f1�- I 1 Sewer Main Easement Temp -EAS ®]WR rev.doc • 0 FOX Land Surveys, Inc. 4696 Overland Rd. STE 162 0 Boise Idaho 0 83705 0 208-342-7957 0 208-342-7437 FAX TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER PUMP STATION DESCRIPTION A PORTION OF THE NORTH % OF THE SOUTHEAST %, SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO A portion of the North % of the Southeast'/, Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows; Commencing at a found 5/8 itch rebar with no cap (set a plastic cap stamped "FLSI PLS 7612" marking the South 1/16 Comer common to Sections 29 and 30, from which a found 5/8 inch rebar with plastic cap stamped "BRIGGS PLS 4998" marking the % Comer common to said Sections bears North 00030'07" West, a distance of 1,326.13 feet; thence North 75°51'59" West, a distance of 282.38 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve to the left, the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said non -tangent curve to the left having a length of 17.36 feet, a radius of 115.00 feet, a central angle of 8039'01", tangents of 8,70 feet, and a long chord which bears South 85°10'27" West, a distance of 17.35 feet to a point of tangency; thence South 80050'56" West, a distance of 32.31 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right; thence along said curve to the right having a length of 16.27 feet, a radius of 85.00 feet, a central angle of 10058'06", tangents of 8.16 feet, and a long chord which bears South 86°1959" West, a distance of 16.25 feet to the beginning of a compound curve; thence along said compound curve to the right having a length of 67.97 feet, a radius of 969.00 feet, a central angle of 4°01'08", tangents of 34.00 feet, and a long chord which bears North 86°10'24" West, a distance of 67.95 feet to a point of tangency; thence North 84009'50" West, a distance of 93.30 feet to the beginning of a curve to the left; thence along said curve to the left having a length of 38.47 feet, a radius of 1,031.00 feet, a central angle of 2008'16", tangents of 19.24 feet, and a long chord which bears North 85°13'58" West, a distance of 38.46 feet to a point; thence North 00000'00" East, a distance of 13.20 feet to a point; thence South 90000'00" East, a distance of 63.29 feet to a point; thence North 00°00'00" East, a distance of 5.57 feet to a point; thence South 90000'00" East, a distance of 103.66 feet to a point; thence North 00000'00" East, a distance of 5.86 feet to a point; thence South 90000'00" East, a distance of 28.78 feet to a point; P thence South 00°00'00 West, a distance of 8.78 feet to a point; thence South 90°00'00 East, a distance of 12.83 feet to a point; thence South 00000'00" West, a distance of 1.50 feet to a point; thence South 90000'00" East, a distance of 55.77 feet to a point; thence South 00°00'00" West, a distance of 23.94 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 7,212 square feet (0.165 acres), more or less. Refer to the attached `Temporary Sanitary Sewer Pump Station Description" sketch. Fox Land Surveys, Inc. Timothy J. Fox, President, PLS 7612 END OF DESCRIPTION TJF:Iaj W:\PROJECTS0005\05-028.PP"P,OJECIIDFSCRI MONS1528LIFTDESC.DOC 11 C, M -sV9ZU All.LO.OSo00 N J r� C" N O M O U co N bEO O M ""i C6 U) lij ach N r LL ^ N O O U) W co - I T �n r- O co - W " U) CNI o Co c oU o M Z OO Qp 0 T o0 pOILo CO) � CC) O VJ O OIO ��o o C� U) T � [H v V1�W V- W w a� o0 O n W (100 0 h+q W N p CO 0 O O O O I Fid co O O a - o L(j W W C:) A H� ZC-50 O 0 ` U) CO O O WI J W m o CD \ O ®IN OO OCrj\,J O 008IO�N Oz coi yU W � W 0 O N M I N Z T E U E`( OR J 0) rn N co Cl Pt0 Z W N bEO O M ""i C6 CO r M 2 U Z19 a� LO 6 d N O F- N O co O M T T T CO CO 'T CO 00 OD LO CO U CO Z U) Z H Z o ', O KO N J Q O M O 0) Q I -- ~ i �y Q O O _O T o CO T LL V J W 00 ;o T O 'V M o O T CD N D 00 O p coLo Oi Csi Lr) T MO T U' N CA M 'It Z W t0 T t-� CO 1-4 T Co M J CO N N V U T U T U T U J 0) rn N co Cl Pt0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-L REQUEST Approve Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hoogland at 1625 E. Bentley Drive: 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 Agreement / Memo Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. c: Memo To: Mayor De Weerd & City Council Frorm Kane Glenn CC: File Date: 2/21/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for 2/27/07 City Council Meeting 0 City of Meridian Public Works Dept. FEB 2 1 2007 City of Meridian City Clerk Office The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the 2/27/07 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hoogland at 1625 E Bentley. The Hoogland's are losing their well due to a right of way purchase for the widening/ overpass of Locust Grove. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Agreement for Hookup to City Services for Property Outside City Limits for Pim and Pamela Hoogland at 1625 E Bentley and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. 0 Page 1 ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. Mom NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 ! BOISE IDAHO 03/08/07 01:361R1f RECORDED- REQUEDEPUTY Pd ST OF III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilllll 111 Clay of Meridian 107033590 AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS : 1625 Bentley Drive, Meridian THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this .- 20CL5 , by and between CITY OF ME day of �c Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", a ITT c°rpo tion of the State of hereinafter defined and hereinafter referred to as "SEWER/WATER USER": � as 1 • RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS, "Sewer/Water User" is the sole owner, in law and/or in equity of certain tract of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, hereinafter referred to as the "Property"; and 1.2 WHEREAS, Idaho Code §50-323, provides and empowers cities to. establish, create, develop, maintain and operate Sewer/Water systems; and 1.3 WHEREAS, "City" operates and maintains and develops as Sewer/Water system; and 1.4 WHEREAS, the "City" has enacted an ordinance governing its Sewer/Water system codified in Meridian City Code § 9-4-26 and 9-1-16; and 1.5 WHEREAS, the "Sewer/Water User" is the owner of "Real Property" hereinafter described which is presently located outside of the city limits of the "City"; and 1.6 WHEREAS, the "Sewer/Water User" is desirous of obtaining connection to the Sewer/Water to serve the "Real Properly" and the "City" is willing to provide that connection to the Sewer/Water service to the "Sewer/Water User" subject to the terms and conditions and consideration of this agreement, and it is specifically agreed that as a specific consideration of the "City's" willingness to enter into this agreement that the "City's" "Ordinance" and "Policy/Regialations" which govern its Sewer/Water system be included as terms and conditions of this agreement and that the "Sewer/Water User" provide perpetual consent to annexation of the "Real Property" in to the "City". AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS -1 Wage • 2. DEFINITIONS: • For all purposes of this agreement the following words, terms, and phrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided for, unless the clear context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise: 2.1 "City": means and refers to the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho. 2.2 "Sewer/Water User": means and shall refer to and/or the person who is the owner of the real property. 2.3 "Real Property": means and shall refer to certain parcel(s) of real property located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length together with improvements thereon. 2.4 "Ordinance": means and shall refer to the City's ordinances that appertain to the regulation and control and use of its Sewer/Water system presently at Meridian City Code § 9-4-26 and 9-1-16, and this definition specifically includes any prospective amendments and/or recodifications to said ordinance or any parts thereof, and shall also refer to any other ordinance of the City of Meridian governing the "Sewer/Water System". 2.5 "Policy/Regulations": means and shall refer to any City Council enacted policy and/or regulation of its Sewer/Water system. 2.6 "Sewer/Water System": means and shall refer to the City's Sewer/Water system. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 3 • INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 4. PROVISION OF SEWER/WATER HOOKUP SERVICE: The "City" agrees to authorize a connection to the "Sewer/Water System" to service the "Real Property" subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS —2 vaq 0 • 5• CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF SEWERIWATER USER FOR THE HOOKUP OF THE SEWER/WATER LINE TO THE REAL PROPERTY: The hookup and assessment costs relative to the "Sewer/Water System" connection shall be the responsibility of ACHD (Ada County Highway District). 6. ORDINANCE APPLICATION: The "Ordinance" and "Policy/Regulations" apply to the Sewer/Water service and connection and are herein incorporated as specific terms of this agreement and at such time or times as the "Ordinance" and/or "Policy/Regulations" is/are amended or recodified, this agreement is automatically amended in accordance therewith. 7. ANNEXATION: At such time as the real property becomes legally eligible for annexation into the "City", the "Sewer/Water User" herein gives consent to such annexation, agrees to pay the annexation application fee, agrees to apply for annexation, and diligently pursue annexation into the City. This provision of this Agreement is a written request and application for such annexation in accordance with I.C. § 50-222 or any amendments or recodification of said statute. 8. HOOKUP AND SERVICE FEES: The charges for hookup, inspection, and service fees shall be in accordance with the provisions of the "Ordinance" and/or "Policy/Regulations" as are applicable for real properties outside of the city limits. 9. REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: "City" shall record either a memorandum of this Agreement or this Agreement, including all of the Exhibits, at "Sewer/Water User" cost, and submit proof of such recording to "Sewer/Water User". 10. DEFAULT: default. Any failure to perform the terms and conditions of this agreement shall be a 11. REMEDIES: 11.1 This Agreement shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS -3 page -3 by either "City" or "Sewer/Water User", or by any successor or successors in title or by the assigns of the parties hereto. Enforcement may be sought by an appropriate action at law -or in equity to secure the specific Performance of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and obligations contained herein. In addition, remedies available to the City include but are not limited to, termination of Sewer/Water service to all users located on the real property covered by this agreement. 11.2 In the event of a default, written Notice of Default shall be served and defaulting_party shall then have thirty (30) days after delivery of notice of default to correct the same -before the non -defaulting party may seek any remedy provided for herein.. 11.3 In the event the performance of any covenant to be performed hereunder by either "Sewer/Water User" or "City" is delayed for causes which are beyond the reasonable control of the party responsible for such .performance, which shall include, without limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or similar causes, the time for such performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay. 12. NOTICES; 12.1 Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY: c/o Public Works Director City of Meridian 660 E. Watertower, Suite #200 Meridian, Idaho 83642 with copy to: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho 83642 PROPERTY OWNER: Pim and/or Hoo and 1625 Bentley Drive Meridian. ID 83642 12.2 A party shall have the right to change their address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS -4 age n 0 • 13. 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 attorney's 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. 14. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the,failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform. 15. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: - - This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' _ respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives, including "City's" corporate authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding on the owner of the property, each subsequent owner and each other person acquiring an interest in the Property. Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the Property, or portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. 16. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision of this Agreement is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised therefrom and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. 17. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition and understandings between "Sewer/Water User" and "City" relative to the subject matterhereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between "Sewer/Water User" and "City", other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to "City", a duly adopted resolution of "City". AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS _ 5 P 0 0 18. TERMINATION: At such time as the "Real Property" is annexed into the City, this agreement shall terminate except for any default that exists at such time shall still be enforceable pursuant to the. terms of this agreement. 19. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Agreement shall be effective at such time as both parties have executed this Agreement. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and made it effective as hereinabove provided. ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, BY RESOLUTION NO. bA . - / it,111111 . . \\\� allgzc�l CITY OF MERIDIAN By: MAYO DE WEERD AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS -6 Page k_J0LL 0 STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada) LJ On this_ day of , in the year 2000 before me, the undersigned., a Notary Public, personally appeared, ' jam, vnknown or- identified to me to be the property owner, who executed the instrument. WI - IN WITNESS*WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year �► Z� first above written. (SEAL) Notary Publ'c or Idaho Residin p�' ` My Commission Expires: •. `. ------ STATE ----STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada On this day of MCL!At,,( .in the year 200 1, before me,. the undersigned, a Notary Public, personally appeared TAMMY DE WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., .known or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the .City. of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the persons that executed the instrument on behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. •soon., (SEAL) ,,' oT•q�p : Sh .(,� � 3111-1.a� : Notary Public for Idaho o ; Residing at: 1.7-Yie ,. My Commission Expires: AGREEMENT FOR HOOKUP TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN'S SEWER/WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS -7 paw raga t ut i 1625 E Bentley THIS MAP NOT INTENDED ICOR NAVISATIONAL USE http://208.186.142.152/*mfffimtPtintMap;jsp?title=I625°%20E%20Bentley 2/21/2007 'V 3 Of OD of Z N Co Oo AP -P Oo f7 N Oo Oo Co s xa a �riJ s s s mePat g Z Oo e a a o g s X a 33 y� r1* a Fn fn m �' a m m W i�r1 p (_� A m I 7C .-p Z -vC� p Z 1 C� 10"3 j*1 rri rn N m�� M0 0 g V m j Fn 71 M, a a February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -M REQUEST Approve Legal Department Budget Amendment for Deputy City Attomey: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY See Attached Spreadsheet CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. a Sharon Smith From: Bill Nary Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 20071:52 PM To: Will Berg; Sharon Smith Cc: Tammy de Weerd; Reta Cunningham Subject: For next week's agenda a Page 1 of 1 Can we add Budget Amendment for Deputy City Attorney. I can do it as a Department Report or it can go on consent. Whatever the Mayor prefers. Bill Nary City Attorney/HR Director City ofMeridian 703 Main Street Meridian, ID 83642 208.898.5506 or 208.898-5503 (office) 208.884.8723 " 2/21/2007 Ll Fiscal Year: - 2007 Department: Le aVHR/IT 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. U I would like to move our current Assistant City Attorney to a new Deputy City Attorney position as of the April 1 pay period. This would be the second Deputy position and would be responsible for meeting coverage, daily legal assignments, and will be the primary attorney assigned to Code Enforcement issues. We have grown the Code Enforcement section of MPD and now have three full time enforcement officers and one full time supervisor. The growth in the area is expanding and the need for active and responsive legal assistance will be an asset for the Department and the City. Many of the Code issues are not criminal related and having a dedicated and experienced attorney at this level will be extremely important. Additionally this position will be focused on the Community Development and Entitlement City status requirements. We have experienced a few matters lately in preparation for litigation that this position can assist with. A part time position is insufficient to meet the growing and timely needs of the City. With this enhancement I am requesting to create a new Deputy position and transfer the funding from the Assistant position for the remainder of this budget year. In FY 178 / would like to retain the part time Assistant position In our department and funded for the next level of service growth that we experience. We will return before hiring a part time attorney to demonstrate the Increase in work load and the need for additional help. I went to avoid the need to do another budget amendment mldFyear If the need exists. See Finance Note Below 2. What unexpected event or situation requires appropriation outside of the annual budget and appropriation process. The growth in legal services has been steady and Increasing. The area of Code enforcement has taken a greater emphasis and time over the last 12 months. The entitlement process for community development funding will take additional legal oversight. 3. Describe the proposed method of financing this request, include the fund (s), and any expected revenues or funding sources outside the City. We currently have a balance of $15,000 for outside legal expenses. We have been fortunate in the last two budgets to have used very little of these funds. I anticipate a return of approximately $10,000 from this line item in this budget year. Barring some unforeseen circumstances our current litigation costs are being charged back to the enterprise fund or the City Hall fund. As of the date of this request we have one potential claim that may require outside legal expenses from this line item. Any additional infusion or need of funds in this area would be of a matter that would be directly brought to the Council for their approval. AENDMENT HAS BEEN ADDED Reclass Outside Services to Wages $ 101000.0( Total Budget Available for new Position $ tee__ 45,022.0( Budget Costs for New Position(Annual) $ 64;682.01 Additional Budget Dollars needed for FY'07(Annual) $ 14,830.01 On-going Expenditure for FY'08-Full Time Position $ 64,682.01 Outside Services for FY'08 $ 15,000.00 Total On-going Expenditure for FY'08 $ 79.682.01 Todd-^aJ20/07 Annual Apr -Sept Current. Bud et Oct -Mar Additional Dollars Needed Wages $ 44,5881 $ 22,294 $ 29,4181 $ 14,709 $ 7,585 Wages - FSLA Fire only '.' $ Overtime I$ Uniform Allowance if applicable i $ FICA $ 3,411 $ 1,705 $ 2,250 $ 1,125 $ 580 PERSi $ 4,905 $ 2,452 $ 3,236 $ 1,618 $ 834 Workers Com $ 178L$4 $ 118 $ 59 $ 30 Em to einsura $ 11,600 $ - $ 5,800 $ 64;682 $ 35,022 ss$ 17;511 $ 14,830 Use This Form for Appropriation Changes and Budget Transfers CITY of MERIDIAN BUDGET AMENDMENT Descriptive Title: I DeRuty Number of Full Time Positions 1 City Attorney 1 Account Code Description of Expenditure Proposed Amount Personnel Costs: 41300 es $ 44,588 41300 es - Fire onl41210 jFSLA ertime rFICA 41304 form wance if applicable) $ - $ _ 42021 $ 3,411 42022 RSI $ 4,905 42023 Workers Com $ 178 42025 Employee Insurance $ 11,600 TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $ 64,682 1 annual cost only need 1/2 year of salary $ 32,341 6month of budget remaining $ (17,511) to move operating contract legal budget $ (10,000) Operating Expenditures: 1 time ExpendituresT Expenditures Yr to Yr Expenditures TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $ - $ _ Capital Outlay: 1 time Expenditures TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS $ - GRAND TOTAL of REQUEST $ 4,830 APPROVALS: Note from CFO - recommended going through budget process and waiting until FY08 - second recommendation is to ask for full time attorney through the FY08 budget process and not use amendment process to add positions Pre -Council Cell GCA K� �C�� �!7 Q �� (q Financial ManagemerA & PLAnning Date of '''r Pre -Council Mayor - Da e 2 —270 7 Date of Council Approval qer 123, ��A ,a 4 �'M SIGNED COPY MUST BE RETURNED TO OFFICE FINANCIAL MANAGES CHECK MONTHLY BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT TO ENSURE APPROVEI"3`�X{V1161Ii44T[#�AS BEEN ADDED Fiscal Year: 1 2007 Department: I Legal/HR/IT 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. I would like to move our current Assistant City Attorney to a new Deputy City Attorney position as of the April 1 pay period. This would be the second Deputy position and would be responsible for meeting coverage, daily legal assignments, and will be the primary attorney assigned to Code Enforcement issues. We have grown the Code Enforcement section of MPD and now have three full time enforcement officers and one full time supervisor. The growth in the area is expanding and the need for active and responsive legal assistance will be an asset for the Department and the City. Many of the Code issues are not criminal related and having a dedicated and experienced attorney at this level will be extremely important. Additionally this position will be focused on the Community Development and Entitlement City status requirements. We have experienced a few matters lately in preparation for litigation that this position can assist with. A part time position is insufficient to meet the growing and timely needs of the City. With this enhancement I am requesting to create a new Deputy position and transfer the funding from the Assistant position for the remainder of this budget year. In FY '08 I would like to retain the part time Assistant position In our department and funded for the next level of service growth that we experience. We will return before hiring a part time attorney to demonstrate the increase in work load and the need for additional help. I want to avoid the need to do another budget amendment mid- year if the need exists. See Finance Note Below 2. What unexpected event or situation requires appropriation outside of the annual budget and appropriation process. The growth in legal services has been steady and increasing. The area of Code enforcement has taken a greater emphasis and time over the last 12 months. The entitlement process for community development funding will take additional legal oversight. 3. Describe the proposed method of financing this request, include the fund (s), and any expected revenues or funding sources outside the City. We currently have a balance of $15,000 for outside legal expenses. We have been fortunate in the last two budgets to have used very little of these funds. I anticipate a return of approximately $10,000 from this line item in this budget year. Barring some unforeseen circumstances our current litigation costs are being charged back to the enterprise fund or the City Hall fund. As of the date of this request we have one potential claim that may require outside legal expenses from this line item. Any additional infusion or need of funds in this area would be of a matter that would be directly brought to the Council for their approval. a • February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-N REQUEST Approve Task Order 2.1 for Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CH2MHILL for $34,000.00 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See Attached Agreement / Memo CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. L�] Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer • CET"D FEB 2 2 2007 �itY of Meridian Aity Clerk Office Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis. CH2M HILL has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $34,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater services agreement approved by City Council on the 12"' of December, 2006 for the Engineering Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects. This project provides engineering services for the model calibration, review, and development costs for Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment and Bioaugmentation, updated flow and growth estimates, recommendations for capital projects for fiscal year 2008 and a schedule for recommended improvements. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CI -12M HILL for $34,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks for the construction of the pressure sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the pressure sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. 0 Page 1 • a Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC. A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC for the construction of the sanitary sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the sanitary sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $15,000. This is an extension of the agreement between the City of Meridian and JUB Engineers, Inc. approved by City Council on the 28th of January, 2003 for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project. This project provides construction engineering services for the completion of the construction for the 2006 Trunk Sewer Project which consists of construction of approximately 11,439 lineal feet of 36 -inch PVC gravity sewer, 4,387 lineal feet of 21 -inch PVC gravity sewer and 561 lineal feet of 10 -inch PVC water main. