Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-03 ~ ~' CITY OF .R~'~ IDAHO '~ C~R ~ Taensuae V nuE~ sixce 1903 • CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, April 3, 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 _ C~ Joe Gorton ~_ Charlie Rountree ~_ Keith Bird _ C,~ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: `j y ton Cvtc.~~ii. 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Craig Flinn with the Meridian ' Alliance Church: ~ore~.-~~- 4. Adoption of the Agenda: u,~~..c, 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 30, 2007 City Council Joint Meeting: ~~'~~ B. Approve Minutes of March 6, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: ~~-~ v~-` C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 07- 003 Request for Preliminary .Plat approval of 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres in a C-G zone for Medina Subdivision by Ken Lenz - SWC of South Meridian Road and West Overland Road: G~r~h'"°~,c_. ' - D. Approve Transfer of Location of Beer and Liquor Licenses for Jakers of Boise DBA Jakers of Meridian from 906 N. Main Street to 3268 E. Pine Avenue.: ~,r,,,,,,.~ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 3, 2007 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • E. Resolution No. ~ 7' ~~Z : A Resolution Adopting the Park Properties Namina Policy for the City of Meridian.; and Providing an Effective Date.: ~~y,~m ~-c., F. Approve Beer, Wine and Liquor License Renewals: Winco Foods #48 Applebee's Neighborhood Grill ~ Bar Tobacco Connection Sizzler #215 Maverick Country Stores #343 Epi's A Basque Restaurant Baja Fresh Mexican Grill Goodwood Barbecue Company Jacksons Food Stores - 412 E. Fairview #1 1585 S. Meridian Road #11 522 W. Cherry Lane #35 66 E. State Street #56 3100 E. Magic View #97 1950 E. Fairview Avenue #98 180 E. Central Drive #99 3291 E. Pine Street #105 Idaho Pizza Company Big Smoke, LLC Meridian Speedway Red Robin Albertsons - 20 E. Fairview Avenue 3301 W. Cherry Lane Ultra Touch Carwash Limelight, LLC A New Vintage Wine Shop Corona Village Jakers of Meridian G. Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Masco, Inc. for the ' Construction of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD for $1946.00: ~~~'vtr~- H. Approve Agreement for Professional Services with Kay Frances Company for Entitlement Services and Community Development Block Grant Management for $42,995.00: u~~~~ I. Approve ACHD Bid Award to Kina Excavation for Water and Sewer Improvements in conjunction with AHCD Project W. 1St Street, Washington to Cherry Project for $18,042.50: ~~~~,~.~ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • • J. Resolution No. d?- ~~,3 : VAC 07-005 Request to Vacate the public utility, drainage and irrigation easements located on a portion of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2 of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1 adjacent to 3015 S. Meridian Road for Strada Bellissima by Strada Bellissima, LLC - 309 5 S. Meridian Road: a~y~~.w 6. Department Reports.: ~~ ' 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: rL~n.~ 8. Continued Public Hearing From March 20, 2007: PP 06-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 30 single-family building lots, 3 common lots and 1 other lot on 10.57 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Sundial Subdivision by Gemstar Development -south of Ustick Road and west of Linder Road: ~,,,~~ a.,,~ ~'l~ f c (.l ~.,. ~~,,,,,, ~„~~ 9. Public Hearing: VAC 07-006 Request for a Vacation of the 20-foot front yard. setbacks for Lots 4-7 & 11-13, Block 34 for Paramount Subdivision No. 13 by Paramount Development Inc -West of Meridian Road and North of McMillan Road; ~.u(, Q,,,~ ~~~' ~ ~~ ~ ~~,~ ~~ 10. 'Public Hearing: PP 06-064 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 4.0116 acres within the R-4 zone for Cold Creek Subdivision by BSC, LLC -north of Ustick Road and east Ten Mile Road.: ~,nL~,t,,,~ ,C~~' ~ ~.~~ ~,. d~-~Z~ 11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 95.57 acres from RUT to R-8, R-15 and R-40 zones for Barava Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc - 3935 West Franklin Road and 280 South Black Cat Road: ~~~n,~,~,~/~ ~ 6! 9-v7 12. Public Hearing: PP 06-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 118 single-family building lots on 26.41 acres in the proposed R-8 zone; 216 single-family building lots on 38.26 acres and 1 school lot on14.98 acres in ~, the proposed R-15 zone; 2 multi-family lots on 13.01 acres in the proposed R-40 zone; and 30 common lots for Barava Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc - 3935 West Franklin road and 280 South Black Cat Road: Cdy,. fi n ~w ,a/s~ ,<v 6 ~9-p 7 13. Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1121 A: AZ 04-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.5 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Christian Family Matters, Inc. by Don Weber -east of South Linder Road and south of West Overland Road: u~~,.,° `~``" ' Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 3, 2007 Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 14. Ordinance No. ~ 7- l~0 7 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: wP~~ 15. Ordinance No. ~ ? -l3 0 $ AZ 06-064, Request for Annexation and Zoning of 27.05 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Normandy Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc. - 4145 South Locust Grove Road.: .~~.~,,.°~,c 16. 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): ~ ~~~ ~A Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 3, 2007 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council Meeting April 3. 2007 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, April 3, 2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, Keith Bird, Joe Borton, and David Zaremba. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Caleb Hood, Len Grady, Bill Musser, Joe Silva, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Good evening, I will go ahead and start tonight's meeting. Welcome to the Meridian City Council meeting. It is Tuesday, April 3rd, It's five minutes after 7:00. I don't have my glasses, so if I have fudged it, I apologize. And we will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance. Tonight we will be led in the pledge by Lieutenant Colonel Ron Coulter. If you will all raise and join us in the pledge of allegiance. Retired. (Pledge of allegiance recited..) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Craig Flinn with the Meridian Alliance Church: De Weerd: I would offer you a City of Meridian pin, but I think you have one. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. We will be led. tonight by Pastor Craig Flinn with the Meridian Alliance Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Pastor. Flinn: Let's just take a moment and just have a moment of silence. Almighty God, we acknowledge your soverenty in the universe and in this earth and over ail mankind. We thank you that your loving kindness is new this morning throughout the day and this evening and great is your faithfulness. Again, we thank you for your patience, your compassion, your kindness towards us. God, we thank you for the city you have placed us in to live, work and play together. We pray that this meeting tonight will have great conversations of discovering new avenues of growth for whatever developments, Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 69 projects, avenues of transportation or communication are before this meeting. We pray a blessing and wisdom in humanity amongst the .leadership as they make decisions and just bless each participant that we be a stronger people and community and city because of this meeting tonight and we pray these things in Jesus' name, amen. I have a lot of pins. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you. I'll save one just in case you change your mind. Okay. Item 4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird.: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the agenda we have -- on the Consent Agenda Item E is resolution number 07-552. Item J on the Consent is resolution number 07-553. The regular agenda Item 14 is 07-1307, ordinance number, and Item 15 is ordinance number 07-1308. With that I move we approve the agenda as adopted. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I .have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as stated. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 30, 2007 City Council Joint Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of March 6, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval.: PP 07- 003 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres in a C-G zone for Medina Subdivision by Ken Lenz - SWC of South Meridian Road and West Overland Road: D. Approve Transfer of Location of Beer and Liquor Licenses for Jakers of Boise DBA Jakers of Meridian from 906 N. Main Street to 3268 E. Pine Avenue: E. Resolution No. 07-552 A Resolution Adopting the Park Properties Naming Policy for the City of Meridian; and Providing an Effective Date: Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 3 of 69 F. Approve Beer, Wine and Liquor License Renewals: Winco Foods #48 Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar Tobacco Connection Sizzler #215 Maverick Country Stores #343 Epi's A Basque Restaurant Baja Fresh Mexican Grill Goodwood Barbecue Company Jacksons Food Stores - 412 E. Fairview #1 1585 S. Meridian Road #11 522 W. Cherry Lane #35 66 E. State Street #56 3100 E. Magic View #97 1950 E. Fairview Avenue #98 180 E. Central Drive #99 3291 E. Pine Street #105 Idaho Pizza Company Big Smoke, LLC Meridian Speedway Red Robin Albertsons - 20 E. Fairview Avenue 3301 W. Cherry Lane Ultra Touch Carwash Limelight, LLC A New Vintage Wine Shop Corona Village Jakers of Meridian G. Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Masco, Inc. for the Construction of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACRD for $1946.00: H. Approve Agreement for Professional Services with Kay Frances Company for Entitlement Services and Community Development Block Grant Management for $42,995.00: I. Approve ACHD Bid Award to King Excavation for Water and Sewer Improvements in conjunction with AHCD Project W. 1St Street, Washington to Cherry Project for $18,042.50: J. Resolution No. 07-553 :VAC 07-005 Request to Vacate the public utility, drainage and irrigation easements located on a portion of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2 of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1 adjacent to 3015 S. Meridian Road for Strada Bellissima by Strada Bellissima, LLC - 3015 S. Meridian Road: • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 4 of 69 De Weerd: Okay. Item 5, Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird.. Bird,: I move we approve the Consent Agenda, which includes Item E, which is resolution number 07-552 and Item J, which is resolution number 07-553 and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Any discussion, Council? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. i i Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports: De Weerd.: Okay. There are no item listed under department reports. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Or item moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing From March 20, 2007: PP 06-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 30 single-family building lots, 3 common lots and 1 other lot on 10.57 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Sundial Subdivision by Gemstar Development -south of Ustick Road and west of Linder Road: De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 8, which is a continued Public Hearing from March 20th on PP 07-060. I will start with staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As the Mayor mentioned, this is a continued item from March 20th. The project name is Sun Dial Subdivision. It is located approximately a quarter mile south of Ustick Road and a quarter mile west of Linder Road. It's just south of Tumble Creek and north and west of Turtle Creek Subdivisions. Everything in the general vicinity is zoned R-4. The site is currently vacant. It's in the middle of the screen there, but for the 150 foot tall cell tower and associated structures for the cell tower that will remain and as I get to the plat you will kind of see how that fits in. The specific site is currently zoned R-4 in the city. There was a previous request to R-8 zoning. The applicant has withdrawn that application, so all of the lots shown on