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2 with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $15,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 TASK ORDER NO. 2.1 UNDER THE MASTER AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF MERIDIAN AND C112M HILL, INC. This Task order is entered into by and between City of MERIDIAN (OWNER) and C112M HILL, Inc. (ENGINEER), according to the terms and conditions of the Master Agreement (AGREEMENT) for Professional Services, dated January 1, 2007. See Attachment A for the Scope and Fee for Task 2.1. All other terms and conditions of the original agreement will remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below: For C112M HILL, Inc. date C Name Title For City of Meridian dated this day of , 2007. Name Title 0 Attachment A �il Scope of Work For Task Order 2.1 Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis City of Meridian INTRODUCTION This scope of work is the second in a series of tasks that will constitute a plant optimization study for the City of Meridian Ustick Wastewater Treatment Plant (UWWTP). The first task order included coordination with regulatory agencies and a desktop analysis that evaluated existing unit plant capacities. We anticipate completion of this task in mid-February. This task order scope includes a model calibration, review and development of costs for Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment (CEPT) and Bioaugmentation, updated flow growth estimates, recommendations for capital projects for fiscal year 2008 including a recommendation for plant expansion if needed, and a schedule for recommended improvements. We anticipate this task order to be completed by the end of March. The third task will conduct field testing, review of field test results, and review of the step feed and other treatment processes. We anticipate this to be done by the end of May. SCOPE OF WORK Task 1 Model Calibration This task provides for calibration of the hydraulic model using field water level measurements to be done in one day. Task 2 Development of Costs for CEPT and Bioaugmentation CEPT and bioaugmentation are considered leading candidates for plant optimization. Based on the Pro2D results, initial sizing of new CEPT and bioaugmentation treatment facilities will be performed to support conceptual level construction cost estimates. Task 3 Update Flow Growth Estimates Using recent flow data, existing COMPASS and previous master plan estimates will be updated so that anticipated future flows can be matched with plant optimization and plant capacity rerating work to support facility planning and near term budgeting. Page 1 of 3 C: -1 L J Task 4 Recommendations for Capital Improvement Projects Based on the results of tasks 1-3, and the parallel filtration study, recommended capital improvements plan will be developed for fiscal year 2008 budgeting, and conceptually, for the next five ,years. Task 5 - Project Management and Quality Assurance/Quality Control CH2MHILL will be responsible for planning, managing, and executing the work in accordance with the schedule, budget, and established quality expectations. The project management tasks include the following work activities: • Coordinate between tasks and team members. Document meeting decisions and action items, assign activities to team members, and follow up to ensure timely resolution. • Monitor project progress, including work completed, work remaining, budget expended, schedule, estimated cost of work remaining, and estimated cost at completion. • Monitor project activities for potential changes, anticipate changes when possible, and with City approval, modify project tasks, task budgets, and approach. • Manage the quality control review of work activities and project deliverables. • Prepare and submit a monthly invoice. FEE ARRANGEMENT As consideration for providing the services enumerated under the Statement of Work, the CITY shall pay CH2MHILL the amount shown in the table below in accordance with the AGREEMENT. The fee shall be based on time and materials, 3.2 RLM. The cost for performing the Scope of Work shall not exceed this amount without a formal amendment to this task order that increases the Scope of Work. Task Fee 1.0 Model Calibration $ 6,303 2.0 Development of Cost for CEPT and Bioaugmentation $ 4,388 3.0 Update Flow Growth Estimates $ 5,534 4.0 Recommendations for Capital Improvement Projects $ 11,400 5.0 Project Management $ 6,375 Total $ 34,000 SCHEDULE This task will be completed by March 30, 2007. OTHER PROVISIONS Page 2 of 3 • This Statement of Work will become part of the referenced AGREEMENT when executed by both parties. Page 3 of 3 L:] 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-0 REQUEST Permanent Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks: 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 shall become properly of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Memo #�e V_,�/ a • Memo P&CEf" " 2 2 2a07 1ty of IVieridiaxi To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green City Clerk Office From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis CH2M HILL has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $34,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater services agreement approved by City Council on the 12"' of December, 2006 for the Engineering Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects. This project provides engineering services for the model calibration, review, and development costs for Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment and Bioaugmentation, updated flow and growth estimates, recommendations for capital projects for fiscal year 2008 and a schedule for recommended improvements. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CH2M HILL for $34,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks -- for the construction of the pressure sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the pressure sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. 0 Page 1 a • Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC for the construction of the sanitary sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the sanitary sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No 2 JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $15,000. This is an extension of the agreement between the City of Meridian and JUB Engineers, Inc. approved by City Council on the 2e of January, 2003 for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project. This project provides construction engineering services for the completion of the construction for the 2006 Trunk Sewer Project which consists of construction of approximately 11,439 lineal feet of 36 -inch PVC gravity sewer, 4,387 lineal feet of 21 -inch PVC gravity sewer and 561 lineal feet of 10 -inch PVC water main. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2 with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $15,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 ADA COUNTY RECORDER JOID NAVARRO AMOUNT 00 BOISE IDAHO 03/08/07 01:36 PM CEPUTY PattiThompsonECORDORDED-REQUEST OF iy of Meridian 1070, 3597 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this day of , , 20between Bitterereek, LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks, the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a sanitary sewer and water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer and water is to be provided for through underground pipelines to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipelines from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for an easement for the operation and maintenance of sanitary sewer and water mains over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of sanitary sewer and water mains and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs or performing other maintenance, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement BCLLC City of Meridian Sanitary Sewer • THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. ;k, LLC Jewett i nAging Member Sparks Charlo Sparks STATE OF IDAHO ) ) ss County of Ada ) On this 9-0'1Lh day of 1 Be61,,,,,Y , 20OZ, before me, the undersigned, allotary Public in and for said State, personally appeared James L. Jewett and, known or identified to me to be the Managing Member of Bittercreek, LLC, and Charlotte Sparks and Hermis Sparks, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement BCLLC City of Meridian Sanitary Sewer 0 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fisj0AVPMftji. NOT4Rr «� NOTARY P LIC FOR IDAHO ft61.�G Residing at: �'A Commission Expires: N 29 ' al3 Tammy de Weer ayor 'rte - UL 5 Attest by William G. Ber, , Ci Clerl�-/ , ` Approved By City Council On: JJfit ti T ESTI STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada ) On this '� �' cl day of 6) 2Q6_ 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. (SEAL) Sh m P--� NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at: try-U,�hc-,- Jo( Commission Expires: j b -- / 5 -1 F Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Sanitary Sewer BCLLC City of Meridian � 1 I 7177 I I rr_cI �y w&" avow —V.? mrm S I I I I I -- I I I I I ti FN 48 - Mir - - ttL� 911 3 s • GPS, BOUNDARY, E TOPOGRAPHIC AND A.L.T.A. ARR-N4g" SURVEYS CONSTRUCTION SWUNG land Surveying, Inc. 3D SCANNING 1121 E. State Street - Suite 105 - Eagle, Idaho 83616 - office: 1-208-939-7373 - fox: 1-208-939-7321 Job No. 06217 J.B.F. 2-14-07 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CITY OF MERIDIAN 50' Force Main Sewer and Water Easement Exhibit "A" A 50 foot Force Main Sewer and Water Easement that is 25 feet each side of the following centerline located in the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho described as: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and running thence S89'1 7'16"E 1160.74 feet along the North line of said Section to the Point of Beginning; thence S00°42'48"W 204.91 feet; thence N89° 17' 12"W 310.00 feet; thence S00°4214811W 403.55 feet to a point of curve; thence Southeasterly 408.83 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data.: Radius=685.00', Delta=34°11'46", Chord Bearing and Distance=S16023'05"E 402.79 feet); thence S33°28'24"E 126.61 feet to a point of curve; thence Southeasterly 146.42 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data; Radius ---150.00', Delta=55055'44", Chord Bearing and Distance=S61026'16"E 140.68 feet); thence S89024'08"E 15.00 feet; thence N00035'52"E 25.00 feet to a point of terminus marking the center of a 50 foot radius to be included in said easement area. BLACKCAT ROAD L- t Q O ISN!) SURVEYING, INC. 1121 & STATE STREET SUM 103; EAGLE; MAW 83616 (208) 939-7373: FAX (208 39 -Ml pN NCITY o P 0 sv 0 S. 34 T. 3 N., R.1 E.,B.M. OF MERIDIAN 2-14-07 PRaWCT- SKEET OF DRAIIAi. BY: ✓BF 06-217 L7fC� BY. ORL February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-P REQUEST Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement Contract for Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project with Bittercreek, LLC: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See Attached Agreement / Memo CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. Memo nCEIVED FEB 2 2 2001 City of Meridian To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green Otty Clerk Office From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis CH2M HILL has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $34,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater services agreement approved by City Council on the 12n' of December, 2006 for the Engineering Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects. This project provides engineering services for the model calibration, review, and development costs for Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment and Bioaugmentation, updated flow and growth estimates, recommendations for capital projects for fiscal year 2008 and a schedule for recommended improvements. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CH2M HILL for $34,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks for the construction of the pressure sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the pressure sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. 0 Page 1 Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC. A permanent easement has been signed ----- by Bittercreek LLC for the construction of the sanitary sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the sanitary sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $15,000. This is an extension of the agreement between the City of Meridian and JUB Engineers, Inc. approved by City Council on the 2e of January, 2003 for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project. This project provides construction engineering services for the completion of the construction for the 2006 Trunk Sewer Project which consists of construction of appro)amately 11,439 lineal feet of 36 -inch PVC gravity sewer, 4,387 lineal feet of 214nch PVC gravity sewer and 561 lineal feet of 10 -inch PVC water main. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2 with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $15,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. • Page 2 • ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. 60 NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 f BOISE IDAHO 03/08/07 01:38 PM DEPUTY Patti Thompson 4 RECORDED -REQUEST OF III I)II�I'III')IIIII'I'IIIIIII III CIV of Meridian 107033596 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this 16day of mb , NaS between Bitterereek LLC, the parties of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantors, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a sanitary sewer and water main right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer and water is to be provided for through underground pipelines to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipelines from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the right-of-way for an easement for the operation and maintenance of sanitary sewer and water mains over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS D and C) The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of sanitary sewer and water mains and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors and assigns forever. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that after making repairs or performing other maintenance, Grantee shall restore the area of the easement and adjacent property to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and maintenance. However, Grantee shall not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easement that was placed there in violation of this easement. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement BCLLC City of Meridian Sanitary Sewer THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, trees, brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part of the right-of-way and easement hereby granted shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further effect and shall be completely relinquished. THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first herein above written. Bitterc eek LLC James k. Jewett, Maliaging member STATE OF IDAHO ss County of Ada ) On this day of 2 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appe ed James L. Jewett and, known or identified to me to be the Managing Member, respectively, of the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS E ' e hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year fist, y10 • �� �% • ; NOTARY P IC FOR IDAHO Q; Residing at: �,�• FATE 0�•�.` Commission Expires: -PAT% • GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement BCLLC City of Meridian Sanitary Sewer 0 V,%r t Zi;;r 00 Tammy de Weerd ayor Attest by William G. Berg, City Clerk. Approved By City Council On:r 1iffM6i IViViVit STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada ) On this day of {i' ?(�{ �; , 201L I, 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. �p'� Abp �+'• S��G{i� �� �7 Lt `�-� (SEAL) r'$ °1 ; NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO s a' Residing at: --7� Commission Expires: 6 • .S = / / Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Sanitary Sewer BCLLC City of Meridian Dagle w GPS, BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHIC AND AJ-.T.A. AR W SURVEYS s land Surveying,,CONSTRUCTION STAIGNG Inc. CONSTRUCTION SCANNING 1121 E. State Street - Suite 105 - Eagle, Idaho 83616 - office: 1-208-939-7373 - fax: 1-208-939-7321 Job No. 06217 J.B.F. 2-14-07 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CITY OF MERIDIAN Sewer and Water Easement Exhibit "D" A Sewer Easement that is located in the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho described as: Commencing at the North Quarter corner of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada. County, Idaho and running thence S89118'1 8"E 1307.13 feet to the Northeast corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section; thence S00038'53"W 1325.77 feet to the Southeast comer of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section; thence N89°21'00"W 312.00 feet along the South line of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section to the terminus point of South Bittercreek Ave.; thence S00038'5311W 89.22 feet to a point of curve; thence Southwesterly 347.97 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius --200.00', Delta=99041' 11', Chord Bearing and Distance= S50°29'28"W 305.71 feet); thence N79039'56'W 196.12 feet to a point of curve; thence Westerly 326.33 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data: Radius=500.00', Delta=37023'41", Chord Bearing and Distance=S81 °38' 13"W 320.57 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence Westerly 192.78 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius --400.00', Delta --27'36'50", Chord Bearing and Distance=S76°44'48"W 190.92 feet); thence N89°2647"W 1217.28 feet; thence N00°00' 00"E 295.08 feet to a point of curve; thence Northerly 151.76 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius=1020.00', Delta=08031'29", Chord Bearing and Distance N04°15'45"E 151.62 feet); thence N76°10'41"W 25.10 feet to the Point of Beginning (said point also being a point on a curve); thence Southerly 30.17 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data: Radius ---I 045.00', Delta=l 03911411, Chord Bearing and Distance=S7049'29"W 30.17 feet); thence N76010'41"W 153.47 feet; thence N66000'00"W 112.52 feet to a point on a curve; thence Northeasterly 31.52 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data: Radius=50.00', Delta=36� Distance=N34017'00"E 31.00 feet); thence S66000'00"E 1( S76010'41"E 144.79 feet to the point of beginning. NOO'37'470E 166.27' C /AAj a • � 500'5244_� 105.98' tiv N/ / o w/ r � /V 507.4,929 1 ' NOO'00'00"W=1R-1 p45 O - _ 51.76' 295.08' =1020.00 151.62' - N 4'15'45 A -R-R o WiS=.734 T.3 N., R.1 E., B. M. o CITY OF MERIDIAN ND LASURVEYING, INC. o DATE. 2-14-0 PBOlBLT• SEEET OF 1121 & STATE STREET SUM 105, EAGLE, IDAND 83616 � O DAdWN.. BY. ./BF 06-217 (208) 939-7373, FAX (208)939-7521 CWCAV. BY. M t��j 3 vgrom � n j K v N �. ►v I Q; 25' W w Z av w -�� cl cm zoo ' z �46z M pp• �p fir/ pp w • � 500'5244_� 105.98' tiv N/ / o w/ r � /V 507.4,929 1 ' NOO'00'00"W=1R-1 p45 O - _ 51.76' 295.08' =1020.00 151.62' - N 4'15'45 A -R-R o WiS=.734 T.3 N., R.1 E., B. M. o CITY OF MERIDIAN ND LASURVEYING, INC. o DATE. 2-14-0 PBOlBLT• SEEET OF 1121 & STATE STREET SUM 105, EAGLE, IDAND 83616 � O DAdWN.. BY. ./BF 06-217 (208) 939-7373, FAX (208)939-7521 CWCAV. BY. M t��j 3 vgrom � n j K GPS, BOUNDARY, ARTOPOGRAPHIC AND A-I-T.A. SURVEYS g CONSTRUCTION STAKING Land Surveying, Inc. 3D SCANNING 1121 E. State Street - Suite 105 - Eagle, Idaho 83616 - office: 1-208-939-7373 - fax: 1-208-939-7321 Job No. 06217 J.B.F. 2-14-07 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CITY OF MERIDIAN 50' Sewer and Water Easement Exhibit "C" A 50 foot Sewer and Water Easement that is 25 feet each side of the following centerline located in the North 1/2 of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho described as: Commencing at the North Quarter corner of Section 34, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and running thence S89'1 8'18"E 1307.13 feet to the Northeast corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section; thence S00°38'53"W 1325.77 feet to the Southeast corner of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section; thence N89°21'00"W 312.00 feet along the South line of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of said Section to the terminus point of South Bittercreek Ave. (said point being the Point of Beginning); thence S00°38'53"W 89.22 feet to a point of curve; thence Southwesterly 347.97 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius --200.00', Delta --99'41'1 1', Chord Bearing and Distance= S50029'28"W 305.71 feet); thence N79°39'56' W 196.12 feet to a point of curve; thence Westerly 326.33 feet along said curve to the left (Curve data.: Radius --500.00', Delta -37°23'41 ", Chord Bearing and Distance=S81 °38' 13"W 320.57 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence Westerly 192.78 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius=400.00', Delta=27°36'50", Chord Bearing and Distance=S76°44'48"W 190.92 feet); thence N89°26'47"W 1217.28 feet; thence N00100'00'E 295.08 feet to a point of curve; thence Northerly 151.76 feet along said curve to the right (Curve data: Radius-- 1020.00', adius=1020.00', DeltaF=08031'29", Chord Bearing and Distance=N04015'45"E 151.62 feet) to a point of terminus. t ' • a WO ff away larle-W6009) xv.i roc-ere (909) LIZ-90 !9r iLB '11l ygiff s 91MV MM 7 3 AIM 3 tS a X MVIS *3 1911 .10 .Lff"s 22mroad x0-PI-z Wjyff 0 AWQlW9N JO AJIJ C I to Wyv M('� 1..1.. L .I.tri - - - -- -_ Cli. R Q Oslo Ir L,, I - - z- UM - -- I-- - -- - HOZ U M _ ___ IZ9alSl. I I 3„S�I�.i�dN I 0 - -- 09-86 - • 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-Q REQUEST Approve Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services No. 2 for Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project with JUB Engineers for $15,000.00 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See Attached Agreement / Memo CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 0 Memo nCET"D FEB 2 2 2007 City o f Meridian To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green City Clerk Office From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis CH2M HILL has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $34,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater services agreement approved by City Council on the le of December, 2006 for the Engineering Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects. This project provides engineering services for the model calibration, review, and development costs for Chemically Enhanced Primary Treatment and Bioaugmentation, updated flow and growth estimates, recommendations for capital projects for fiscal year 2008 and a schedule for recommended improvements. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for Task Order 2.1 for the Plant Optimization Desktop Analysis with CI -12M HILL for $34,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC and Charlotte and Hermis Sparks for the construction of the pressure sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the pressure sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it. 0 Page 1 Permanent Easement Contract for Bittercreek LLC. A permanent easement has been signed by Bittercreek LLC for the construction of the sanitary sewer on their property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent easement contract for the construction of the sanitary sewer on this property for the Mason Creek Lift Station and Pipelines Project and authorize the Mayor to sign it Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $15,000. This is an extension of the agreement between the City of Meridian and JUB Engineers, Inc. approved by City Council on the 2e of January, 2003 for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project. This project provides construction engineering services for the completion of the construction for the 2006 Trunk Sewer Project which consists of construction of approximately 11,439 lineal feet of 36 -inch PVC gravity sewer, 4,387 lineal feet of 214nch PVC gravity sewer and 561 lineal feet of 10 -inch PVC water main. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Black Cat Phase 3 Authorization for Additional Services — No. 2 with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $15,000 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 �O rC J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 S. Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 o Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 • Telephone (208) 376-7330 • FAX (208) 323-9336 AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL, SERVICES - NO. 2 CLIENT: CITY OF MERIDIAN PROJECT NAME: Black Cat Phase 3 J -U -B Project Number: 10-05-135 The following additional items of work on the project referenced above have been or will be provided by J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. These additional services are a supplement to the scope of services contained in J -U -B's existing Agreement for Engineering Services for this project approved by City Council on September 9 2005 Additional Services: Adiust contract amount for Construction Services to for additional work effort. J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. was verbally authorized to provide these services by: n/a n/a Name Date Unless otherwise noted below, J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. will provide these additional services on a time and materials basis, using the Firm's standard billing rates, or if applicable, the billing rates established in the initial Agreement for Engineering Services. wax= Other Basis for Payment: to a new cantnrt nrnmint I^. Dated this day of 2007. City of Meridian J -U-13 ENGINEERS, Inc. Print or Type Client Name Client or Representative Signature Tammy de Weerd Mayor Print or Type Name and Title Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk By: ltom7l V - 'A Project R presentafive Signature Phillip H. Krichbaum P.E.— Project Manager Print or Type Name and Title February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -R REQUEST Permanent and Temporary Easement ROW Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Aoratos, LLC, Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC, Strada Commercial LLC, and Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: 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: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Memo Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. i City of Meridian Public Works Dept. Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Michael Cole CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 i -RECEIVEIL) FEB 2 2 20P CAC Of Melndiaj�_ city Clerk Office Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Aoratos LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments LLC . A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association Inc. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. 0 Page 1 i� Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Commercial LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 • 0 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, ID 83642 PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT CONTRACT Project # and Description: 104)6-059 Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 Parcel # and Owner: R5915720010 & R5915720040 Kung Victory LLC Date of Offer. January 8. 2007 THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY CONTRACT, made this ..Z day of _effC�2007, between the City of Meridian, acting by its Mayor and Council, herein called "CITY" and Aoratos LLC, Evans Real Estate Investments LLC Strada Commercial LLC Strada Bellissima Commercial Association Inc herein called "GRANTOR". WHEREAS, subject to the terms outlined below, GRANTOR agrees to deliver to the CITY a Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement and Temporary Construction Easement included herewith as Exhibit "A": NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The City shall repair the portion of the grantor's property encumbered by the described easement to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking the construction. 2. The City, at it's own expense, shall landscape to within 5 -feet of the right-of-way of Meridian Road as approved by the Landscape Encroachment Agreement #3-07-008. The landscape shall include grass seed, any required topsoil, and sprinkler lines. 3. The City agrees to attempt to minimithe impact of the temporary easement, in the event of new building construction within the Grantor's property. 4. If a building permit is issued on any lot encumbered by the temporary easemetrt, the portion of the temporary easement necessary to construct the building shall revert back to the grantor at such time as building construction begins. 5. The City agrees to raise the water valve can, located within the southerly portion of the landscape buffer, to grade. 6. This Contract shall not be binding unless and until executed by the Mayor and/or their authorized representatives. The parties have herein set out the whole of their agreement, the performance of which constitutes the entire consideration for the granting of said easement and shall relieve the CITY of all fiu*er claims or obligations on that account or on account of the location, grade, construction and maintenance of the proposed sanitary sewer line. 7. The parties whose names appear below as Grantors, covenant and warrant that they are the OWNERS of the property to which this docurnent applies, are fully authorized to execute this document and forever bind themselves, their successors and assigns and the subject property to the terms set forth herein. S.'TabRc Wadm gm Cole%vaos Easwmmfems easew= rnnaaer dx Page 1 of 2 0 • IN WTFNESS WEREOF, the parties have executed this contract the day and year first above written. CM OF MERIDIAN By: Tammy de Weerd, Mayor ATTEST: William Berg, Jr., City Clerk Date approved by Council: GRANTOR Evans Real E Investments, LLC, an Idaho limited liability co y By: Richard Evans, Member Strada Commercial, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company ,,12 ---2 By: Aoratos, By:. Str' mmercia sociati0 Inc. By ,;Be'chard Evans, 'dein S:1Pnb&e worb Mke CQ'OM%Ms FasmueutWvm CUMM cmMsadoc Page 2 of 2 Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 13, 2007 ---------- ....... .. EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A PERMANENT EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast Y4 of the Southeast V4 of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast'/ of said section, North 00°3824" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89 ° 25'18" West, 95.00 feet, thence South 00* 38'24 West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said right-of-way South 89"25'18" East, 5.10 feet; thence along a curve to the right 31.44 feet, having a radius of 20.00 feet, a delta of 90°04'04", and a long chord which bears South 44"2316' East, 28.30 feet to the Westerly right-of-way of South Meridian Road; thence along said right-of-way South 00°38'45" West, 1,190.75 feet; thence North 89°21'14" West, 5.01 feet; thence South 00"3846" West, 16.97 feet; thence South 55°4548" West, 24.37 feet; thence North 00'3824" East, 1,241.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.706 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. SND E ?-to-S to I# RMHtTLK.Ihc PAPHMV-06-059 Black cat PH4Tasements\10-06-059-SbadaPerm.doc I I S Ifs Al CORNER Y JL zuo 2 , SCALE: 1 "=200' — P.O. CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS ITANGENTI DELTA I CHORD BEARING CHORD C1 1 31.44 20.00 1 20.02 nnd'nd" 1 0 A A z',�"r 4 � �� EMBT A-2 IOF a LINE TABLE LINE _ LENGTH _ BEARING L1 95.00' N89'25'18"W L2 25.00' S0038'24"W L3 5.10' S8925'1 WE L4 5.01' N89'21'14"W L5 16.97'SOO 38'46"W L6 24.37' S55'45'48�W — P.O. CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS ITANGENTI DELTA I CHORD BEARING CHORD C1 1 31.44 20.00 1 20.02 nnd'nd" 1 0 A A z',�"r 4 � �� EMBT A-2 IOF a Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 15, 2007 EXHIBIT B-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A TEMPORARY EASEMENT -....._"------- --------- �.. ___ ....... That portion of the Southeast % of the Southeast % of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; theme along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast Y of said section, North 00"3g74" Fast, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street, thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93 North 89.25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00°38'24" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way 5, West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 00°38'24" West, 988.94 feet to the Northerly boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2, Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1; thence along said Northerly boundary line North 89°2136" West, 50.00 feet, thence North 00*3874" East, 988.88 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street; thence South 89°25'18" East, 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 1.135 acres, more or less. TOGETHER WITH: That Portion of the Southeast % of the South-east % of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast a of said section, North 00°3874" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Betlissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Bo North 89°25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00`3824" West, 1,180.58 feet, the POINT 93, BEGINNING; thence 11265; POINT OF Bok t thence continuing South 00°3824" West, 86.07 feet to the Northerly right - thence along said right-of-way the following three courses: y of West victory Road; 1 • South 55.4548" West, 24.35 feet; 2. thence North 89"21'16" West, 57.09 feet; 3. thence along a non -tangent curve to the right 73.33 feet, having a radius of 318.31 feet a delta of 13 ° 11'55", and a long chord which bears North 84°48'44" West, 73.16 feet; , thence North 00.3824" East, 94.21 feet; thence South 89'21'16" East, 150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0,339 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: �NIJ J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc.,S,Cs1$�'8 Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. G' `n•0''L 15 014 OF g0 GEH/TLK:Ihc P.,"M10-06.059 Bleck Cat PH474sements110-06-059-StradaTemp.doc N IN O I0 2 W. VICTORY RD P.O. S 1fe CORNER N. r ' L SCALE: 1 "-200' ° M 6 toj o? Ml8ff B-2 1 1 LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING Li 95.00' N89'25'18"u L2 25.00' S00'38'w-u L3 50.00' S8925'1 WE L4 50.0Q' N89'21'36"W LS 94.21' N00'3824"E L6 1 0.00' S89 21'16"E L7 86,07' S00'38'24"W L8 24.35' S55'4548"W L9 57.09 N89'21'16"W Ml8ff B-2 1 1 • February 23, 2007 s MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -S REQUEST Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Aoratos, LLC: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Memo Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Michael Cole CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting FEB 2 2 2007 city 01,enas iffy Clare Office The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Prosect with rte' Aoratos LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Aoratos LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Prosect with Evans Real Estate Investments. LLC . A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Prosect Wth Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. 0 Page 1 Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Commercial LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the pennanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 • ADA COUNTY RECORDER�tVID BOISE IDAHO 04/26/07 01: PM DEPUTY Neava Haney RECORDED—REQUEST OF Meridian CIN NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 107059186 This sheet has been added to document to accommodate recording information SANITARY SEWER EASMENT BLACK CAT SEWER PHASE 4 BRIAN SMITH (AORATOS LLC) 0 • SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, effective this day of , 2007, by the undersigned Aoratos LLC., who maintains a mailing address of 960 B adwa i Ave Ste. 500, Boise, ID 83706, hereafter referred to as "GRANTOR" for the benefit of the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho that maintains a mailing address of 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereafter referred to as "CITY. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to provide a sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline from time to time by the CITY; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto the CITY the right-of-way for the permanent and temporary construction easements for the construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A-1, A-2, B-1, & B-2) The permanent easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a sanitary sewer line, together with maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the CITY, with the free right of reasonable access to such facilities at any and all times. The temporary construction easement is for the purpose of construction of a sanitary sewer line and related incidental work. The temporary construction easement shall expire upon completion of the sanitary sewer line. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said permanent easement and right-of-way unto the said CITY, its successors and assigns forever. 1. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantor shall have the right to use and improve the easement area for uses which do not interfere with the use of the said easement or the purposes stated herein. Such uses shall include, but not be limited to landscaping, a tree selection that is coordinated with the CITY, ingress, egress, driveways, roads, parking, temporary storage, farming, pathways and utility extensions. THE GRANTOR(S) do hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures within the area described for this easement that would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 1 of 3 2. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the CITY, in constructing and in making future repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and replacement. However, the CITY will not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent structures, large trees or brush placed within the area described in this easement. THE GRANTOR(S) does hereby covenant with the CITY that he is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first hereinabove written. Aoratos LLC By: rian S ith, Member STATE OF IDAHO) ) ss County of Ada ) d On this Xa day of F roti/ , 2007, before me bm M SCI LA Pi A , personally appeared Brian Smith, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose names is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 OTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO *,®w, My Commission Expires on Rcg of SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 • Beneficiary: CITY OF MERIDIAN OF Co BY: Tammy erd, Mayor = .. ATTEST: �� - - , e i liam Berg, Jr., City ClerkV 2 r asp • ° �g 6�; o.�°c 5'4 Date approved by Council: _'1�20 STATE OF IDAHO, ) : ss. County of Ada ) On this �l'3day of V A C�-'1 C�— , 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. (SEAL) , �dNOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT:� • MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: lo -15-11 eMMrr'' � 17'1.1 � �♦ SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 3 of 3 Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 13, 2007 EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A PERMANENT EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast Y/ of the Southeast V/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast 1/ of said section, North 00°38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89 ° 25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00' 3874" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said right-of-way South 89"25'18" East, 5.10 feet; thence along a curve to the right 31.44 feet, having a radius of 20.00 feet, a delta of 90°0404", and a long chord which bears South 44'23'16" East, 28.30 feet to the Westerly right-of-way of South Meridian Road; thence along said right-of-way South 00°38'45" West, 1,190.75 feet; thence North 89921'14" West, 5.01 feet; thence South 00"3846" West, 16.97 feet; thence South 55°4548" West, Z4.37 feet; thence North 00"3924" East, 1,241.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.706 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. RMH/TL (:Ihc PAPHM10-06-059 Black Cat PH4\Eamnents\70.06-09-StmdaPerm.doc S 14e CORNER W. TP.O—WB� 29 2s J Q I 24 I BLOCK 2 u 20 ISIMA 19 _ �? 2 SCALE: 1 "=200' CURVE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 95.00' N89'25'18"W L2 25.00' S003824"W L3 5.10' S89'25'18"E L4 5.01' N89'21'14"W L5 16.97' S00 3846"W L6 24.37' S55 -45-48"W CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS 1 JTANGENT DELTA I CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl. 31.44 20.00 20.02 90`04'04" 1 S44'23'16"E 4 28.30' 'V 0 •sea.=lNie�a EXHIBIT A-2 4 1 Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 15, 2007 EXHIBIT B-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A TEMPORARY EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast V4 of the Southeast'/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast % of said section, North 00'38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89'25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00*38'24" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 00°3874" West, 988.94 feet to the Northerly boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2, Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1; thence along said Northerly boundary line North 89 ° 2136" West, 50.00 feet; thence North 00°38`24" East, 988.88 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street; thence South 89°25'18" East, 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 1.135 acres, more or less. TOGETHER WITH: That portion of the Southeast Y4 of the Southeast Y4 of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast confer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast V4 of said section, North 00°3824" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89°25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00"3824" West, 1,180.58 feet, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 00"3824" West, 86.07 feet to the Northerly right-of-way of West Victory Road; thence along said right-of-way the following three courses: 1. South 55°45'48" West, 24.35 feet; 2. thence North 89"2116" West, 57.09 feet; 3. thence along a non -tangent curve to the right 73.33 feet, having a radius of 318.31 feet, a delta of 13°11'55", and a long chord which bears North 84°48'44" West, 73.16 feet; thence North 009 38248 East, 94.21 feet', thence South 89"21'16" East, 150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.339 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. GEH/TLKAhr, PAPM10406.059 Black Cat PH4Wzsemen1s1104*-059-5b adaTienp.doc AML S Jos CORNER • o .O.B. I � 29 I f g Q 24 I f eLoc�c I 20 M N aof o S ADA LLISIMA 19 '�? SCALE: 1 "=200' o SU DTVI t N 15 w I p' p pate. 16 10 Z d'J, L% tg0? yo I I go�c�l1E OF 7 I ! I �' E. Wo`,�,�, I I 1 6 s f I Q �I �I I 4 L6 I I---- �{ f �f ..._ _.. W. VICTORY RD 25 d .a.c.F- •W.� l-` BLACK CAT PHASE 4 r , rJ U B,� TEMPORARY E 1 EMterr e-2 CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13-11-55-N84'48'44"W 73.16' LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 95.00' N8925'1 8"W L2 25.00' soo•3s'24"W L3 50.00' S89'25'18"E Cl L9 Nb L4 50.00' N89'21'36"W 24 19 L5 9 ,21' N00'38'24"E L6 0.00' S$9'21'1fi"E P L7 86.07 S00'38'24"W L8 24.35' S5545'48"W L9 57.09' NN89-21'16"W CURVE TABLE 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -T REQUEST Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Evans Real Estate investments, LLC: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Memo C� Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Michael Cole CQ Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting FED 2 City Of Aleii cha_ City Flay y.:_ cjfjic The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Aoratos LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments LLC A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. 0 Page 1 0 0 Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Commercial LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 BOISE IDAHO 04(26107 01:42 PM DEPUTY Nava RECORDED - REQUEST OF Merldlan City 107059184 This sheet has been added to document to accommodate recording information SANITARY SEWER EASMENT BLACK CAT SEWER PHASE 4 RICHARD EVANS (EVANS REAL ESTATE I VESTAffiNTS LLC) • SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, effective this A 2 day of -�6 , 2007, by the undersigned Evans Real Estate Investments LLC., who maintains a mailing address of 9560 W. Pebble Brook Ln., Garden City. Id. 83714, hereafter referred to as "GRANTOR"for the benefit of the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho that maintains a mailing address of 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereafter referred to as "CITY". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to provide a sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline from time to time by the CITY; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto the CITY the right-of-way for the permanent and temporary construction easements for the construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A-1, A-2, B-1, & B-2) The permanent, easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a sanitary sewer line, together with maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the CITY, with the free right of reasonable access to such facilities at any and all times. The temporary construction easement is for the purpose of construction of a sanitary sewer line and related incidental work. The temporary construction easement shall expire upon completion of the sanitary sewer line. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said permanent easement and right-of-way unto the said CITY, its successors and assigns forever. 1. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantor shall have the right to use and improve the easement area for uses which do not interfere with the use of the said easement or the purposes stated herein. Such uses shall include, but not be limited to landscaping, a tree selection that is coordinated with the CITY, ingress, egress, driveways, roads, parking, temporary storage, farming, pathways and utility extensions. THE GRANTOR(S) do hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures within the area described for this easement that would interfere with the use of said easement, for the SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 1 of 3 • purposes stated herein. 1] 2. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the CITY, in constructing and in making future repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and replacement. However, the CITY will not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent structures, large trees or brush placed within the area described in this easement. THE GRANTOR(S) does hereby covenant with the CITY that he is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first hereinabove written. Evans tate Inves nts, LLC By: Richard Evans, Member STATE OF IDAHO) ) ss County of Ada ) On this ,;Q'�& day of 61glojo, , 2007, before me L rr,,ssq M er-9c„*P6k , personally appeared Richard ans, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose names is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same, SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 re c� t� core" OTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO ®J My Commission Expires on 06 -AuA - OR ci SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 0 0 Beneficiary: CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: Tammy de d, Mayor IM = ATTEST: i am Berg, Jr,, City Clerk' %�� , \ Date approved by Council: STATE OF IDAHO, ) . ss. County of Ada ) On this I day of 2a'� civ , 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. (SEAL) SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 3 of 3 SI'7aj /'1 S�j T {�— NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDINGAT: Jd MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: /O Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 13, 2007 EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A PERMANENT EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast % of the Southeast 1/a of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast �/a of said section, North 00`38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89°25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00`38'24 West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said right-of-way South 89"25'18" East, 5.10 feet; thence along a curve to the right 31.44 feet, having a radius of 20.00 feet, a delta of 90'04'04", and a long chord which bears South 44"2316" East, 28.30 feet to the Westerly right -of --way of South Meridian Road; thence along said right-of-way South 00°3845" West, 1,190.75 feet; thence North 89.21'14" West, 5.01 feet; thence South 00"3846" West, 16.97 feet; thence South 55°4548" West, 24.37 feet; thence North 00"3824" East, 1,241.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.706 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.LS. RMH/TLK:Ihc PAPHK110-06-059 Black Cat PH41Easements\10-06-059-StradaPerm.doc S K$ CORNER lou —�o SCALE: 1"=200 En 0440 is Z113lo7) 101 - P. CURVE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING Li 95.00' N89'25'18"W L2 25.00' S00'38'24"W L3 5.10' S89'25'1 WE L4 5.01' N89'21'14"W L5 16.97' S00 3846"W L6 24.37' S55 445'48"W P. CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH 1 RADIUS ITANGENTI DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 31.44 20.00 1 20.02 90-04'04" S44'23'16"E 1 28.30' 4 EM BIT A-2 1 Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 15, 2007 EXHIBIT B-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A TEMPORARY EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast A of the Southeast A of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast V4 of said section, North 00°38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89'25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00 3874" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 00°38'24" West, 988.94 feet to the Northerly boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2, Strada Beliissima Subdivision No. 1; thence along said Northerly boundary line North 89'21'36" West, 50.00 feet, thence North 0003824" East, 988.88 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street; thence South 89°25'18" East, 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 1.135 acres, more or less. TOGETHER WITH: That portion of the Southeast % of the Southeast Y44 of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast % of said section, North 00°38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the, plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89 °2518" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00"3824 West, 1,180.58 feet, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 00 3824" West, 86.07 feet to the Northerly right-of-way of West Victory Road; thence along said right-of-way the following three courses: 1. South 55°4548" West, 24.35 feet; 2. thence North 89"21'16" West, 57.09 feet; 3. thence along a non -tangent curve to the right 73.33 feet, having a radius of 318.31 feet, a delta of 13 1155", and a long chord which bears North 84"48'44" West 73.16 feet; thence North 00°38'24' East, 94.21 feet; thence South 89"21'16" East, 150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.339 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. 'l.+:sTa C�t5/o-) z�6 G'Cy�Y Ega GEH/TLKAhc PAPM10-06-059 Black Cat PH4Tzsementsll0-06-059-StradaTemp.doc i S As CORNER N. . O LINE TABLE LINE Z BEARING 4 95.00' cd W. VICTORY RD P.O. L SCALE: 1 "= 02 0' CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13'11'55" N84'48'44"W 73.16' �•u� 1 WF URARY EASEMENT i ,,� .4 MlBrr &2 10F i LINE TABLE LINE I LENGTH. BEARING L1 95.00' N89'25'18"W L2 25.00' S00'38`24"W L3 50.00' S8925'18"E L4 50.00' N89"21'36'W L5 94.21' N00'38`24"E L6 150.00' S89'21'1 VE L7 86,07' S00`3824"W 24.35' S55'45'48"W 9 [:iL8 57.09' N89-21'1 6"W CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13'11'55" N84'48'44"W 73.16' �•u� 1 WF URARY EASEMENT i ,,� .4 MlBrr &2 10F i February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -U REQUEST Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc.: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See Attached Agreement / Memo CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Michael Cole CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer • R F-44cP-1 FEB 2 2 (-"ty Of AlelicLa -1 Citv Clery,_ ?office Date: 02/22/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Aoratos LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments. LLC . A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with -- Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. 0 Page 1 • Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Commercial LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 • ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. Dj% NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 I BOISE IDAHO 04/26/07 01:42 PM DEPUTY NHaney III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIII RECORDED -- REQUEST EQUEST OF Meridian City 107059185 This sheet has been added to document to accommodate recording information SANITARY SEWER EASA ENT BLACK CAT SEWER PHASE 4 RICHARD EVANS (STRADA BELLISSIMA CONDvIERL4L ASSOCIATION INC) SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, effective this �,� day of P`�o , 2007, by the undersigned Strada Bellissima Commercial Association Inc., who maintains a mailing address of 9560 W. Pebble Brook Lane, Boise, ID 83703, hereafter referred to as "GRANTOR" for the benefit of the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho that maintains a mailing address of 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereafter referred to as "CITY". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to provide a sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline from time to time by the CITY; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto the CITY the right-of-way for the permanent and temporary construction easements for the construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A-1, A-2, B-1, & B-2) The permanent easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a sanitary sewer line, together with maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the CITY, with the free right of reasonable access to such facilities at any and all times. The temporary construction easement is for the purpose of construction of a sanitary sewer line and related incidental work. The temporary construction easement shall expire upon completion of the sanitary sewer line. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said permanent easement and right-of-way unto the said CITY, its successors and assigns forever. 1. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantor shall have the right to use and improve the easement area for uses which do not interfere with the use of the said easement or the purposes stated herein. Such uses shall include, but not be limited to landscaping, a tree selection that is coordinated with the CITY, ingress, egress, driveways, roads, parking, temporary storage, farming, pathways and utility extensions. THE GRANTOR(S) do hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures within the area described for this easement that would interfere with the use of said easement, for the SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 1 of 3 purposes stated herein. 2. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the CITY, in constructing and in making future repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and replacement. However, the CITY will not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent structures, large trees or brush placed within the area described in this easement. THE GRANTOR(S) does hereby covenant with the CITY that he is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first hereinabove written. Strada Belloggria Comm cial Association Inc. By: Richard Evans, Association President STATE OF IDAHO) )ss County of Ada ) On this a;t day of f7ejy uQ,r , 2007, before me L LA64 M. L*P IR , personally appeared Richard vans, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory / evidence to be the person whose names is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. A06L LMNOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO ® My Commission Expires on 6(P-PrLtr,_ DR SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 0 . Beneficiary: CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: 6-iq o� Tammy de erd, Mayor ATTEST: </%i - b William Berg, Jr., City CI 181 . Date approved by Council: �)-r- c�4-'° ►, STATE OF IDAHO, : s$. County of Ada ) i On this 21' day of �� ��' 1 C �� , 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. #000. �ys/® (SEAL) •' 41C T�N4,6 � ® ; •s.MD a** SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 3 of 3 S ha " 10 NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: )1W12,A- JW MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: (c -/S`-- 1 *'I'--1*---- ..._._.._..._.. _.._..._.__....i .....- Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 13, 2007 EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A PERMANENT EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast Y4 of the Southeast 1/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast 1/ of said section, North 00`38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89°25'18" West, 95.00 feet, thence South 00'38`24 West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said right-of-way South 89"25'18" East, 5.10 feet; thence along a curve to the right 31.44 feet, having a radius of 20.00 feet, a delta of 90'04'04", and a long chord which bears South 44"2316" East, 28.30 feet to the Westerly right-of-way of South Meridian Road; thence along said right-of-way South 00°3945" West, 1,190.75 feet; thence North 89 ° 21'14" West, 5.01 feet; thence South 00"3846" West, 16.97 feet; thence South 55"45'48" West, Z4.37 feet; thence North 00*3874" East, 1,241.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.706 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.LS. RMH/TLK:Ihc P:1PHM10-06-059 Btack Cat PH41Easements\10-06-059.StradaPerm.doc .. - . --- --•-- ._.__-�_-._._.....-F..�._....�......��-,_-:�.,,._:,�-tee S 1f8 CORNER A , SCALE: 1 "=200' goo �g CURVE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 95.00' 1V89.25'18"W L2 25.00' SOO'38'24"W L3 5.10' S8925'1 WE L4 5.01' N89'21'14"W L5 16.97' SOO'38'46"W L6 24.37' S55 45'48"W �g CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA I CHORD BEARING CHORD C1 31.44 20.00 20.02 90'04'04" 1 S44"23'1 "E 28.30' BLACK CAT PHASE 4 SHEE �•V� PERMANENT EASE ENT 1 DWIBIT A-2 op 0 Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 15, 2007 EXHIBIT B-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A TEMPORARY EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast A of the Southeast Y4 of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast % of said section, North 00°38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89'25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00°38'24" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 00°3824" West, 988.94 feet to the Northerly boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2, Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1; thence along said Northerly boundary line North 89°2136" West, 50.00 feet; thence North 00°3824" East, 988.88 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street; thence South 89'25'18" East, 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 1.135 acres, more or less. TOGETHER WITH: That portion of the Southeast % of the Southeast % of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast Y4 of said section, North 00°3824" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89"25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00 3824 West, 1,180.58 feet, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 00"3824" West, 86.07 feet to the Northerly right-of-way of West Victory Road; thence along said right-of-way the following three courses: 1. South 55°4548" West, 24.35 feet; 2. thence North 89"21'16" West, 57.09 feet; 3. thence along a non -tangent curve to the right 73.33 feet, having a radius of 318.31 feet, a delta of 13 11'55", and a long chord which bears North 84"4844" West, 73.16 feet; thence North 00°3824" East, 94.21 feet; thence South 89"21'16" East, 150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.339 acres, more or less. END- OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by:5�0� cl,$ .I -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. 4�• Gregory E Holkesvig, P.L.S. E. 4 Z. j�5�a3 GEH/TLK:Ihc P:%PHM10-06-059 Black Cat PH4Wasements\10-06-059-StradaTernp.doc W. VICTORY RD P.O. S Ifs CORNER r I N SCALE: 1 "=200' CURVE TABLE LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 95.00' N8925'1 8"W L2 25.00' S00'38'24"W L3 50.00' S89'25'18"E L4 50.00' N8921136"W L5 94.21' N00"38'24"E L61 0.00' S89'21'16"E L7 86,07' S00'38'24"W L8 24.35' 55'45'48"W S55-4648-W- L9 L 57.09' N89'21'16"W CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA I CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13'11'55" N84 -48-44"W 73.16' I= EMIBtf B-2 I' � 0 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-V REQUEST Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Sewer Phase 4 with Strada Commercial, Inc.: 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 shall become properly of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Memo C� Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Michael Cole CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 02/22/2007 s. RECEJVEE� FEB 2 2 2007 "'tP%Ot Office Re: Proposed Agenda Items for February 27, 2007 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the February 27 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Aoratos LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Aoratos LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Evans Real Estate Investments, LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Bellissima Commercial Association, Inc. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property. 0 Page 1 0 Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Permanent and Temporary Easement Contract for Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 Project with Strada Commercial LLC. A permanent and temporary easement has been signed by Strada Commercial LLC. for the construction of the Black Cat Trunk through their property Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the permanent and temporary easement contract for the construction of the sewer trunk on this property for the Black Cat Trunk Phase 4 and authorize the Mayor to sign it Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 • ADA COUNTY RECORDER AID BOISE IDAHO 04/26107 01:42 PM DEPUTY Neava Haney RECORDED—REQUEST OF Meridian City NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 107053183 This sheet has been added to document to accommodate recording information SANITARY SEWER EASMENT BLACK CAT SEWER PHASE 4 RICHARD EVANS (STRADA COMMERCIAL LLC) 0 • SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, effective this 2- 2 day of 2007, by the undersigned Strada Commercial LLC., who maintains a mailing address of 9560 W. Pebble Brooke Ln., Garden City, Id. 83703, hereafter referred to as "GRANTOR" for the benefit of the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho that maintains a mailing address of 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereafter referred to as "CITY". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to provide a sanitary sewer right-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipeline from time to time by the CITY; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto the CITY the right-of-way for the permanent and temporary construction easements for the construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer line over and across the following described property: (SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A-1, A-2, B-1, & B-2) The Qermanent easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of a sanitary sewer line, together with maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the CITY, with the free right of reasonable access to such facilities at any and all times. The temporary construction easement is for the purpose of construction of a sanitary sewer line and related incidental work. The temporary construction easement shall expire upon completion of the sanitary sewer line. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said permanent easement and right-of-way unto the said CITY, its successors and assigns forever. 1. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantor shall have the right to use and improve the easement area for uses which do not interfere with the use of the said easement or the purposes stated herein. Such uses shall include, but not be limited to landscaping, a tree selection that is coordinated with the CITY, ingress, egress, driveways, roads, parking, temporary storage, farming, pathways and utility extensions. THE GRANTOR(S) do hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures within the area described for this easement that would interfere with the use of said easement, for the SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 1 of 3 purposes stated herein. 2. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the CITY, in constructing and in making future repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such construction, repairs and replacement. However, the CITY will not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent structures, large trees or brush placed within the area described in this easement. THE GRANTOR(S) does hereby covenant with the CITY that he is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures the day and year first hereinabove written. Strada Co er ial, LL By: z� Ric and Evans, Member STATE OF IDAHO) ) ss County of Ada ) On this "d day of— , 2007, before me Asa n1 5ULP9& , personally appeared Richard vans, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose names is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. C RI m , 'WARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO a �,�� Q My Commission Expires on big - ALm _pg coo 4" 11000000 SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3 Beneficiary: CITY OF MERIDIAN Tammy Ofyi/eerd,, Mayor ATTEST:.���� Z� William Berg, Jr., City C Date approved by Council: STATE OF IDAHO, ) : ss, County of Ada ) is On this 21' ` day of �` �� , 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. (SEAL) SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, Page 3 of 3 NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT:. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Project: 10-06-059 Date: ' February 13, 2007 EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A PERMANENT EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast Y/ of the Southeast 1/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast 1/ of said section, North 00` 38'24" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center tine of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89 ° 25'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00"38'24 West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way tine of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said right-of-way South 89'2518" East, 5.10 feet, thence along a curve to the right 31.44 feet, having a radius of 20.00 feet, a delta of 90'04'04", and a long chord which bears South 44"23'16" East, 28.30 feet to the Westerly right-of-way of South Meridian Road; thence along said right-of-way South 00°3845" West, 1,190.75 feet; thence North 89-21-14- West, 5.01 feet; thence South 00"3846" West, 16.97 feet; thence South 55"-4548" West, 24.37 feet; thence North 00"38'24' East, 1,241.65 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.706 acres, more or less. ENI) OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Hotkesvig, P.L.S. RMH/TLK:Ihc P:\PHK\10-06-059 Black Cat PH4\Easements\10-06-059-SbadaPerm.doc P.O. B7/1 f, 15 wt S F i L`* � N Go 10 � O I� 10 ZI t z S X8 CORNER A` JL 200 t SCALE: 1 "=200' LINE 29 11 LENGTH 26 95.00' N89.25'18"W J Q 5.10' S89'25' 18"E 24 I N89'21'14"W BLO 0 2 S00'38'46"W S5545'48"W 15 wt S F i L`* � N Go 10 � O I� 10 ZI t z S X8 CORNER A` JL 200 t SCALE: 1 "=200' LINE TABLE LENGTH BEARING 95.00' N89.25'18"W 25.00' Soo'38'24"W 5.10' S89'25' 18"E 5.01' N89'21'14"W 16.97' S00'38'46"W 24.37' S5545'48"W CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS JTANGENT DELTA I CHORD BEARINGCHORD Cl 31.44 20.00 20.02 904'04" S4423'16"E 28.30' EXHIBIT A-2 I� j •--------------------------------- --- Project: 10-06-059 Date: February 15, 2007 EXHIBIT B-1 PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR A TEMPORARY EASEMENT That portion of the Southeast'/ of the Southeast % of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24, thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast Y of said section, North 00°3824" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89-25'18- West, 95.00 feet, thence South 00 ° 3874" West, 25.00 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing, South 00°38'24" West, 988.94 feet to the Northerly boundary line of Lot 5, Block 2, Strada BetUssima Subdivision No. 1; thence along said Northerly boundary line North 89 ° 2136' West, 50.00 feet-, thence North 00°3874" East, 988.88 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of West Maestra Street; thence South 89'25'18" East, 50.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 1.135 acres, more or less. TOGETHER WITH: That portion of the Southeast % of the Southeast % of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast comer of Section 24; thence along the Easterly boundary line of the Southeast'A of said section, North 00°3824" East, 1,321.03 feet to the intersection of South Meridian Road and West Maestra Street; thence along the center line of said West Maestra Street as shown on the plat of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1, as recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, at Book 93, page 11265; North 89025'18" West, 95.00 feet; thence South 00"3824" West, 1,180.58 feet, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 00"3874" West, 86.07 feet to the Northerly right-of-way of West Victory Road; thence along said right-of-way the following three courses: 1. South 5504548" West, 24.35 feet; 2. thence North 89"21'16" West, 57.09 feet; 3. thence along a non -tangent curve to the right 73.33 feet, having a radius of 318.31 feet, a delta of 13°11'55", and a long chord which bears North 84°4844" West, 73.16 feet; thence North 00°3824" East, 94.21 feet, thence South 89`21'16" East, 150.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 0.339 acres, more or less. END OF DESCRIPTION Prepared by: J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gregory E. Holkesvig, P.L.S. £. ►t51a)'o �a OF 1�4` F iol� GEH/TLK:Ihc PAPHK110-06.059 Black Cat PH4Tmments110-06-059-StradaTemp.doc S Xis CORNER Ip of Ldm W. VICTORY RD P.O. tao SCALE: 172T00' CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13'11'55* N844844"W 73.16' 1 EMIElrr 13-2 OF { 1 LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING Li * 95.00' N89'25'18"W L2 __L5.00' S00'38'24" W L3 5p.00 S89'25'1 WE L4 50.00' N89'21'36"W LS 94.21' NOO'38'24"E L6 1 0.00' S89 -21-16"E L7 86,07' SOO'38'24"W L8 24.35' S55'4V48"W L9 1 57.09' N89'21'1 6" CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA CHORD BEARING CHORD Cl 73.33 318.31 36.83 13'11'55* N844844"W 73.16' 1 EMIElrr 13-2 OF { 1 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-W REQUEST Approve Building Lease Extension with William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership for general office space at 660 East Watertower Lane: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • • Page 1 of 1 Will Berg From: Brad Watson Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 8:21 AM To: Bill Nary; Anna Canning; Will Berg Cc: Tara Green; Michelle Albertson Subject: RE: Letter from Hon Investments regarding Planning and Public Works I'll bring you a copy of the lease and two amendments at the directors meeting this morning. From: Bill Nary Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 5:29 PM To: Brad Watson; Anna Canning; Will Berg Cc: Tara Green; Michelle Albertson Subject: Letter from Hon Investments regarding Planning and Public Works Can I review a copy of our lease agreement so I can respond to Mr. Hon's letter. Normally tenants are not responsible or liable because the property owner does not properly clear their sidewalks of ice and debris. I want to be sure that there is no language in our lease about that before I send a polite letter. Bill Nary City Attorney/HR Director City of Meridian 703 Main Street Meridian, ID 83642 208.898.5506 or 208.898-5503 (office) 208.884.8723 (fax) 1/9/2007 0 • Page 1 of 1 Will Berg From: Bill Nary Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 5:29 PM To: Brad Watson; Anna Canning; Will Berg Cc: Tara Green; Michelle Albertson Subject: Letter from Hon Investments regarding Planning and Public Works Can I review a copy of our lease agreement so I can respond to Mr. Hon's letter. Normally tenants are not responsible or liable because the property owner does not property clear their sidewalks of ice and debris. I want to be sure that there is no language in our lease about that before I send a polite letter. Bill Nary City Attomey/HR Director City of Meridian 703 Main Street Meridian, ID 83642 208.898.5506 or 208.898-5503 (office) 208.884.8723 (fax) 1/9/2007 0 HONINYESTMENT COMPANY P.O. BOX 19087 BOISE, IDAHO 83719 RECEIVED (208) 288-0086 (208) 288-0087 Fax JAN 10 2007 City of Meridian. ]Public Works Director January 30, 2007 Brad Watson, P.E. Public Works Director Suite 200 HAND DELIVERED 660 E. Watertower Street Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mr. Watson: As you requested in your letter of January 18, 2007, I am sending you a Third Amendment to our Lease. I am taking a trip and will not be available February 6 to February 23. Please advise. Sincerely, William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership William A. on WAH/ck THIRD AMENDMENT TO LEASE This Third Amendment to Lease, made and entered into February Z!kI , 2007 by and between William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership, an individual (hereinafter "Lessor") and the City of Meridian, a Body Corporate of the State of Idaho (hereinafter "Lessee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Lessor's predecessor in interest, William A. Hon, and Lessee entered into a lease dated December 19, 2000, under the terms of which Lessee leased general office space as defined in the Lease at 660 E. Watertower Lane, Meridian, Idaho. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee amended said Lease on May 8, 2003 to expand the premises. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee have agreed to extend the term of said Lease per the terms stated herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Rent: The present Lease expires March 31, 2007. The Lease shall be extended to July 31, 2008. The monthly rental from April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008 shall be $18,277. The monthly rental shall increase to $18,825 beginning April 1. 2008. In regard to a month to month extension beyond July 31, 2008, paragraph 29 of our Lease concerns HOLDING OVER. The Lease states that month -to month tenancy will be at 1 %2 times the current rent. Lessor: William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership By: Ile Date: Z Z� William A. Hon Lessee: City of Meridian ®`fle`'1411III till tia Fee, Y: Tammy d �a s� SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE This Second Amendment to Lease, made and entered into November 30'�-2004 by and between William A. 11 Family Limited Partnership, an individual (hereinafter "Lessor") and the City of Meridian, a Body Corporate of the State of Idaho (hereinafter "Lessee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Lessor's predecessor in interest, William A. and Lessee entered into a lease dated December 19, 2000, (hereinafter "Lease"), under the terms of which Lessee leased general office space as defined in the Lease (hereinafter the "Premises") at 660 East Watertower Lane, Meridian, Idaho (hereinafter the "Building"); WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee amended said Lease on May 8, 2003 to expand the premises. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee have agreed to further expand Lessee's existing premises and to extend the term of said Lease per the terms stated herein. WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee upon the execution of this Second Amendment to Lease hereby mutually amend the Lease under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth: NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and. sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Premises: Lessee shall lease additional space within the Building. The Demised Premises leased per the Lease shall be expanded as follows: Suite Number Previous Rentable Expanded Rentable Square Feet Sauare Feet 202 5,987 3,371 RSF 150 2,564 0 RSF Total Rentable Square Feet 8,551 11,922 RSF 1. Commencement Base Rent for Expansion Space: The commencement of Base Rent for the Expansion Space portion of the Lease shall begin December 1, 9904. to/ 2a o¢..--pw 2. Lessee's Pro Rata Share: Lessee's Pro Rata Share as defined ,in Section 3 of the Lease( Agreement shall be 63.28%. 3. Tenant rovement—s: Lessor shall improve the Expansion Space as per a mutually acceptable space plan and specifications to be signed by both Lessor and Lessee prior to construction. 4. Delivery ofPremises: Lessee's occupancy ofthe added premises -shall be deemed by Lessor as acceptance of the added premises condition by Lessee. Rent: Lessee hereby covenants and agrees to pay Lessor, or assigns the following monthly rent: Period: Dec. 1, 2004 — March 31, 2005 April 1, 2005 — March 31, 2006 April 1, 2007 - March 31, 2007 Total Monthly Rent: $16,751,21 $17,247.96 $17,744.71 Term: The term of the lease shall be extended to March 31, 2007. In the event of a conflict between the terms of the Lease and this Second Amendment to Lease, the terms of this Second Amendment to Lease shall control. Except as expressly modified by this Second Amendment to Lease, the Lease shall remain unchanged and in fidl force and effect. This Second Amendment to Lease shall not be modified or amended except in writing, signed by the parties hereto. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Section 38 of the Lease is ratified and affirmed as applicable to -this Amendment. [End of text] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have set our hands the day and year first above written.. Lessor: William A. Hon Family Limited Partnership By:��� William A. Hon Its: General Partner Lessee: City of Meridian Date: WO Its: Mayor 4/1/05 - 3/31/06 Suite #: RSF: Mo. Lease Annual Lease: 1RSF 150 2,564 $3,632.33 City of Meridian $17.00 202 (existing) 5,987 $8,980.50 660 Watertower Lane $18.00 202 (expansion) 3.371 P,635.13 Lease Breakdown $16.50 12/1104 - 3/31105 $17,247.96 $206,975.50 $17.36 Suite #: RSF: Mo. Lease Annual Lease: $/RSF 150 2,564 $3,525.50 $42,306.00 $16.50 202 (existing) 5,987 $8,731.04 $104,772.50 $17.50 202 (expansion) 3,.371$4,494,67 $53.936.00 $16.00 11,922 $16,751.21 $201,014.50 $16.86 4/1/05 - 3/31/06 Suite #: RSF: Mo. Lease Annual Lease: 1RSF 150 2,564 $3,632.33 $43,588.00 $17.00 202 (existing) 5,987 $8,980.50 $107,766.00 $18.00 202 (expansion) 3.371 P,635.13 $55,621.50 $16.50 11,922 $17,247.96 $206,975.50 $17.36 4/1/06 - 3131/07 Suite #• RSF. Mo. Lease Annual Lease: U SAF 150 2,564 $3,739.17 $44,870.00 $17.50 202 (existing) 5,987 $9,229.96 $110,759.50 $18.50 202 (expansion) 3,371 $4,775.58 $57,307.00 $17.00 11,922 $17,744.71 $212,936.50 $17.86 11/24/2004 i *RECORDED- RECI,EEST OF ADR COURTY RECORDER MERWMT J. DAVM NAVARRO OO1S:., MAIM FEEDEPUTY#_010 201 FE 22 P!9 ! : 34 10 1 015 2 6 2 CON04ERCIAL LEASE AND DEPOSIT RECEIPT CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR 61,711 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AT 660 E. WATERTOWER LANE, SUITE 250 MERIDIAN, ID - TO WILLIAM A. HON P.O. BOX 190870 BOISE, ID 83719 DECEMBER 19, 2000 • • COMMERCUAL LEASE AND DEPOSIT RECEIPT RECEIVED FROM City of Meridian. a Body Cion, ft d .bye Ike of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as LESSEE, the sum of $L%M $L%8evidenced by check, as a deposit, which shall belong to William A. Hon, ("Lessor") and shall be applied as first month's rent.. Leser offers to lease from Lessor the promises (the "Prmnises") situated in the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, described as 6,711 square fee( of office space in Suite 250 of the building loomed at 660 E. Wet oftwer Lane (the "Building"}, upon the following tarns and conditions: 1. TERM: The term of this Lease will be sbrty (60) manors commencing April 1, 2001 (the "Occupancy Dere"). At any time atter the Occupancy Date, within ten (10) days Lessor's request, Lessee agrces to provide Lessor with a written acknowledgment of the Occupancy Date (lease conunencement date). Lesser agrees to allow Lessee reasonable ams to the Premises prior to the Occupancy Date to install fixturos, a computer, a telephone system and move -in furniture. Fuer, Lessor agrees to allow Lam to opevte in the Premises upon completion of the tenant improvements outlined on Exhibit B of this Agreement. 2. RENT: Lessee hereby covenants and agrees to pay Lessor, or assigns, the total sum of Five Hundred Seventy Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Five Dollars ($570,435.00) payable in monthly installments of $8,948.00 for months One through Twdve (1- 12), 59,227.63 for months thirteen through twenty -fog (13 . 24), $9,507.25 for months twenty-five, through thirty-six (25-36), $9,786.88 for month thirty-seven through forty-eWit (37.48), and $10,066.50 for months forty- nine through sixty (49 - 60), herein "Base RwW'. All rents will be, paid to Lessor or histher authariaed agent, at the following address: William A. Hon P.O. Box 190$70. Boise. ID 83719, or at such other plain as may be designated by Lessor from time to time. In the event rant is not paid within 15ve days after due date, Lessee agrees to pay a late ¢targe of 1()% plus interest at 8j 80A per annum an the delinquent amount. Lessee further agrees to pay $2Q0 for each dishonored bank check. The late charge period is not a grace period, and Lessor is entitled to isle written demand for any rent if not paid when due. 3. OPERATING EXPENSE INCREASES: The Base Stent payable hereunder shall also be annually adjusted upwards beginning on the first anniversary date of the term of this Lease, and each year thereafter, by an amount ihat: shall be Lee's Proportionate Shane of any increases in the operating Expenses (es that term is defined below) paid or payable by Lessor, or estimated to be paid by Lessor, daring the immediately preceding calendar year. As used in this Lease, the term "Operating Bxpenaes" means: "Real Estate Taxes" which shall mean and include all general and special maces and assessments levied upon or assessed against the Budding and the land on which it is loomed (any tax levied in whole or in part in lieu of or in addition to real properly taxes); "Operating Costs" which shall mean all reasonable costs of management, operation, and malatenance of the Building and the land on which it is situated, including without limitation wages, salaries, and compensation of employees; consuldng, acting, legal, janitorial, maintenance, guard, and other services; management fees and costs; mahamence and repairs; and any other costs, charges, and expenses that under generally accepted accounting principles would be regarded as management, maintenance, and operating expanses; "Utility Cats" which shall inehde the ocan paid and incurred by Lessor for all utilities in connection with the Building, including, without ii nitation, the costs of heat ventilating and air conditioning, costs of furnishing gas, electricity or other fuels or power sources, and costs of furnishing water and sewer services, Initials and the cost of waste disposal; and "Loam's Pmpordonste Share°' marls the perctrntaogc equal to the square footage based to Lessee under this Lease (6,711 square fleet) over the total rentable quare footage in the Building. 4. USE: The premises are to be used for the operation of governmental offices, and for no other purpose, without prior written consent of Lessor. Loose will not commit any waste upon the premises, or any nuisance or act which may dwarb the quiet cWoymem of any tenant in the building. S. UM PROHIBITED: Lessee will not use any portion of the premises for purposes other than those specified. No use will be made or permitted to be made upon the premises, nor acts done, which will increase the existing rate of insurance upon the property, or cause cancellation of insurance policies covering the property. Leasee will not induct or permit any sale by auction on the premises. 6. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING: Lessee shall have the right to sublet all or any portion of the Promises or assign the lease at any time to an Affiliated Person of Leasee, Lessee's partner, a .successor entity cremated by mmger, rcorganization, recapitalization, or acquisition, without Landlord's consent or approval. Lessee will not assign this Lease or sublet any portion of the Premises to any other party without prior written consent of the Lessor, which will not be unreasonably withheld. Any such assignment or subletting to another party without consent will be void and, at the option of the Lessor, will terminate this Lease. Lessee will not sublease for a profri. If Lessee assigns or sublets, Lessee shall remain requmsible for the faithful performance and observance of all of its covenants and obligations set forth in the Lease. 7. ORDINANCES AND STATUTES: Lessee will comply with all statutes, ordinances, and requirements of all municipal, state and faleral authorities now in force, or which may later be in force, regarding the use of the promises. The commencement or pendency of any state or federal court abatement proceeding affecting the use of the premises will, at the option of the Lessor, be deemed a breach of this Lease. S. MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS: Unless otherwise indicated, Lessee altaowledges that the premises are in good order and repair and Lessor warrants that at the time of occupancy the premises are in good order and repair. Lessee shall, at hislher own expense, maintain the interior of the premises in a good and safe condition. Lessor shall maintain all systems and equipment, including oleotricml wiry plumbing and heating and air conditioning installations and repairs, and any other system or equipment The premises will be surrendered by Lessee, at termination of the Lease, in as good condition as received, normal wear and tear and damage from casualty excepted. Lessor will be responsible for maintenance of roofs exterior walls, and structural foundations (including any retrofitting required by governmental authorities). No i uMvernent or alteration of the premises will be made without the prior written consent of the Lessor. 9. ENTRY AND MWECTIOAT: Lessee will permit Lessor or Lessor's agents to enter lice premises at reasonable times od upon reasonable notice for the purpose of inspecting the promises, and will penthit Lessor, at any time within WV* (90) days prior to the expiration of this Lease, to place upon the premises any usual "For Lease" signs and permit persons desiring to lease the pmaises to inspect the premises at reasonable idmes. IL IlYDE11+ NWICATION OF LESSiOM Lessor will not be liable for any damage or injury to Less, or any other person, or to any property, o ccur ng on the prensises. Lessee agrees to hold Lessor harmless Prom any claims for damages arising out of Lessee's use of the promises, and to indemnify Lessor for any expense incurred by Lor in defending any such claims. initials: 11. POSSESSION: If Lessor is unable to deliver the promises to Leasee for the installation of tenant fl== and fbmkm by Minh 1.2401. Lessor will not be liable for any damage caused by the delay, nor will this Lease be void or voidable, but Lessee will not' be liable for any rent until possessiart is delivered and tie tanant improvements are substntiaily completed. Leasee may terminate this Lease if pwwWon of the premises is not delivered to Lessee on or before Aaei1 15, 12. LESSEE'S INSURANCE: Except for such loss or damage as maybe caused by the negligent or willful act of Lessor, its spate, or employees,. Lessor shall not be liable to Lessee, its officers, agents, employees, customers, invitees or third parties for loss of or damage to property, including good, wares and merchandise, or for injury or death to persons, in on, or about the promises, and Lessee agrees to hidemnify and save and hold Lessor harmless from and on account thereof howscom arising or by whomever caused. During the term thereof; Leasee shall maintain in full force and effect with insurance companies "A" rated or better a comprehensive liability insurance policy, naming Lessor as an additional insured,.applicable to the Premium and the activities of Lessee therein with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of not less than 51,000,000. A certiftcete evideneing such coverage and providing that the insurance may not' be canceled without thirty (30) days prior written notice to Landlord shall be provided to Landlord within ten (10) days fioom occupancy. Lessee shall maintain in eMct policies of insurance covering its fixtures, inventory, equipment and leasehold improvements located on the premises, In an amount not less than one hundred percent (140%) of their NU replacement cost, providing protection against any peril inchuied within the classification Special Form Coverage, including insurance against sprinkler damage, vandalism and malicious mischief 13. LESSOR'S INSURANCE: Lessor will maimain hazard & liability insurance covering one hundred percent (IOWA) actual replacement value of the Building throughout the Lease term. Lessor's insurance will not insure Lessee's personal property, leasehold improvements, or trade fixdm. The foregoing policy of insurance shall be written with rent loss endorsements in favor of Lessor to cover a period of not less dion twelve (12) months. 14 SUBROGATION: To the maximum extent permitted by it su mm policies which may be owned by the parties. Lessor and Lessee waive any and all rights of subrogation which might otherwise exist. 15. UT11LI'IMS, & SERVICES: Lessor will pay for the following services to be delivered to the premises: electricity, water, gas, sewer and trash. Lessor shall provide janitorial services to the Premises five days per week. Lessee shall be responsible with all other services and utilities desired by Lessoo, including but not limited to, telephone service, 1C SIGNS: Lessee, at Lessee's expense, shall be permitted to install signp on the front door of the Premises. All signage must be approved by the Lessor prior to installation and must comply with all applicable municipal codes. Lessor shall provide teat signage on the building directory. 17. ABANDONMENT OF PREMISES: Lessee will not vacate or abandon the premises at any time during the term of this Lease. If Lessee does abandon or vacate the premises, or is dispossessed by process of law, or odu revise, any personal property belonging to Lessee left on the premises will be deemed to be abandoned, at the option of Lessor. I& CONDEMNATION: In the event that the }remises are condemned in whole or in part and the remainder is not susceptible for use by the Lessee, this Lem will terminate upon the date which the condemnor acquires possossion. All sums which may be payable on account of any condemnation will belong solely to the Lessor, except that Lessee will be entitled to retain any amount awarded to him/her for hisihher trade fixtures or moving expenses. 19. TRADE FIXTURES: Any and all itnprovements made to the premises during the term will belong to the Lessor, except trade fixtures of the Lessee. Lessee may, upon termination, remove all his&a trade futures, but will pay for all costs succesery m repair any damage to the promises Initials: • 0 oorasioned by the removal. 26. DESTRUCTION OF PREMISES: IISES: In the event of a partial destruction of the premises during the term, from any corse, Lessor will promptly repair the premises, provided that such rears an be reasonably made wiithla sixty (60) days. Such partum destruction will not terminate this Lase, except that Lasa will be entitled to a proportionate reduction of rent while such repass are being made, based upon the extent to which the making of such repairs interferes with the business of Lessee on the prerinises. If the repairs cannot be made within sixty (60) days, this Lease may be terminated at the option of either party by giving written notice to the other party within the sixty (60) day period. 21. EHAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Lessee will not use, store, or dispose of any hazardous substances upon the premises, except the use and storage of such substances that are customarily used in L ssee's business, and are in compliance with all environmental laws. Hazardous substances means any hazardous waste, substance or toxic materials regulated under any envkom rental laws or regulations applicable to the property. Lessee will be responsible for the cost of removal of any toxic camdamination caused by les's use of the premises and indemnify Lessor from any damages by Lessee. Notwithstanding anything w the contrary contained in this, Lessee shall not be permitted to an or sell.bottled oxygen on the premises. 22. U -SOLVENCY: The appointment of a receiver, an assignment for the benefits of creditors, or the filing of a petition in baNwptcy by or against Lessee, will constitute a breach of this Leese by Lasses+. 23. DEFAULT: In the event of any breach of this Lim by Lessee, Lessor may, at his/her option, terminate the Lease and recover from Lessee: (a) the worth at the time of award of the unpaid rent which had been earned at the time of termination; (b) the womb at the time of award of the amount by which the unpaid rent which would have been earned attar terncination until the time of the award exceeds the amount of such rental loss that the Lessee proves could have been reasonably avoided; (c) the worth at the time of award of the amount by which the unpaid rent for tho balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amo ud of such rental loss that the Lessee proves could be reasonably avoided; and (d) any other amount necessary to compensate Lessor for all the detriment proximately caused by the Lessee's failure to perform his/her obligations under the Lease or which in the ordinary course of things would be likely to result therefrom. Lessor may, in the alternative, continue this Leese in effect, and Lessor may enforce all of Lessor's rights and remedies, under the Leas, including the right to recover the rent as It becomes due under the Lease. Lessor may terminate Lessee's right to possession of the premises without terminating this Lease. In such event, Leasoar may retake possession of the premises and relet the premises to a , replacement tenant, in which event Lessee shall be liable for any amount by which the rent due and payable under this Lease exceeds rent paid by the roplacement tenant, plus Lessor's costs to relet the premises, including leasing commissions and the cost of tenant improvements. if said breach of Lease continues, Leaser may, at any time tltaretdter, elect to terminate the Lease. The remedies set forth in this secdon are cumulative and will not limit any other right or remedies which Lessor may have. If the Lessee fails to appropriate funds as permitted in Ston 38 hereof, the remedies available to the Lessor shall be restricted to those described above, provided that once it has relinquished the Project and made any payments due hereunder for Its then culmt fiscal year, the Lam shall have no further liability under this agreement. 24. OPTION TO LEASE ADJOINING SPACE: In event tie adjoining space is vacant or becomes vaunt during the germ of this Lease, Lessee shall leave an Option to Lease the Adjoinieg Space provided that d& Lease rmmains in full force and effect, and that no default under this Lease has occwred. Lessor shall notify Lessee in writing upon vacation of the adjoining space. Such Option for Adjoining Spars will be granted and become effective only if exercised by written notice to Lessor, and once exercised, is irrevocable. In the event Lowe fails to give such written notice to Lessor not later #ran thirty (30) days following receipt of Lessor's written notice, the Option for Initials: � • 0 Adjoining Spm shall atrbomalically terminate and expire, goad Lessee shall have no further right to exe163e the Option for Adjoining Spm. Prior to delivery of porion, Lessee strap execute an Amendment to this Lease reflecting the addition to tits praises, the additional Base Rent and Additional Rent, the change m ratio of the Premises to ltie Building area, and any other revisions Me2sMY because of such additional space being added to the mgmal Premises. Allother terms and conditions of this Lease shall apply to the additional Premises. 2L DEPOSIT REFUNDS: The balance of all deposits will be nefnnded within thirty (34) days (or as otherwise req &W by law), from date possession is delivered to Lessor or his/her authorized agent after exPbWim of the term of this Lease, togeth a with a statement showing any charges :Wade against the deposits by Lessor. 2b. ATTORNEY FEES: In any action or proceeding involving a dispute between Lessor and Lessee arising out of this Low, the prevailing party will be entitled to reasonable atterney.fess. 27. WAIVER: No failure of Lessor to enforce any t= of this Lease will be deemed to be a waiver. 2. NOTICES: Any notice which eitherparty mayor is re i&W to give, will be given by mailing the notice, postage prepaid, to Lessee at the premises, or to Lessor at the address shown in Item 2, or at such other places as may be designated in writing by the parties fium time to time. Notice will be effective five days air malilng, or on personal delivery, or when: receipt is acknowledged in writing - 29. HOLDING OVER: Any holdmg over after the exphaden of this Lease, with the consent of Owner, will be a month to-manth tenancy at a monthly rent of one and one half (11/2) times the cunvnt monthly rout, payable in advance and otherwise subject to the terms of this Lease, as applicable, until either party will terminate the tenancy by giving the outer party thirty (30) days written notice. 30. TIME: Time is of the ossonce of this Lease. 31. EEMS, ASSIGNS, SUCCESSORS: This Lease is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the heirs, assigns, and m=ssars oftlte parties. 32. TADS: Lessor shad be responsible for all real property taxes assessed to the premises. Lessee shall be responsible for arty taxes assessed in connection with Lessee's property. 33. PARIKING: Lessee shall be entitled to a proportionate share of the panting for the Building; provided, Lessor reserves the right to assign alt of Loom's parking to certain area in the parking lots fm the Building. 34. OPTION TO RENEW: Provided that Lessee is not in default in the performance of this Lease, Lessen will have the option to renew the Lease for me ( I—) additional term(s) of sixty M months. commencing at the expiration of the initial Lease term. Ali of the terms and conditions of ties Lease will apply during the renewal tern, except that the monthly sent will be at tine `then" market rent, which shall not be less than the rent for the previous year. The option will be exercised by written notice given to Lessor not less than rt= (90) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Leese term. Nnotice is not given within the time specified, this Option win expire. 3S. LESSOR'S T JAl31,'LiTY: In the event of a transfer of Leasor's title or inturest to the property during tate term of this Lease, Lessee agrees that the grantee of suds title or interest will be substituted as the Lessor under this Lease, and the original lessor will be released of all further liability; provided, that all deposits will be transferred to the grantee. 36. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE: (a) On ten (10) days' prior written notice from Lessor, Lessee will execute, acknowledge, and deliver to Lessor a statement in writing: (1) certifying that this Lease is unmodified tend in full frtrcc and effect (or, if modiflcd, stating the nature of such I:ritials • 0 modification and cetti*ingg dist this Lease, as so modified, is in fall force and effect), the amount of any security deposit, and the date to which the cut and other charges are paid in advancer, if any; and (2) aclmowledging that titers are not, to Lessee's knowledge, any tinned defaults on the pert of Lessor, or specifying such defaults if any we claimed Any such statement may be conclusively relied upon by any prospective buyer or encumbrancer of the premises. (b) At Lessor's option, Lessee's, Endure to deliver such statement within such time will be a material breach of this Lease or will be conclusive upon Lessee: (1) that this lease is in full force and effect, without modification except as may be reprosented by Lessor; (2) that there are no uncured defaults in Lemor's perfommance; and (3) first not more than one month's recti has been paid in advance. (c) If Lessor desires to finance, refinance, at sell the premises, or any part thereof; Lessee agrees to deliver to any lender or buyer designated by Lessor such financial statements of Lessee as may be removably required by such lender or buyer. All financial statements will be received by the Lessor or the lender or buyer in confidence and will be used only for the purposes set forth. 37. SUBORDINATION: This Lease, at Lessor's option, shall be subject and subordinate to the lien of any montgages or deeds of true now or hereafter placed by Lessor on or against the premises. Such subordination shall be sutornatic witbout the necessity of the execution and delivery of any further instruments on the part of Lessee to effactaRte such subordination; provided, however, that so long as Lessee complies with the obligations imposed upon Lessee in this Lease, neither Lessee ear its Successors and permitted assigns (if approved by Il essor) shall be disturbed or molested in its possession of the premises. Tenant hereby acknowledges that this Lease is subject to the approval of Lessor's mortgagee, and agrees to execute such reasonable modifications and amendments m this Lease as may be required as a condition to such approval or suet mortgagee's f inning of the premises. Tenant furthere covenants and agrees to execute and deliver qpoo demand without charge therefor, such further instrurnents evidencing the subordination of this Lease to any such mortgage or deed of trust as may be requiredby Lessor or prospective purchasers or mortgagees fo the premises. 38. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND RENEWAL OF AGREEMNT LEASE TERM The Lessee, by entering into this agreement, acknowledges its current intention to make all Lease Payments due hereunder on the dates such Lease Payments are due (but does not coamnit to a legal or other obligation to make such payments or to incur any liability beyond its then current Fiscal Year). In the event the Lessee's governing body fafls to include in its proposed budget or related documents for the ensuing Fiscal Year or fails to approprWo sufficient funds to fluky fiend all of Leer's obligations to make Lease Payments header for any future Fiscal Year, then the Lessee will immediately notify the Lessor or its udgme of such occurrence and the Lessee•'s right to possession of any property constituting the Project, and all its interest in the Project, shall terminate as of September 30 of the Fiscal Year in which the fiWJnm to appropriate occurs. In such ease, the obligations of the Lessee and remedies of Lessor shall be limited as provided in Section 23. In the event that the Lemee's, governing body does appropriate and budget funds sufficient to make the Lease Payments for a Fiscal Year dten the Lease Terni of this Agreement shall be deemed renewed for such Fiscal Year. The Lessee agrees during the current FhKW Year and during each Fiscal Year that the Lease Term of this Agreement Is renewed (i) staff of fire Lesser will prat for consideration by the City Council of Lessee a budget request for the ensuing Fiscal Year containing an amount sufficient to make the Lease Payments s chedaled for such Fiscal Year, (ii) drat the City Council of rho Lessee shall, for the ensuing Fiscal Year in which the Lease Payments are scheduled to be made, consider a budget request and appropriation of the expenditure of an amount sufficient to allow Lessee to make all Leas® payments due in such Fiscal Year; (M) that, to the extent funds have been appropriated for the c unem Fisxatl Year, it will mage all such Lease Payments; and (iv) that if stiff' rcient funds are appropriated and budgeted by it for the next Fiscal Year for the lease of the Project, then the Lease Term of this Agreement shall be deemed renewed for such Fiscal Year and shall be effective fbr such Fiscal Year. wtiarr-" Nothing in this Section or elsewhere in. this Agreement shall be deemed in any way to obligate the Leases beyond its cwreuit Fiscal Year. If the Imsee fkdk or reftm to renew the Lease Tom of this Agreetaw for the next Fiscal Year as permitted above, makes any payment due for the then cunt Fiscal Year from Muds budgeted and appropriated for that propose and relinquishes the Project as provided in Section 23 hereof. Then Lessee shall have no Airther liability ander this Agreement. 39. SPECIAL PROVISIONS: Additional provision are set forth in RxMbit A attached hent. 40. ENTiRE AGREEMENT: The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and may be modified only in writing signal by all parties. The following exhibits are a part of this Louse: Exhi`bk A: SttecWYhw si=---Owner's Shell and Buil dine Standard T==t_Imtn+ovements Exhe%k B: Premises Floor Pl n • C� J The undersigned Lessee w1knowledgm that it has thoroughly road and approved each of the provisions contained in this Lease, and apm to the teams and coaditlons apmi&d, and acknowledges receipt of a copy hereof. ACCEPTANCE Lessor: William A. Hon LJ w r Lessee: of Meridian By: rrie Its: Manor �+�;�tltlS4 � K .4o - n cy. ftg-ft. • Iia ��pj11; f+ r 111,00 Z—�ri—�Zv�G7 aultiz.-Aff— 66011±. WATERTOWER LME OWNER'S SBELL AND BUILDING STANDARD TENANT IIIVIPROVEDIENTS L CORE IMMOVEMENTS TO BE PERFORMED BY OW.I+rER, The following is a description of the contraction work provided by the Owner. A. Owner's Shell. Core Structure 1. Structure - The Oww shall construct all of the aLructural walls, floor slab, and roof of the builft, togeder with all finished exterior surfaces, parking, landscaping and other exterior iiapmvernents. 2. Interior Conon - Tho: Owner shall coArusu all mechanical rooms which serve the structure as a whole. B. Core Mechaoleal The Owner shall install roof mounted package HVAC unix, G Core Electrical The Owner shall provide complete electrical to all exterior areas imcluding Tenant sign illumination, the main switchgear and meter panels. D. Core Plumbing The Owner shall supply restrooms. to conform with Uniform building code for specific building use. E. Core Communications The Owner shall supply access to a cenuid moons roars for the Tenant's communications carrier. Terminal communication panels relating spccifcally to the Tenant's promises shall in located outside of the common communications room, and inside the useable area of the Tenant's premises only if required by TenanL F. Core Fire Sprinklers Owner shall provide fire sprinkler risers, alaam lines and oto net of heads above the ceiling line. G. Core Entrance and Glaaing 7be Owner shall provide all exterior glazing which shall be 1" insulated glass with solar grade tinting. IL Hardware Enttraace Deadbolt: Commercial grade lacks. IL BUILDING STANDARD TENANT JAWROVEMNTS TO BE PERFORMED BY OWNER it ` r ON BEHALF OF TENANT A. Space Pla®ing The OwnWs architect shall do all space planning unless otherwise provided for in the Lease or odierwise agreed to by the fawner and Tenant in writing. IL Building Permita for Tenant Improvements The Owner shall obtain from the govermnental des having jurisdiction the Building Permits required for the constcuctionlinstsllation of the Tenant improvements within the Tenant's premises. The cost of all building and other permits for Tenant's use shall be part of the Owner's contribtrtion to Building Standard Tenant Improvements, C. Tenant Demising Walla Tenant demising walk between leased spares, shall have 671 studs at 16" on center with 519" *'pe 'X' gypsum wallboard on each side. Fell cavity with. R-19 Insulation. Extend wall to underside of roof structure and scribe to fit around obstructions. D. Iaterfor Partition Walls: Shall be provided as shaven on attached floor plan with 3-112" stalls at 16" on center with Sib" gypsum wallboard on each side. Extend wall to the tmderside of the suspended ceiling with a compressible gasket strip and four-way were bmeing and strut per UBC Standard 23-2 for seismic brace. Acoustical sealant to be applied under base plates. Finish to be exposed gypsum board surfaces. E. Interior Tenant Doors Doors, frames and hardware shall be provided as Shown on the attached floor plan. Interior doors shall be 3' by 7' by 1.1/4, solid core, paint grade with hollow metal fimes. Interior doors, unless pre -f diked, shall be primed and finished with two coats of semi -gloss enamel Paint F. interior Waal Finishes Interior finishes in dw office areas shall be gypsum wallboard with light spray texture, one coat of pruner and one coat of finish to cover. Partition walls and interior wall assemblies in office areas shall be finished with 4" vinyl bass. G. hardware interior partitions shall be fural" with Kwikset passage low or equal. Hardware finish to be US26D or equal. I13. Interior Woodwork: Maple wood window sills and skirts. L Interior Ghodngi Not Included in Build1ing Standard Tenant Improvements. A Floor Covering Flour covering to be selected by Tenant shall be Building Standard 26 oz. Commercial Qupet with 319" felt pad and tack strip applicatkm ($15.04 per sq. yd, allowance) in office Initials:A4__ 0 • k areas. X Ceilings Office ceilings shall have T -Bar ceilings with. Building Standard 2'x4' 'USG Fissured SLT ceiling, tH a with DONN DX 15/16» grid or approved equal. White finish (050) on both Ile and grid. L. Cabinets and Coffee Bar Owner will provide coffee bars with sinks and lower cabinets as shown on the attached floor Pte. Coffee bars to lmve laminated plastic tops. Cabinets to be building standard plastic laminate. M, Colling Fiinures One 2'x4' lay in, flotmcut Mabe fixiwe far every 80 sq. It of useable area within the Tenant's preatism. N. Electrical Disfrlbution I. Two duplex wall outlets in each office area within the Tenant's premises. 2. Single pole light switch: one per 250 sq. S. of useable office am of within the Tenant's 3. Battery powered emergency light per code. 4. Building exit light per code. 5. Phone data outlet: one per ISO sq. & of useable office arm within the Tenant's premises. Phone data wiring is not part of the Building Standard Tenant Improvements. O. Fire Sprinklers and Protection System 1.15 sprinkler heads are allowed for each 144 sq, & of useable office area within the Tenant's premises. One 5-1b. wall mounted fire extinguisher as wired. P. 1RVAC Standard multi -zone heating and cooling, adequate for aornml once with one standard thermostat per zone. Building Standard Tenant Improvements shall include air distribution, with the necesamyr connections to matte the systains operable. Q. Window Treatment: Horizontal wood blinds. DL TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO BE COA+IPLETED AT TENANT EXp]LNSE A. Electric Fixtures and Equipment. All electric fixtures and equipment not included above. & Gas Connections: All gas eannections within Tenant's spore not included above. C Telephone: All mulubs for telephone wires or comupga networks from the central building Panel to the leased premises and in the leased premises. Tenant shall make all arrangements for telephone service. Initials w.. D. Walls: All special well mverieg, glass partkWl% or olm special construction within the leased area, E. Coves and Ceilkp: All special coves and ceilings. F. Furniture and Fixtures: All cabinets, woodwork, fucdues and equipment not fiunished by Owner. G. floor CoverluW All floor coverings above the allowance. .. IL Paintlag. Extra colors or special.paint I. Alam Systema: All alarm systems or other protective devices. J Special Plumblig; All extra phcmbing or fixtures requaed for tenant's special needs. IC Special Ventilation: All ventilation and related equipment, other thm standard air oonditioninocating in office space. L. Hot Water Heater: Except as required for the toilet rooms and coffee bar sink (if included.) x Electric Floor Outlets. , N. Signs: Sign and installation of sign (copy and design subject to Owners approval). O. All architects' fees above allowwce, special licensing has and city or county permits for interior of Tenant's space. P. ACHD fees above business part rates. Iaitisl®vr� PREMISES FLOOR PLAN initislC V ii foECORDED,RACUE5T OF ADA COUNTY RECORDER MEFUMM CATY1 J. DAVID NAVARRO RUi3,.. IDA!� ��FEE�.,-..DEPUTY 2001 FE 22 Pik 1'. 34 141` 101015262 COMMERCIAL LEASE AND DEPOSIT RECEIPT :4 CITY OF MERIDIAN FOR 6,711 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AT 660 E. WATERTOWER LANE, SUITE 250 MERIDIAN, ID TO WILLIAM A. HON P.O. BOX 190870 BOISE, ID 83719 DECEMBER 19, 2000 • • COMMERCIAL LEASE AND DEPOSIT RECEIPT RECEIVED FROM City of Meridian. a Body Corporate of the State of Idaho. hereinafter referred to as LESSEE, the sum of $8.948.00 evidenced by check, as a deposit, which shall belong to William A. Hon, ("Lessor") and shall be applied as first month's rent.. Lessee offers to lease from Lessor the premises (the "Premises") situated in the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, described as 6,711 square feet *of office space in Suite 250 of the building located at 660 E. Watertower Lane (the "Building"), upon the following terms and conditions: 1. TERM: The term of this Lease will be sixty (60) months commencing April 1, 2001 (the "Occupancy Date"). At any time after the Occupancy Date, within ten (10) days Lessor's request, Lessee agrees to provide Lessor with a written acknowledgment of the Occupancy Date (lease commencement date). Lessor agrees to allow Lessee reasonable access to the Premises prior to the Occupancy Date to install fixtures, a computer, a telephone system and move -in furniture. Further, Lessor agrees to allow Lessee to operate in the Premises upon completion of the tenant improvements outlined on Exhibit B of this Agreement. 2. RENT: Lessee hereby covenants and agrees to pay Lessor, or assigns, the total sum of Five Hundred Seventy Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Five Dollars ($570,,435.00) payable in monthly installments of $8,948.00 for months One through Twelve (1 - 12), $9,227.63 for months thirteen through twenty-four (13 - 24), $9,507.25 for months twenty-five through thirty-six (25-36), $9,786.88 for months thirty-seven through forty-eight (37 - 48), and $10,066.50 for months forty- nine through sixty (49 - 60), herein `Base Rent". All rents will be paid to Lessor or his/her authorized agent, at the following address: William A. Hon. P.O. Box 190870, Boise, ID 83719, or at such other places as may be designated by Lessor from time to time. In the event rent is not paid within live days after due date, Lessee agrees to pay a late charge of 10% plus interest at 18% per annum on the delinquent amount. Lessee further agrees to pay $25.00 for each dishonored bank check. The late charge period is not a grace period, and Lessor is entitled to make written demand for any rent if not paid when due. 3. OPERATING EXPENSE INCREASES: The Base Rent payable hereunder shall also be annually adjusted upwards beginning on the first anniversary date of the term of this Lease, and each year thereafter, by an amount that shall be Lessee's Proportionate Share of any increases in the Operating Expenses (as that term is defined below) paid or payable by Lessor, or estimated to be paid by Lessor, during the immediately preceding calendar year. As used in this Lease, the term "Operating Expenses" means: "Real Estate Taxes" which shall mean and include all general and special taxes and assessments levied upon or assessed against the Building and the land on which it is located (any tax levied in whole or in part in lieu of or in addition to real property taxes); "Operating Costs' which shall mean all reasonable costs of management, operation, and maintenance of the Building and the land on which it is situated, including without limitation wages, salaries, and compensation of employees; consulting, accounting, legal, janitorial, maintenance, guard, and other services; management fees and costs; maintenance and repairs; and any other costs, charges, and expenses that under generally accepted accounting principles would be regarded as management, maintenance, and operating expenses; "Utility Costs" which shall include the costs paid and incurred by Lessor for all utilities in connection with the Building, including, without limitation, the costs of heat ventilating and air conditioning, costs of furnishing gas, electricity or other fuels or power sources, and costs of furnishing water and sewer services, Initials: u • and the cost of waste disposal; and "Lessee's Proportionate Share" means the percentage equal to the square footage leased to Lessee under this Lease (6,711 square feet) over the total rentable square footage in the Building. 4. USE: The premises are to be used for the operation of governmental offices, and for no other purpose, without prior written consent of Lessor. Lessee will not commit any waste upon the premises, or any nuisance or act which may disturb the quiet enjoyment of any tenant in the building. S. USES PROHIBITED: Lessee will not use any portion of the premises for purposes other than those specified. No use will be made or permitted to be made upon the premises, nor acts done, which will increase the existing rate of insurance upon the property, or cause cancellation of insurance policies covering the property. Lessee will not conduct or permit any We by auction on the premises. 6. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING: Lessee shall have the right to sublet all or any portion of the Premises or assign the lease at any time to an Affiliated Person of Lessee, Lessee's partner, a successor entity created by merger, reorganization, recapitalization, or acquisition, without Landlord's consent or approval. Lessee will not assign this Lease or sublet any portion of the Premises to any other party without prior written consent of the Lessor, which will not be unreasonably withheld. Any such assignment or subletting to another party without consent will be void and, at the option of the Lessor, will terminate this Lease. Lessee will not sublease for a profit. If Lessee assigns or sublets, Lessee shall remain responsible for the faithful performance and observance of all of its covenants and obligations set forth in the Lease. 7. ORDINANCES AND STATUTES: Lessee will comply with all statutes, ordinances, and requirements of all municipal, state and federal authorities now in force, or which may later be in force, regarding the use of the premises. The commencement or pendency of any state or federal court abatement proceeding affecting the use of the premises will, at the option of the Lessor, be deemed a breach of this Lease. S. MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS, ALTERATIONS: Unless otherwise indicated, Lessee acknowledges that the premises are in good order and repair and Lessor warrants that at the time of occupancy the premises are in good order and repair. Lessee shall, at his/her own expense, maintain the interior of the premises in a good and safe condition. Lessor shall maintain all systems and equipment, including electrical wiring, plumbing and heating and air conditioning installations and repairs, and any other system or equipment. The premises will be surrendered by Lessee, at termination of the Lease, in as good condition as received, normal wear and tear and damage from casualty excepted. Lessor will be responsible for maintenance of roof, exterior walls, and structural foundations (including any retrofitting required by governmental authorities). No improvement or alteration of the premises will be made without the prior written consent of the Lessor. 9. ENTRY AND INSPECTION: Lessee will permit Lessor or Lessor's agents to enter the premises at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice for the purpose of inspecting the premises, and will permit Lessor, at any time within ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of this Lease, to place upon the premises any usual "For Lease" signs and permit persons desiring to lease the premises to inspect the premises at reasonable times. 10. INDEMNIFICATION OF LESSOR: Lessor will not be liable for any damage or injury to Lessee, or any other person, or to any property, occurring on the premises. Lessee agrees to hold Lessor harmless from any claims for damages arising out of Lessee's use of the premises, and to indemnify Lessor for any expense incurred by Lessor in defending any such claims. Initials: V 11. POSSESSION: If Lessor is unable to deliver the premises to Lessee for the installation of tenant fixtures and furniture by March 1. 2001, Lessor will not be liable for any damage caused by the delay, nor will this Lease be void or voidable, but Lessee will not be liable for any rent until possession is delivered and the tenant improvements are substantially completed. Lessee may terminate this Lease if possession of the premises is not delivered to Lessee on or before April 15, 2001. 12. LESSEE'S INSURANCE: Except for such loss or damage as maybe caused by the negligent or willful act of Lessor, its agents, or employees, Lessor shall not be liable to Lessee, its officers, agents, employees, customers, invitees or third parties for loss of or damage to property, including good, wares and merchandise, or for injury or death to persons, in on, or about the premises, and Lessee agrees to indemnify and save and hold Lessor harmless from and on account thereof howsoever arising or by whomever caused. During the term thereof, Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect with insurance companies "A" rated or better a comprehensive liability insurance policy, naming Lessor as an additional insured,. applicable to the Premises and the activities of Lessee therein with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of not less than $1,000,000. A certificate evidencing such coverage and providing that the insurance may not be canceled without thirty (30) days prior written notice to Landlord shall be provided to Landlord within ten (10) days from occupancy. Lessee shall maintain in effect policies of insurance covering its fixtures, inventory, equipment and leasehold improvements located on the premises, in an amount not less than one hundred percent (100'/0) of their full replacement cost, providing protection against any peril included within the classification Special Form Coverage, including insurance against sprinkler damage, vandalism and malicious mischief. 13. LESSOR'S INSURANCE: Lessor will maintain hazard & liability insurance covering one hundred percent (100%) actual replacement value of the Building throughout the Lease term. Lessor's insurance will not insure Lessee's personal property, leasehold improvements, or trade fixtures. The foregoing policy of insurance shall be written with rent loss endorsements in favor of Lessor to cover a period of not less than twelve (12) months. 14. SUBROGATION: To the maximum extent permitted by insurance policies which may be owned by the parties, Lessor and Lessee waive any and all rights of subrogation which might otherwise exist. 15. UTILITIES & SERVICES: Lessor will pay for the following services to be delivered to the premises: electricity, water, gas, sewer and trash. Lessor shall provide janitorial services to the Premises five days per week. Lessee shall be responsible with all other services and utilities desired by Lessee, including but not limited to, telephone service. 16. SIGNS: Lessee, at Lessee's expense, shall be permitted to install signage on the front door of the Premises. All signage must be approved by the Lessor prior to installation and must comply with all applicable municipal codes. Lessor shall provide tenant signage on the building directory. 17. ABANDONMENT OF PREMISES: Lessee will not vacate or abandon the premises at any time during the term of this Lease. If Lessee does abandon or vacate the premises, or is dispossessed by process of law, or otherwise, any personal property belonging to Lessee left on the premises will be deemed to be abandoned, at the option of Lessor. I& CONDEMNATION: In the event that the premises are condemned in whole or in part and the remainder is not susceptible for use by the Lessee, this Lease will terminate upon the date which the condemnor acquires possession. All sums which may be payable on account of any condemnation will belong solely to the Lessor; except that Lessee will be entitled to retain any amount awarded to him/her for his/her trade fixtures or moving expenses. 19. TRADE FIXTURES: Any and all improvements made to the premises during the term will belong to the Lessor, except trade fixtures of the Lessee. Lessee may, upon termination, remove all his/her trade fixtures, but will pay for all costs necessary to repair any damage to the premises Initials:2 occasioned by the removal. 20. DESTRUCTION OF PREMISES: In the event of a partial destruction of the premises during the term, from any cause, Lessor will promptly repair the premises, provided that such repairs can be reasonably made within sixty (60) days. Such partial destruction will not terminate this Lease, except that Lessee will be entitled to a proportionate reduction of rent while such repairs are being made, based upon the extent to which the making of such repairs interferes with the business of Lessee on the premises. If the repairs cannot be made within sixty (60) days, this Lease may be terminated at the option of either party by giving written notice to the other party within the sixty (60) day period. 21. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Lessee will not use, store, or dispose of any hazardous substances upon the premises, except the use and storage of such substances that are customarily used in Lessee's business, and are in compliance with all environmental laws. Hazardous substances means any hazardous waste, substance or toxic materials regulated under any environmental laws or regulations applicable to the property. Lessee will be responsible for the cost of removal of any toxic contamination caused by lessee's use of the premises and indemnify Lessor from any damages caused by Lessee. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this, Lessee shall not be permitted to store or sell -bottled oxygen on the premises. 22. INSOLVENCY: The appointment of a receiver, an assignment for the benefits of creditors, or the filing of a petition in bankruptcy by or against Lessee, will constitute a breach of this Lease by Lessee. 23. DEFAULT: In the event of any breach of this Lease by Lessee, Lessor may, at his/her option, terminate the Lease and recover from Lessee: (a) the worth at the time of award of the unpaid rent which had been earned at the time of termination; (b) the worth at the time of award of the amount by which the unpaid rent which would have been earned after termination until the time of the award exceeds the amount of such rental loss that the Lessee proves could have been reasonably avoided; (c) the worth at the time of award of the amount by which the unpaid rent for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of such rental loss that the Lessee proves could be reasonably avoided; and (d) any other amount necessary to compensate Lessor for all the detriment proximately caused by the Lessee's failure to perform his/her obligations under the Lease or which in the ordinary course of things would be likely to result therefrom. Lessor may, in the alternative, continue this Lease in effect, and Lessor may enforce all of Lessor's rights and remedies, under the Lease, including the right to recover the rent as it becomes due under the Lease. Lessor may terminate Lessee's right to possession of the premises without terminating this Lease. In such event, Lessor may retake possession of the premises and relet the premises to a replacement tenant, in which event Lessee shall be liable for any amount by which the rent due and payable under this Lease exceeds rent paid by the replacement tenant, plus Lessor's costs to relet the premises, including leasing commissions and the cost of tenant improvements. If said breach of Lease continues, Lessor may, at any time thereafter, elect to terminate the Lease. The remedies set forth in this section are cumulative and will not limit any other rights or remedies which Lessor may have. If the Lessee fails to appropriate funds as permitted in Section 38 hereof, the remedies available to the Lessor shall be restricted to those described above, provided that once it has relinquished the Project and made any payments due hereunder for its then current fiscal year, the Lessee shall have no further liability under this agreement. 24. OPTION TO LEASE ADJOINING SPACE: In event the adjoining space is vacant or becomes vacant during the term of this Lease, Lessee shall have an Option to Lease the Adjoining Space provided that this Lease remains in full force and effect, and that no default under this Lease has occurred. Lessor shall notify Lessee in writing upon vacation of the adjoining space. Such Option for Adjoining Space will be granted and become effective only if exercised by written notice to Lessor, and once exercised, is irrevocable. In the event Lessee fails to give such written notice to Lessor not later than thirty (30) days following receipt of Lessor's written notice, the Option for Initials: / Adjoining Space shall automatically terminate and expire, and Lessee shall have no further right to exercise the Option for Adjoining Space. Prior to delivery of possession, Lessee shall execute an Amendment to this Lease reflecting the addition to the premises, the additional Base Rent and Additions) Rent, the change in ratio of the Premises to the Building area, and any other revisions necessary because of such additional space being added to the original Premises. All other terms and conditions of this Lease shall apply to the additional Premises. 25. DEPOSIT REFUNDS: The balance of all deposits will be refunded within thirty (30) days (or as otherwise required by law), from date possession is delivered to Lessor or his/her authorized agent after expiration of the term of this Lease, together with a statement showing any charges made against the deposits by Lessor. 26. ATTORNEY FEES: In any action or proceeding involving a dispute between Lessor and Lessee arising out of this Lease, the prevailing party will be entitled to reasonable attorney. fees. 27. WAIVER: No failure of Lessor to enforce any term of this Lease will be deemed to be a waiver. 28. NOTICES: Any notice which either parry may or is required to give, will be given by mailing the notice, postage prepaid, to Lessee at the premises, or to Lessor at the address shown in Item 2, or at such other places as may be designated in writing by the parties from time to time. Notice will be effective five days after mailing, or on personal delivery, or when receipt is acknowledged in writing. 29. HOLDING OVER: Any holding over after the expiration of this Lease, with the consent of Owner, will be a month-to-month tenancy at a monthly rent of one and one half (1 1/2) times the current monthly rent, payable in advance and otherwise subject to the terms of this Lease, as applicable, until either partywill terminate the tenancy by giving the other party thirty (30) days written notice. 30. TIME: Time is of the essence of this Lease. 31. HEIRS, ASSIGNS, SUCCESSORS: This Lease is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the heirs, assigns, and successors of the parties. 32. TAXES: Lessor shall be responsible for all real property taxes assessed to the premises. Lessee shall be responsible for any taxes assessed in connection with Lessee's property. 33. PARIQNG: Lessee shall be entitled to a proportionate share of the parking for the Building; provided, Lessor reserves the right to assign all of Lessee's parking to certain areas in the parking lots for the Building. 34. OPTION TO RENEW: Provided that Lessee is not in default in the performance of this Lease, Lessee will have the option to renew the Lease for one (i—) additional term(s) of six (60) months, commencing at the expiration of the initial Lease term. All of the terms and conditions of the Lease will apply during the renewal term, except that the monthly rent will be at the "then" market rent, which shall not be less than the rent for the previous year. The option will be exercised by written notice given to Lessor not less than ninety 90 days prior to the expiration of the initial Lease term. If notice is not given within the time specified, this Option will expire. 35. LESSOR'S LIABILITY: In the event of a transfer of Lessor's title or interest to the property during the term of this Lease, Lessee agrees that the grantee of such title or interest will be substituted as the Lessor under this Lease, and the original lessor will be released of all further liability; provided, that all deposits will be transferred to the grantee. 36. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE: (a) On ten (10) days' prior written notice from Lessor, Lessee will execute, acknowledge, and deliver to Lessor a statement in writing: (1) certifying that this Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or, if modified, stating the nature of such Initials �� modification and certifying that this Lease, as so modified, is in full force and effect), the amount of any security deposit, and the date to which the rent and other charges are paid in advance, if any; and (2) acknowledging that there are not, to Lessee's knowledge, any uncured defaults on the part of Lessor, or specifying such defaults if any are claimed. Any such statement may be conclusively relied upon by any prospective buyer or encumbrancer of the premises. (b) At Lessor's option, Lessee's failure to deliver such statement within such time will be a material breach of this Lease or will be conclusive upon Lessee: (1) that this lease is in full force and effect, without modification except as may be represented by Lessor; (2) that there are no uncured defaults in Lessor's performance; and (3) that not more than one month's rent has been paid in advance. (c) If Lessor desires to finance, refinance, or sell the premises, or any part thereof, Lessee agrees to deliver to any lender or buyer designated by Lessor such financial statements of Lessee as may be reasonably required by such lender or buyer. All financial statements will be received by the Lessor or the lender or buyer in confidence and will be used only for the purposes set forth. 37. SUBORDINATION: This Lease, at Lessor's option, shall be subject and subordinate to the lien of any mortgages or deeds of trust now or hereafter placed by Lessor on or against the premises. Such subordination shall be automatic without the necessity of the execution and delivery of any further instruments on the part of Lessee to effectuate such subordination; provided, however, that so long as Lessee complies with the obligations imposed upon Lessee in this Lease, neither Lessee nor its successors and permitted assigns (if approved by Lessor) shall be disturbed or molested in its possession of the premises. Tenant hereby acknowledges that this Lease is subject to the approval of Lessor's mortgagee, and agrees to execute such reasonable modifications and amendments to this Lease as may be required as a condition to such approval or such mortgagee's financing of the premises. Tenant furthere covenants and agrees to execute and deliver upon demand without charge therefor, such further instruments evidencing the subordination of this Lease to any such mortgage or deed of trust as may be required' by Lessor or prospective purchasers or mortgagees fo the premises. 38. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT LEASE TERM: The Lessee, by entering into this agreement, acknowledges its current intention to make all Lease Payments due hereunder on the dates such Lease Payments are due (but does not commit to a legal or other obligation to make such payments or to incur any liability beyond its then current Fiscal Year). In the event the Lessee's governing body fails to include in its proposed budget or related documents for the ensuing Fiscal Year or fails to appropriate sufficient funds to fully fund all of Lessee's obligations to make Lease Payments hereunder for any future Fiscal Year, then the Lessee will immediately notify the Lessor or its assignee of such occurrence and the Lessee's right to possession of any property constituting the Project, and all its interest in the Project, shall terminate as of September 30 of the Fiscal Year in which the failure to appropriate occurs. In such case, the obligations of the Lessee and remedies of Lessor shall be limited as provided in Section 23. In the event that the Lessee's, governing body does appropriate and budget funds sufficient to make the Lease Payments for a Fiscal Year then the Lease Term of this Agreement shall be deemed renewed for such Fiscal Year. The Lessee agrees during the current Fiscal Year and during each Fiscal Year that the Lease Term of this Agreement is renewed (i) staff of the Lessee will present for consideration by the City Council of Lessee a budget request for the ensuing Fiscal Year containing an amount sufficient to make the Lease Payments scheduled for such Fiscal Year, (ii) that the City Council of the Lessee shall, for the ensuing Fiscal Year in which the Lease Payments are scheduled to be made, consider a budget request and appropriation of the expenditure of an amount sufficient to allow Lessee to make all Lease Payments due in such Fiscal Year, (iii) that, to the extent funds have been appropriated for the current Fiscal Year, it will make all such Lease Payments; and (iv) that if sufficient funds are appropriated and budgeted by it for the next Fiscal Year for the lease of the Project, then the Lease Term of this Agreement shall be deemed renewed for such Fiscal Year and shall be effective for such Fiscal Year. Initia S: Nothing in this Section or elsewhere in this Agreement shall be deemed in any way to obligate the Lessee beyond its current Fiscal Year. If the Lessee fails or refuses to renew the Lease Term of this Agreement for the next Fiscal Year as permitted above, makes any payment due for the then current Fiscal Year from funds budgeted and appropriated for that purpose and relinquishes the Project as provided in Section 23 hereof. Then Lessee shall have no further liability under this Agreement. 39. SPECIAL PROVISIONS: Additional provisions are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto. 40. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and may be modified only in writing signed by all parties. The following exhibits are a part of this Lease: Exhibit A: Special Provisions: Owner's Shell and Building Standard Tenant Improvements_ Exhibit B: Premises Floor Plan Initials:V The undersigned Lessee acknowledges that it has thoroughly read and approved each of the provisions contained in this Lease, and agrees to the terms and conditions specified, and acknowledges receipt of a copy hereof. ACCEPTANCE Lessor: William A. Hon W ffl, MAW so �.� Lessee: i of Meridian By: Ito rrie D G. BergIr. Arm�IanrfY Date: M. Date: IIiltla3o•yTLL 0 • EXHIBIT A 660 E. WATERTOWER LANE OWNER'S SHELL AND BUILDING STANDARD TENANT IMPROVEMENTS L CORE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PERFORMED BY OWNER' The following is a description of the construction work provided by the Owner. A. Owner's Shell Core Structure 1. Structure - The Owner shall construct all of the structural walls, floor slab, and roof of the building, together with all finished exterior surfaces, parking, landscaping and other exterior improvements. 2. Interior Construction - The Owner shall construct all mechanical rooms which serve the structure as a whole. B. Core Mechanical The Owner shall install roof mounted package HVAC units. C. Core Electrical The Owner shall provide complete electrical to all exterior areas including Tenant sign illumination, the main switchgear and meter panels. D. Core Plumbing The Owner shall supply restrooms to conform with Uniform building code for specific building use. E. Core Communications The Owner shall supply access to a central communications room for the Tenant's communications carrier. Terminal communication panels relating specifically to the Tenant's premises shall be located outside of the common communications room, and inside the useable area of the Tenant's premises only if required by Tenant. F. Core Fire Sprinklers Owner shall provide fire sprinkler risers, alarms, lines and one set of heads above the ceiling line. G. Core Entrance and Glazing The Owner shall provide all exterior glazing which shall be 1" insulated glass with solar grade tinting. II. Hardware Entrance Deadbolt: Commercial grade locks. IL BUILDING STANDARD TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PERFORMED BY OWNER Initial 0 • ON BEHALF OF TENANT A. Space Planning The Owner's architect shall do all space planning unless otherwise provided for in the Lease or otherwise agreed to by the Owner and Tenant in writing. B. Building Permits for Tenant Improvements The Owner shall obtain from the governmental entities having jurisdiction the Building Permits required for the construction/installation of the Tenant improvements within the Tenant's premises. The cost of all building and other permits for Tenant's use shall be part of the Owner's contribution to Building Standard Tenant Improvements. C. Tenant Demising Walls Tenant demising walls between leased spaces, shall have 6" studs at 16" on center with 5/8" type `X' gypsum wallboard on each side. Fill cavity with R-19 Insulation. Extend wall to underside of roof structure and scribe to fit around obstructions. D. Interior Partition Walls: Shall be provided as shown on attached floor plan with 3-1/2" studs at 16" on center with 5/8" gypsum wallboard on each side. Extend wall to the underside of the suspended ceiling with a compressible gasket strip and four-way wire bracing and strut per UBC Standard 25-2 for seismic brace. Acoustical sealant to be applied under base plates. Finish to be exposed gypsum board surfaces. E. Interior Tenant Doors Doors, frames and hardware shall be provided as shown on the attached floor plan. Interior doors shall be 3' by 7' by 1-1/4, solid core, paint grade with hollow metal frames. Interior doors, unless pre -finished, shall be primed and finished with two coats of semi -gloss enamel paint. F. Interior Wall Finishes Interior finishes in the office areas shall be gypsum wallboard with light spray texture, one coat of primer and one coat of finish to cover. Partition walls and interior wall assemblies in office areas shall be finished with 4" vinyl base. G. Hardware Interior partitions shall be furnished with Kwikset passage locks or equal. Hardware finish to be US26D or equal. H. Interior Woodwork: Maple wood window sills and skirts. L Interior Glazing: Not Included in Building Standard Tenant Improvements. A Floor Covering Floor covering to be selected by Tenant shall be Building Standard 26 oz. Commercial Carpet with 3/8" felt pad and tack strip application ($15.00 per sq. yd. allowance) in office Initials: • K. Ceilings Office ceilings shall have T -Sar ceilings with Building Standard 2'x4' `USG Fissured SLT ceiling tiles with DONN DX 15/16" grid or approved equal. White finish (050) on both tile and grid. L. Cabinets and Coffee Bar Owner will provide coffee bars with sinks and lower cabinets as shown on the attached floor plan. Coffee bats to have laminated plastic tops. Cabinets to be building standard plastic laminate. M. Ceiling Fixtures One 2'x4' lay -in, florescent tube fixture for every 80 sq. It. of useable area within the Tenant's premises. N. Electrical Distribution 1. Two duplex wall outlets in each office area within the Tenant's premises. 2. Single pole light switch: one per 250 sq. ft. of useable office area of within the Tenant's premises. 3. Battery powered emergency light per code. 4. Building exit light per code. 5. Phone data outlet: one per 150 sq. ft. of useable office area within the Tenant's premises. Phone data wiring is not part of the Building Standard Tenant Improvements. O. Fire Sprinklers and Protection System 1.15 sprinkler heads are allowed for each 144 sq. ft. of useable office area within the Tenant's premises. One 5-1b. wall mounted fire extinguisher as required. P. HVAC Standard multi -zone heating and cooling, adequate for normal office with one standard thermostat per zone. Building Standard Tenant Improvements shall include air distribution, with the necessary connections to make the systems operable. Q. Window Treatment: Horizontal wood blinds. ID. TENANT R"ROVEMENTS TO BE COMPLETED AT TENANT EXPENSE A. Electric Fixtures and Equipment: All electric fixtures and equipment not included above. B. Gas Connections: All gas connections within Tenant's space not included above. C. Telephone: All conduits for telephone wires or computer networks from the central building panel to the leased premises and in the leased premises. Tenant shall make all arrangements for telephone service. Initials D. Walls: All special wall covering, glass partitions, or other special construction within the leased area. E. Coves and Ceilings: All special coves and ceilings. F. Furniture and Fixtures: All cabinets, woodwork, fixtures and equipment not furnished by Owner. G. Floor Coverings: All floor coverings above the allowance. H. Painting: Extra colors or special -paint I. Alarm Systems: All alarm systems or other protective devices. I Special Plumbing:. All extra plumbing or fixtures required for tenant's special needs. K. Special Ventilation: All ventilation and related equipment, other than standard air conditioning/boating in office space. L. Hot Water Heater: Except as required for the toilet rooms and coffee bar sink (if included.) M. Electric Floor Outlets. N. Signs: Sign and installation of sign (copy and design subject to Owners approval). O. All architects' fees above allowance, special licensing fees and city or county permits for interior of Tenant's space. P. ACRD fees above business park rates. Initial 0 0 M-Mrr B PREMISES FLOOR PLAN O*WIIOM _PUN initial:LVLC_ February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S -X REQUEST Approve Performance Contract with New Heritage Theatre Company: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See Attached Contract peV-A-*" AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WffTEN WORK BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND NEW HERI'T'AGE THEATRE COMPANY THIS AGREEMENT made this 2to�A day of .e bi-ft a t The New Heri4& Theatre Com an 200 , between p y (hereinafter referred to `New Heritage"), located at 723 Taylor, Meridian, Idaho, 83642/P.O. Box 44269, Boise, Idaho, 83711 and the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition, by and through the City of Meridian (hereinafter referred to as "City/MADC"), and located at 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian ID, 83642. The City has designated New Heritage to perforin the written work herein described. WHEREAS, New Heritage is a professional theater company comprised of a resident repertory company, a theatrical training conse programs; and, rvatory and educational and community outreach WHEREAS, New Heritage is a non-profit organization exempt from federal taxes under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c) (3); and, WHEREAS, the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition, by and through the City, desires to contract for the work of New Heritage and to commission New Heritage to perform a written work, specifically, a play promoting a drug-free lifestyle and a drug-free community (hereinafter referred to as "Tuned Out"); and, WHEREAS, the parties previously engaged in an agreement to create the play "Tuned Out" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other valuable considerations, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Performance specifications. New Heritage hereby agrees to perform the play "Tuned out,, consistent with the script that was provided subject to artistic interpretation. 2. Sponsorship credit. The City/MADC's sponsorship of the play "Tuned Out's development shall be acknowledged whenever the Play is performed and/or published, whether such Performance and/or publication is of the play in its entirety, or is of any component thereof 3. Payment. The City's payment to New Heritage shall be $35,199.99, of which $4,999.99 is reimbursement for expenses from a State of Idaho Grant from the Governor's office for "Children and Families Against Drugs", for performances in the Spring of AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK -- NF-W HHirkfjttA� TEPATRE COWANy PAGE 1 OF 5 2007 in the Meridian School District. Additional funds will be raised for performances if necessary. A proposed budget for the performances of the play contemplated by this Agreement is attached and is incorporated herein by reference. While the City shall administer the funds for payment of the purchase price, no tax revenues shall be expended for such payment; rather, such funds shall be fundraising monies provided by the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition (NIADC). New Heritage may submit invoice(s) for payment and will be paid timely by the City. 4. Performance date (s). The contracted performances will be held between March 1-31, 2007. The number of performances of the play is to be determined between the City/MADC and New Heritage. "Tuned Out" shall be performed at schools selected by the City/MADC on dates to be agreed between New Heritage and the individual schools. 5. Termination. If either party willfully or negligently fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, the other party shall have the right to terminate the Agreement, by giving written notice to the defaulting party of its intent to terminate and specify the grounds for termination. The defaulting party shall have fourteen (14) calendar days after receipt of the notice to cure the default. If the default is not cured, this Agreement shall terminate. The City may terminate this Agreement for any reason at any time by giving at least fourteen (14) calendar days' notice in writing to New Heritage. In the event of termination or default for non-performance by the City, then City shall compensate New Heritage for reasonable accrued costs for actual time spent performing the Play, less the payments of compensation already paid. In no event shall such costs exceed the total contribution specified herein. The City shall not be responsible for the cost of services performed or expenses incurred subsequent to such notice of termination. 6. Ownership of the play. The City, recognizing that the Play is the exclusive artistic creation of the Author (Sandra Cavanaugh, a member or the Dramatists Guild), agree that it will not make, require or permit to be made any addition, omission and/or alteration of the Play without the prior written consent of the Author. Any change in the manuscript, stage business, or performance of the Play suggested by the City or any third party, which is acceptable to the Author, shall be the property of the Author, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, and the Author shall not be obligated to make any payments to any Person who makes or suggests any changes in the play. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY PAGE 2 of 5 The City represents and warrants that it shall not, and shall not permit any person under its control, direction or employ to publicly or privately, directly or by implication, represent, imply or agree that the Play is a collaborative or joint project or a Joint Work as defined in 17 U.S.C. Section 101, or that the authorship of the play is held by any Person other than the author. 7 Entire agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties. Its terms can be modified only by a mutually agreed upon written instrument duly executed by both parties. 8. Non -waiver of breach. A waiver of any breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of other breaches of the same or other provisions hereof. 9. Notices and changes of address. All notices shall be sent to the addresses set forth in the first paragraph ofthis document. Each party shall give written notification of any change of address prior to the date of said change. 10. Hold harmless and indemnification. New Heritage agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents from and against any damages or losses of any nature whatsoever, including damage or loss to New Heritage, and all liability or expense for any causes of action arising from or connected with the services provided by New Heritage, its agents, employees, assigns, heirs, or representatives pursuant to this Agreement, whether brought against City by third parties or otherwise, unless caused by the sole negligence of City. 11. Independent entity. It is the express intention of the parties that New Heritage, and any official, agent, or employee thereof, is an independent entity and is not an employee, agent, joint venturer, or partner of the City. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between New Heritage and City or between New Heritage and any official, agent, or employee of City. Both parties acknowledge that New Heritage is not an employee of the City. New Heritage shall retain the right to perform services for others during the term of this Agreement. 12. Discrimination prohibited. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK -- NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY PAGE 3 OF 5 In performing the services set forth herein, New Heritage shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. 13. Attorney's fees. In any action by the City or New Heritage for recovery of any sum due under this Agreement, or to enforce any of the terms, covenants, or conditions contained herein, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees in addition to costs and necessary disbursements incurred in such action. 14. Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Idaho and the City Code of the City of Meridian. 15. Assignment or transfer of agreement prohibited. New Heritage acknowledges and agrees that an essential element of this Agreement is the skill and creativity of New Heritage and any persons employed or utilized by New Heritage. New Heritage shall not, therefore, in any manner, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, hypothecate, assign, transfer, or encumber this Agreement or any portion thereof or any interest therein, in whole or in part, to any third party without express, prior written consent of City. New Heritage shall not subcontract outside of New Heritage any work to be done pursuant to this Agreement without the written consent of the City. 16. Binding agreement. This Agreement shall be binding on the parties hereto and their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, personal representatives, and assigns; provided, however, neither this Agreement nor any part hereof, except for monies previously earned and due to New Heritage may be assigned to anyone without the written consent of the City. 17. City Council approval required. The validity of this Agreement shall be expressly conditioned upon City Council approval hereof. Execution of this Agreement by the persons referenced below prior to such ratification or approval shall not be construed as proof of validity in the absence of Meridian City Council approval. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK -- NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY PAGE 4 OF 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this Agreement on this Z4/V/. day of2007. CITY: City of Meridian Mayor Tax�y1C*eerd 4 `v'l 66 C4-�� 2-Z6- 07 Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk And this day of .2007. NEW HERITAGE THEATRE: 'Wdy Cavanaugh,'D' r AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COWANy PAGE 5 OF 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN CONTRACT AMENDMENT CONTRACTOR NAME: DEPARTMENT NAME: The New Heritage Theatre Company City of Meridian ADDRESS: ADDRESS: 723 Taylor Meridian, ID 83642 33 E Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 CURRENT CONTRACT INFO-- ION: Amendment Data: 3/14/07 Previous Amendments. 0 Current Contract Dates: START: 3/9/07 COMPLETION: 5/3_ 1/2007 Current Contract Amount (Inclusive of Previous Amendments to Date): $35,199.99 CHOOSE ONE AMENDMENT COLUMN BELOW, either "STANDARD AMENDMENT" or "AMENDMENT TO EXERCISE OPTION TO RENEW" and check off any applicable amendments under that column. STANDARD AMENDMENT AMENDMENT TO EXERCISE OPTION TO RENEW (Check all that apply) fCheck all that Apply) Amendment to Contract Performance (Scope) Amendment to Contract Performance X Amendment to Contract Dates Amendment to Contract Dates Amendment to Contract Amount Amendment to Contract Amount Other. (Explain) _ Other. (Explain) DESCRIPTION OF REASON FOR AMENDMENT: (Attach all relevant documentation detailing amendment): Paragraph 4 of the original contract required that the contracted performances were to be held between March 1-31, 2007. These performances have not occurred. The parties to the contract have agreed that the first performance will now occur on April 4, 2007. The parties have agreed that the other performance whose number, dates and venue will be determined by the parties per the contract, will occur between the months of Se tember and December of 2007. NEW CONTRACT INFORMATION Amendment Date:/3 14107 New Contract Dates: START: 3/14/2007 COMPLETION: 12/31/2007 Amount of Amendment Change $-Q.00 Current Contract Amount (Inclusive of Previous Amendments to Date): $35.199.99. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE ORIGNAL CONTRACT AND PREVIOUS AMENDMENTS REMAIN UNCHANGED AND IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. CITY OF MERIDIAN New Herltag� Theatre of ,. BY: BY: �... TAMMY de _D, MAYOR SAKIDY A Ut of Dated: �� �""�� ��`� ''• Dat Approved by Council: f SEAL Approved by a to Attest: �� KEIT11 S, 0ljJkrtF Vgli-LIA G. BERG, JR., CItY CLERK llllttttltt111t� ING �4 0 • AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY THIS AGREEMENT made this day of , 200_, between The New Heritage Theatre Company (hereinafter referred to as "New Heritage"), located at 723 Taylor, Meridian, Idaho, 83642/P.O. Box 44269, Boise, Idaho, 83711 and the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition, by and through the City of Meridian (hereinafter referred to as "City/MADC"), and located at 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian ID, 83642. The City has designated New Heritage to perform the written work herein described. WHEREAS, New Heritage is a professional theater company comprised of a resident repertory company, a theatrical training conservatory and educational and community outreach programs; and, WHEREAS, New Heritage is a non-profit organization exempt from federal taxes under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c) (3); and, WHEREAS, the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition, by and through the City, desires to contract for the work of New Heritage and to commission New Heritage to perform a written work, specifically, a play promoting a drug-free lifestyle and a drug-free community (hereinafter referred to as "Tuned Out"); and, WHEREAS, the parties previously engaged in an agreement to create the play "Tuned Out" NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other valuable considerations, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Performance specifications. New Heritage hereby agrees to perform the play "Tuned Out" consistent with the script that was provided subject to artistic interpretation. 2. Sponsorship credit. The City/MADC's sponsorship of the play "Tuned Out's development shall be acknowledged whenever the Play is performed and/or published, whether such performance and/or publication is of the play in its entirety, or is of any component thereof. 3. Payment. The City's payment to New Heritage shall be $35,199.99, of which $4,999.99 is reimbursement for expenses from a State of Idaho Grant from the Governor's office for "Children and Families Against Drugs", for performances in the Spring of AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK PAGE 1 OF 5 NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY 0 0 2007 in the Meridian School District. Additional funds will be raised for performances if necessary. A proposed budget for the performances of the play contemplated by this Agreement is attached and is incorporated herein by reference. While the City shall administer the funds for payment of the purchase price, no tax revenues shall be expended for such payment; rather, such funds shall be fundraising monies provided by the Mayor's Anti -Drug Coalition (MADC). New Heritage may submit invoice(s) for payment and will be paid timely by the City. 4. Performance date (s). The contracted performances will be held between March 1-31, 2007. The number of performances of the play is to be determined between the City/MADC and New Heritage. "Tuned Out" shall be performed at schools selected by the City/MADC on dates to be agreed between New Heritage and the individual schools. 5. Termination. If either party willfully or negligently fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, the other party shall have the right to terminate the Agreement, by giving written notice to the defaulting party of its intent to terminate and specify the grounds for termination. The defaulting party shall have fourteen (14) calendar days after receipt of the notice to cure the default. If the default is not cured, this Agreement shall terminate. The City may terminate this Agreement for any reason at any time by giving at least fourteen (14) calendar days' notice in writing to New Heritage. In the event of termination or default for non-performance by the City, then City shall compensate New Heritage for reasonable accrued costs for actual time spent performing the Play, less the payments of compensation already paid. In no event shall such costs exceed the total contribution specified herein. The City shall not be responsible for the cost of services performed or expenses incurred subsequent to such notice of termination. 6. Ownership of the play. The City, recognizing that the Play is the exclusive artistic creation of the Author (Sandra Cavanaugh, a member or the Dramatists Guild), agree that it will not make, require or permit to be made any addition, omission and/or alteration of the Play without the prior written consent of the Author. Any change in the manuscript, stage business, or performance of the Play suggested by the City or any third party, which is acceptable to the Author, shall be the property of the Author, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, and the Author shall not be obligated to make any payments to any Person who makes or suggests any changes in the Play. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WR=N WORK PAGE 2 OF 5 NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY The City represents and warrants that it shall not, and shall not permit any person under its control, direction or employ to publicly or privately, directly or by implication, represent, imply or agree that the Play is a collaborative or joint project or a Joint Work as defined in 17 U.S.C. Section 101, or that the authorship of the play is held by any Person other than the author. 7 Entire agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties. Its terms can be modified only by a mutually agreed upon written instrument duly executed by both parties. 8. Non -waiver of breach. A waiver of any breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of other breaches of the same or other provisions hereof. 9. Notices and changes of address. All notices shall be sent to the addresses set forth in the first paragraph of this document. Each party shall give written notification of any change of address prior to the date of said change. 10. Hold harmless and indemnification. New Heritage agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents from and against any damages or losses of any nature whatsoever, including damage or loss to New Heritage, and all liability or expense for any causes of action arising from or connected with the services provided by New Heritage, its agents, employees, assigns, heirs, or representatives pursuant to this Agreement, whether brought against City by third parties or otherwise, unless caused by the sole negligence of City. 11. Independent entity. It is the express intention of the parties that New Heritage, and any official, agent, or employee thereof, is an independent entity and is not an employee, agent, joint venturer, or partner of the City. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between New Heritage and City or between New Heritage and any official, agent, or employee of City. Both parties acknowledge that New Heritage is not an employee of the City. New Heritage shall retain the right to perform services for others during the term of this Agreement. 12. Discrimination prohibited. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK PAGE 3 OF 5 NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY In performing the services set forth herein, New Heritage shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. 13. Attorney's fees. In any action by the City or New Heritage for recovery of any sum due under this Agreement, or to enforce any of the terms, covenants, or conditions contained herein, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees in addition to costs and necessary disbursements incurred in such action. 14. Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Idaho and the City Code of the City of Meridian. 15. Assignment or transfer of agreement prohibited. New Heritage acknowledges and agrees that an essential element of this Agreement is the skill and creativity of New Heritage and any persons employed or utilized by New Heritage. New Heritage shall not, therefore, in any manner, directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise, hypothecate, assign, transfer, or encumber this Agreement or any portion thereof or any interest therein, in whole or in part, to any third party without express, prior written consent of City. New Heritage shall not subcontract outside of New Heritage any work to be done pursuant to this Agreement without the written consent of the City. 16. Binding agreement. This Agreement shall be binding on the administrators, successors, personal repres neither this Agreement nor any part hereof, due to New Heritage may be assigned to City. 17. City Council approval required. parties hereto and their heirs, executors, entatives, and assigns; provided, however, except for monies previously earned and anyone without the written consent of the The validity of this Agreement shall be expressly conditioned upon City Council approval hereof. Execution of this Agreement by the persons referenced below prior to such ratification or approval shall not be construed as proof of validity in the absence of Meridian City Council approval. AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK PAGE 4 OF 5 NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this Agreement on this day of , 2007. CITY: City of Meridian Mayor Tammy de Weerd Attest: City Clerk day of .2007. NEW HERITAGE THEATRE: Sandy Cavanaugh, Director AGREEMENT TO PERFORM WRITTEN WORK PAGE 5 OF 5 NEW HERITAGE THEATRE COMPANY i February 23, 2007 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Mayors Office ITEM NO. 6-A-1 REQUEST Appointments to the Arts Commission: ITej0z14 vo 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 Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • • Page 1 of 1 Will Berg From: Peggy Gardner Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 200710:26 AM To: Will Berg Subject: arts commission David Stolhand Nancy Rountree Sandra Cavanaugh Dwight Williams Fred Shaddick Meg Glasgow Joe Borton PEGGY GARDNER Administrative Secretary to Mayor Tammy de Weerd City of Meridian Phone 884.2468 ext 204 2/28/2007 0 0 February 23, 2007 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Purchasing Department ITEM NO. 6-B-1 REQUEST Discussion and Approval of Change Order No. 2 from Ideal Demolition for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition in the amount of $83,000.00: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See Memo / Change Order from Purchasing Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo To: Will Berg, City Clerk From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Agent CC: Sharon Smith, Brad Watson, P.E. Date: 2/26/07 Re: February 27 City Council Department Report FEB 2 6 2007 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the February 27 City Council Agenda under Department Report. Ideal Demolition Change Order #2 Removal and Abatement of Contaminated Soils. All work under this Change Order #2 will be completed pursuant to the existing Asbestos Abatement and Demolition contract executed October 27, 2006. Recommended Council Action: Approve Change Order #2 to Ideal Demolition Inc. for excavation, loading, covering, hauling, and abatement of contaminated soil from the Meridian Creamery Site for a Not -To -Exceed amount of $83,000.00, authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. 0 Page 1 • CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, ID 83642 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER (CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 PROJECT NO. CH -06-001 DATE: 2/27/07 EFFECTIVE DATE: 2/27/07 k;UN I RACTOR: IDEAL DEMOLITION SERVICES, LLC PROJECT: ASBESTOS ABATEMENT & DEMOLITION The Contractor is hereby directed to make the following changes from the Contract Documents and Plans. Desciptlon: Excavation, loading covering, hauling & abatement of contaminated soil at the Meridian Creanery site. Price Is $82.00/CY per proposal by David Apadcio dated 11/9/2006 with a Not To -Exceed amount of $83,000.00. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME. Reason for Change Order: Contaminated soil discovered that was not on original Haz-Mat Survey. Proposal by Ideal Demolition Original Contract Price $ 390,800.00 Net changes form previous Change Orders No.,_ to — $35,556.30 Contract Price Prior to this Change Order. $426,356.30 Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order. $83,000.00 Contract Price with all Approved Change Orders: $509,356.30 CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Times: Completion 1/12/06 Net changes form previous Change Orders No._ to " (calendar days) None Contract Times prior to this Change Order. (calendar days or date) Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order: (calendar days or date) Completion by 4/5/2007 Contract Times with all Approved Change Orders: (calendardays) 4/5/2007 =NUEU: (CONSTRUCTION MANAGER) ACCEPTED: (CiONTRACTOR) By. Dav U5PKVING AGENT) COUNCIL APPRI Date Date: APPROVED: �►' ~ ///yyy✓✓� - (C ATTEST: By M yor Tammy eerd ' Y c6 By: City Clerk, Will Berg J . r•. ) - Date: 6 3 Date: 0 �aEra�n�c�� February 23, 2007 AZ 06-054 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Morgan Development, Inc. ITEM NO. 8 REQUEST Request for Reconsideration by Morgan Development, Inc. for Woodland Springs Professional Park: 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 Request for ReconsideraMon OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 AZ 06-054 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Morgan Development, Inc. ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Findings for Denial — Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.40 acres from R1 to an L -O zone for Woodland Springs Professional Park — 1630 East McMillan 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 HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: See Attached Findings Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING 2.4 ACRES FROM R1 TO L -O For WOODLAND SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL PARK By MORGAN DEVELOPMENT, INC. APPLICANT C/C 02/13/07 Case No. AZ 06-054 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on February 13, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m. at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. Anna Canning, City Planning and Zoning Director for the Planning and Zoning Department, and Frank Lee on behalf of Morgan Development, LLC, appeared and testified, and the City Council having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter therefore make the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The notice of public hearing on the application for annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearings scheduled for February 13, 2007, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearings and with the notice of public hearings having been posted upon the property FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL WOODLAND SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL PARK; CASE NO. AZ -06-054 PAGE 1 OF 4 • under consideration more than one week before said hearing; and that copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council on February 13, 2007, public hearing; and the applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions provided services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §§67-6509 and 67-6511, and §11-5A, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 3. The City Council takes judicial notice of its zoning, subdivisions and development ordinances codified at Title 11, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and all current zoning maps thereof, and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382, and maps and the ordinance Establishing the Impact Area Boundary. 4. The property is approximately 2.4 acres in size and is generally located at 1630 E. McMillan Road, Meridian, Idaho, on the north side of McMillan Road, at the northeast corner of Locust Grove and McMillan Roads, in Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 5. RMC Construction, LLC, whose address is 2053 E. Fairview Avenue, Suite 101, Meridian, Idaho 83642, is the current property owner and the applicant. 6. The subject property is currently zoned RI (Ada County). 7. The Applicant requests the property be zoned L -O (Limited Office District). The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL WOODLAND SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL PARK; CASE NO. AZ -06-054 PAGE 2 OF 4 8. The entire parcel of property is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. The Applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following manner: Limited Office District. 10. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map designates the subject property as R-8 Medium Density Residential. However, in 2004, the City approved Resolution No. 04-454, which amended Chapter VII, Section 1, of the Comprehensive Plan to include the following language: "At the discretion of City Council, areas with a Residential Comprehensive Plan designation may request office uses if the property has frontage on an arterial street or a section line road and is 3 acres or less in size. In this instance, no ancillary commercial uses shall be permitted." CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has discretionary authority to annex real property upon written request for annexation and the real property being contiguous or adjacent to city boundaries and that said property lies within the area of city impact as provided by Idaho Code §50-222. The Municipal Code of the City of Meridian § 11-5B-3 provides the City may annex real property that is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The provisions of Idaho Code §50-222 govern the conditions upon which the City may exercise its authority to annex territory, but the exercise of that authority is discretionary as determined by the City Council. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL WOODLAND SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL PARK; CASE NO. AZ -06-054 PAGE 3 OF 4 • DECISION AND ORDER i NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby order and this does order: That the application for annexation and zoning is denied for the following reasons: The proposed development is not in the best interest of the City of Meridian. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the Z 7 day of February, 2007. A ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD COUNCILMAN JOE BORTON COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCILMAN DAVID ZAREM 3A VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ' ' DATED: 2 _g 7 7 MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: CITY CLERK Copy served upon Applicant, the and City Attorney. Public Works Department, � t By: I CI.' �� �� ( -G) Dated: I Z '2� � 0 City Clerk's Office FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL WOODLAND SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL PARK; CASE NO. AZ -06-054 PAGE 4 OF 4 February 23, 2007 AZ 06-047 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Vacation Villas, LLC ITEM NO. 10 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing From Feb 20, 2007 — Request for a Annexation & Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision — 2510 W. Magic View Court: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT. SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet J CC Minutes Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 PP 06-049 APPLICANT Vacation Villas, LLC ITEM NO. 11 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from Feb 20, 2007 - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi -family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi -family units, 1 clubhouse building lot, 3 common/other lots on 5.3 acres in proposed L -O zone for Waverly Place Sub — 2510 E. Magic View Cour AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: See Previous Item Packet / CC Minutes Date: Phone: Staff Initials: T Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 CUP 06-030 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Vacation Villas, LLC ITEM NO. 12 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from Feb 20, 207 — Request for CUP approval for a multi -family development in a L -O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision - 2510 E. Magic View Court AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet / CC Minutes Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 9, 2007 RZ 06-013 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 13, 2007 APPLICANT Paradigm Real Estate Holding ITEM NO. 13 REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to O -T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Property at 39 W. Pine Avenue: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT. CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Joint School District No. 2 ITEM NO. 14 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2007 — Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 to O -T zone for Joint School District No. 2 — 911 N. Meridian 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 Previous Item Packet / CC Minutes Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 AZ 06-046 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Great Sky, Inc. ITEM NO. i5 REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Anemation and Zoning of 21.7 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision — 3465 and 3595 E. Victory Road & 3432 and 3467 E. Falcon Dr. 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: COMMENTS See P & Z Comm Packet / Minutes See Attached Recommendations MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See Attached: letters from Robert Aldridge and Don Hutt Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: _ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Great Sky, Inc. ITEM NO. 16 REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 61 single family residential lots and 6 common lots on 21.7 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision — 3465 and 3595 E. Victory Road & 3432 and 3467 E. Falcon Drive: 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: COMMENTS See P & Z Comm Packet / Minutes See Attached Recommendations MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See Attached: letters from Robert Aldridge and Don Hutt Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 VAC 07-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Ronald W. Van Auker ITEM NO. 17 REQUEST Public Hearing — Request to Vacate a public utility, drainage & irrigation easement common to Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of the Olson & Bush Industrial Park for Lanark Street Easement — NWC of Eagle Road & Lanark Street at 3180 E. Lanark Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment 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: Emailed: ararr inmais: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Phone: February 23, 2007 AP 07-001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT J.R. & Bonnie Schwenkfelder ITEM NO. 18 REQUEST Public Hearing - City Council's review in an Appeal of staffs denial of the Administrative Design Review application for the proposed Commercial Tire building for Commercial Tire - 100 W. Pennwood Street 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: No Comments 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: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shop become properly of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Jacksons Food Store, Inc. VAR 07-002 ITEM NO. 19 REQUEST Public Hearing -Variance to the UDC 11-3H-4132 to allow construction of right -tum only direct access to N. Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store - 3291 E. Pine Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Comments CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEFT. CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comments CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments 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: See Attached: ITD Comments, Affidavit of Posting Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT Jacksons Food Store, Inc. VAC 07-001 ITEM NO. 20 REQUEST Public Hearing - Vacate a note on the Porky Park Subdivision No. 1 plat that prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store - 3291 E. Pine Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached 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: See Attached Comments 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: Emailed: Attached: ITD Comments, Affidavit of Posting Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 21 REQUEST Public Hearing: Proposed Fireworks Ordinance 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 Proposed Ordinance Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. s 0 February 23, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 27, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 22 REQUEST Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1) (c) - (to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency): 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 Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 0 Page 1 of 1 Sharon Smith � -2—a-7-0--t CIL From: Will Berg Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:56 AM To: Sharon Smith; Tara Green Subject: FW: Exec Session next week From: Joe Borton [mailto:jwborton@foleyfreeman.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 8:48 PM To: Bill Nary; Tammy de Weerd Cc: Will Berg Subject: RE: Exec Session next week OK Sincerely, Joe W. Borton Foley Freeman Borton, PLLC Attorneys at Law 77 East Idaho, Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: (208) 888-9111 Fax: (208) 888-5130 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE. • The preceding message (including attachment, if any) is CONFIDENTIAL, and may also be protected by the ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. If you believe that this message has been sent to you in error, do not read any further portion of the message other than the remainder of this notice, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete the message. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby noted that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. We do not waive any attorney/client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message. Thank You. From: Bill Nary [mailto:naryb@meridiancity.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:27 PM To: Tammy de Weerd; Joe Borton Cc: Will Berg Subject: Exec Session next week Can we add an exec session next week to discuss labor negotiations. g*UL N a re City Attorney/HR Director 703 Main St. Meridian, ID 83642 Ph.# 898-5506 Cell# 440-3881 2/21/2007 MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Keith Bird Joe Borton Charles Rountree David Zaremba CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234 / fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 W. Bower Street 888-3579 / fax 898-5501 Planning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533 / fax 888-6844 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888-6678 / fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500/fax 898-9551 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211/fax 887-1297 - Wastewater 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191 / fax 8840744 - Water 2355 N.W. 8th Street 888-5242 / fax 884-1159 C� DELIQUENCY FOR TURN OFF Schedule for February 28, 2007 Cycle 1 FEB ? 7 7007 City of Meridian. City Clerk Office MAYOR: This letter attests to the fact that no water users have requested a pre -termination hearing for February 27, 2007. Users having delinquent utility bills will be shut off on February 28, 2007. The total amount past due Is $ 6,557.98. The number of past due customers is 66. Jaycee Holman Billing Manager CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK - FAX 888-4218 CIW ATTORNEY / HR - FAX 884-8723 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING - FAX 887-13 MAYOR'S OFFICE - FAX 884-8116 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN Shutoff Account List - MASTER LIST page: 1 Standard Payment Customers Feb 27, 2007 04:37pm Current Period: 03/05/2007 - Transactions Included Through: 03/05/2007 Shutoff Minimum of $ 50.00 compared to Delinquent Balance Report Criteria: Terminated customers not included Customer.Cust No () _ (<)880000001 Customer.13111 Cycle =1 Customer.disconnected = No Customer.shut off list = No Ref No Cust No Name / Service Address Past Due Balance 1 20.46.0854.1 DURRANT, ALAN C 89.24 151.76 3692 FLORENCE DR E 2 21.48.2904.1 BLUE RIBBON ARTISANS BISTRO 548.29 1,373.52 1435 / 1441 EAGLE RD N 3 22.50.0400.3 MCFADDEN, CLEORA 328.86 411.85 1108 2 1/2 ST E 4 22.50.0680.1 LYND M HOOVER 297.59 297.59 1320 4TH ST E 5 22.50.1408.2 CORP, WESLEY 92.99 187.78 1412 MAIN STREET 6 22.50.1500.1 BEDDES, LARRY 221.77 221,77 1535 OFFC MAIN STREET N 7 22.50.2232.3 BURTON, PAM 74.85 120.95 1020 CRESTLEY AVE N 8 22.50.3720.1 PAPPAN, DALE 124.13 256.32 951 SCRIVNER WAY N 9 22.50.4574.3 DA ROSA, JOE 71.75 123.38 220 PINE AVE E 10 22.50.4578.2 PETERSON, MIKE, & CARRIE T. 63.93 103.30 214 PINE AVE E 11 22.51.0346.2 BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT LLC 157.36 157.36 226 BROADWAY AVE E 12 22.51.3310.2 WEBB, MICHAEL 58.34 146,86 226 2ND ST E 13 22.51.3580.2 WHITE, WES & KELLY 135.86 218.13 126 KING ST E 14 22.51.3660.3 FUHRMAN, JIM 115.79 115.79 47 ADA ST E 15 22.51.4218.2 MOORE, LAWRENCE & KRISTIN 54.78 139.03 335 BOWER ST E 16481 ST ST W 'CITY OF MERIDIAN 56.04 Shutoff Account List - MASTER LIST 240 MAPLE AVE W Page: 2 Standard Payment Customers 21 23.02.2562.3 BRUCE, MARTINA & HEATHER Feb 27, 2007 04:37pm Current Period: 03/05/2007 - Transactions Included Through: 03/05/2007 188.48 1314 CRESTMONT DR N Shutoff Minimum of $ 50.00 compared to Delinquent Balance Ref 22 23.02.2564.3 CHRISTANSEN, ROBERTA 50.26 No Cust No Name / Service Address Past Due Balance 16 23.01.1280.1 FUHRMAN, JAMES 51.59 128.45 147.50 809 2ND ST W 17 23.01.2010.1 WISDOM, RICK S 70.94 119.42 122.32 323 IDAHO AVE W 18 23.02.0070.2 PINKSTON, TONYA & THOMAS 74.44 160.13 125.56 922 2ND ST W 19 23.02.1310.5 WALLACE, LORI 64.25 101.24 16481 ST ST W 20 23.02.1860.3 LARIMORE, LAURA & WALLACE, FRA 56.04 106.17 240 MAPLE AVE W 21 23.02.2562.3 BRUCE, MARTINA & HEATHER 104.44 188.48 1314 CRESTMONT DR N 22 23.02.2564.3 CHRISTANSEN, ROBERTA 50.26 121.76 1344 CRESTMONT DR N 23 23.02.6860.1 MYERS, MICHAEL 88.86 147.50 1090 STATE ST W 24 23.23.3024.1 CHRISTENSEN, DWAYNE 55.62 122.32 976 IDAHO AVE W 25 24.03.0118.3 HILL, TARA 73.33 125.56 620 MINERAL WELLS AVE N NO ARRANGEMENTS FOR RENTERSMI 26 24.03.0340.3 SMITH, AARON 100.99 158.30 753 ROTAN AVE N 27 24.03.0844.1 GODFREY, SHELL[ 86.72 142.98 616 BROWNFIELD WY W 28 24.03.0872.3 RUSSELL, BLANE 83.83 211.66 621 BROWNFIELD WY N 29 24.04.0686.2 DA ROSA, JULIE 124.13 206.24 1162 LIGHTNING PL N TOOK OFF CASH ONLY ON 11/28/06 -IF ONE NSF COMES BACK, CUSTOMER WILL BE CASH ONLY PERMANENTLY. 30 24.04.1404.2 SANCHEZ, FERNANDO 154.61 180.39 2813 LEROY CT W 0 • QTY OF MERIDIAN Shutoff Account List - MASTER LIST Page: 3 Standard Payment Customers Feb 27, 2007 04:38pm Current Period: 03/05/2007 - Transactions Included Through: 03/05/2007 Shutoff Minimum of $ 50.00 compared to Delinquent Balance Ref No Cust No Name / Service Address Past Due Balance 31 24.04.1554.1 DOLL, THOMAS 51.59 120.39 2813 SANTA CLARA DR W 32 25.25.0108.3 JONES, JEFF 77.58 111.15 3240 WAVE DR W 33 25.25.0156.2 BANKS, SCOTTARD 56.38 89.62 3315 WAVE DR W 34 25.25.1066.2 KEBER, HEATHER & SMITH, C. 50.26 116.68 4659 BLUE CREEK CT W 35 25.95.0309.2 RAMERO, TED & ASHLEY 84.40 161.71 999 GLAMORGAN AVE N 36 30.30.6022.3 BROADLAND, J. & WHITE, T. 84.27 144.56 1589 SILVER SALMON DR W 37 30.74.0322.3 CUTLER, SHIRLA 63.68 160.86 684 PENNWOOD ST 38 30.74.0356.1 WILSON, DEANA 54.29 128.77 692 HANOVER CT NO ARRANGEMENTS TIL 6/15/071! -BROKE ARRANGEMENTS SIGNED ON 6/15/06. 39 30.74.1076.1 MOORE, EVELYN 120.37 120.37 2 ROSE CL 40 30.74.2368.1 ELDRED, FLOYD 54.17 105.35 1014 CRESTWOOD CL 41 30.74.2726.3 CAMPBELL, ROSS JR 58.17 117.24 1108 CRESTWOOD DR 42 30.74.3186.5 GANGWER, AARON &VANESSA 62.00 116.61 969 GREENHEAD ST W 43 30.74.3256.2 BRADY, MARC 78.34 129.52 601 PELICAN WAYS 44 30.74.3518.6 CASTRICON, JENNIFER 76.58 122.08 971 HONKER DR W 45 30.74.3550.4 TORRES, MIKE 82.17 165.76 970 HONKER DR W 0 ' :ITY OF MERIDIAN Shutoff Account List - MASTER LIST Page: 4 Standard Payment Customers Feb 27, 2007 04:38pm Current Period: 03/05/2007 - Transactions Included Through: 03/05/2007 Shutoff Minimum of $ 50.00 compared to Delinquent Balance Ref No Cust No Name / Service Address Past Due Balance 46 35.35.0073.3 PROCTOR, KARRA 139.45 165.23 2935 GREEN CANYON DR E 47 35.35.0156.4 MYERS, PEGGY & JEFFREY 55.56 115.85 2699 SLATE CREEK WAY S 48 35.35.5017.2 WAGEMAN, CLINT 51.59 121.44 2229 MACKAY CT E 49 35.35.5026.4 NEWELL, JONATHAN 58.32 120.88 2922 GOLD BAR AVE S 50 35.43.0115.2 WILSON, CLINT 80.78 102.83 1826 SAGEMOOR DR E 51 35.65.0308.3 HERS, BEN 82.17 143.51 2132 EASY JET ST E RENTER (fivers) PH#208-353-0445 EMAIL: blazing4phoenix@yahoo.com NO ARRANGMENTS FOR RENTERS PER HPM!!!!!!!!!!!!! 52 35.65.0336.3 HANSON, BRENT 88.85 130.92 1929 THREE BARS DR E 53 35.65.0666.3 SCISM, MARTHA 71.16 115.61 1887 BLUE TICK ST E 54 35.65.0708.1 HUDDLESTON, CODY 76.41 166.91 2299 BAYOU BAR WAY S 55 36.36.1002.1 ALL AMERICAN HOMES 203.08 226.16 687 FOREST RIDGE DR E 56 36.59.0123.2 GAREY, GREG M 96.49 119.57 863 LOGGERS PASS ST E 57 36.59.0126.5 BROADWAY STREET TRUST 93.22 116.30 771 LOGGERS PASS ST E 58 36.65.3120.3 CLARK, BRIAN 145.61 145.61 1777 LABRADOR PL S 59 36.69.0182.1 BURNS, DONALD 141.83 184.50 1444 DOBERMAN ST E 60 36.69.0276.2 KOSTERMAN FAMILY TRUST 74.97 102.08 1295 DOBERMAN ST E 61 36.69.0516.3 MADSEN, DAVID 62.35 128.77 1127 BORZOI ST E ','II -Y OF MERIDIAN Shutoff Account List - MASTER LIST Page: 5 Standard Payment Customers Feb 27, 2007 04:38pm Current Period: 03/05/2007 - Transactions Included Through: 03/05/2007 Shutoff Minimum of $ 50.00 compared to Delinquent Balance Ref No Cust No Name / Service Address Past Due Balance 62 36.69.1016.1 CATALANO, JEFF 54.29 104.55 918 KINGSFORD DR E 63 36.69.1382.1 PEWE, JEFFRY 54.29 133.85 564 TRINIDAD DR E 64 37.37.4218.3 FRETWELL, RYAN & JULIE 62.35 134.90 2073 BEARTOOTH WAY S 65 37.72.0224.2 DEMOND, KYLE 2090 RIPTIDE PL S 66 37.72.0298.2 SMITH, KORY 2086 GULL COVE AVE S Grand Totals: 66 Customers Listed Report Criteria: Terminated customers not Included Customer.Cust No () _ (<)880000001 Customer.Bill Cycle =1 Customer.disconnected = No Customer.shut off list = No 60.13 106.06 75.25 123.73 6,557.98 10,965.92