the subject preliminary plat do conform to the R-4 dimensional Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 5 of 69 standards and there is not a rezone request tonight. Highlights of the development -- after the R-8 rezone was withdrawn, the applicant did have to redesign the plat to make some of the lots conform to the existing R-4 zone for frontage, lot sizes, et cetera. There are 28 single family homes. Thirty were originally proposed. Three common lots and one lot for the existing cell tower. I did mention that that -- how that lot fits in. There is another plan that shows future redevelopment of that lot, so when that lease runs out they are planning on re-subdividing that and having the cell tower go away, again, when that lease did expire. So, for now it will remain and development is proposed around fhat. The density is 2.:64 units per acre. The Commission heard this item on February 15th and recommended approval. Some of the key items of discussion at the Commission meeting were the proposed irrigation system and integrating the proposed subdivision in with the adjacent subdivisions. Some of the discussion there had everything to do with the pressurized irrigation system and tying into some pressurized irrigation systems.. Covenants, having -- making sure that the homes look similar to the homes in Turtle Creek and Tumble Creek. Some of the other items that were discussed.., particularly by adjacent neighbors or neighbors within the vicinity, anyways, was traffic. There is pretty good interconnectivity -- I'm going to jump back to this map here and you can see there is a few stub streets to this property, anyways, and, then, those get you out to the arterials fairly efficiently, but there are -- there is several avenues of ingress and egress to the property currently, but those routes do pass by existing residences and some of them were in attendance at the Planning and Zoning Commission and mentioned some concerns they have with adding additional traffic to the streets fhere. The intersection of Cubic and Field Stream was a particular importance in how that -- some traffic mitigation for that intersection, either some speed bumps were talked about or some chokers or something to that effect to slow traffic down. There are some fairly long, straight strips on the existing streets, too, so these would be some off-site concerns, but concerns nonetheless for some of the property owners there. The Commission did recommend approval of the project, required a homeowners association to be formed for this project. That's pretty much the long and short of this project. Staff and the Commission, as I mentioned., are recommending approval of the project and I will stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff? Bird: Not at this point, Mayor. Rountree: Mayor, I do. Could you tell me what -- what happened with the tower lot in the initial phase? Are there some conditions in the plat that would require maintenance to a certain level, surfacing of the access facility in and out of there, those sorts of things? Hood: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, there are some conditions and I can look them up real quick. I know there were some original concerns expressed by the fire department and the police department about the existing site being aweed -- noxious weed or an eye sore, essentially, and potential fire hazard. So, there is a condition in -- I believe it's the fire department's requirements that they need to maintain Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 6 of 69 the site in accordance with our weed ordinance and they agree to keep it mowed and maintained. I'm not sure about any other maintenance provisions on the site regarding the cell tower itself and I don't know if that's where your question was going, like with the covenants and stuff. There is nothing specific about that. There is an access to the cell tower from the end of the cul-de-sac -- it doesn't really show up very well on any of those, but on the south side of the property that is where the access to the cell tower will occur. Again, I can look and see what the specific conditions regarding maintenance until it does redevelop are and get the exact language for you. Rountree: If you would I would appreciate it. Thank you. De Weerd.: Okay. Anything else from Council? Rountree: That's all I have. De Weerd: Is the applicant here? Good evening. Wildwood: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Susan Wildwood. Office is in Boise. Business address is P.O. 6502 in Boise and I'm here on behalf of the applicant. And I think I might be able to address Councilmember Rountree's -- Rountree: I'm forgettable. Wildwood: -- question. De Weerd: Long name. Wildwood: The staff presentation really covers the basic facts. Just a little bit of history. When we originally came in with an original request to rezone to R-8, staff and I had spent some time trying to find the original file. This property actually dates back -- the annexation is 1994 and it was only when Justin was digging around in the dusty tones in the basement that we actually found the file and the development agreement. So, we withdrew that application and came back. Under the development agreement we are required to meet the R-4 zoning and have a minimum lot size of 8,000 square foot lots, so we withdrew everything, redesigned it, and what you have before you tonight is that redesign. Can you all see this -- De Weerd.: That's good, because, you know, I have institutional knowledge of that 1994 plat. Wildwood: I'm sure you do. De Weerd: Because that was my backyard. Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 7 of 69 Wildwood: Was it really? Well., then, we have -- we can take judicial notice of that, by golly. Back in '94, because fhe owners. had entered into a lease agreement before the annexation and plat was put in place and. that has a -- it's a very unusual lease. It has five automatic renewals without anything done by the property owner. So, we are stuck with the thing for an additional seven years. Because of that this section was withdrawn. It's in the annexation, but it was withdrawn from the plat, so it's never been platted.. And so there weren't any original conditions for maintenance. They had to have fhe certain distance fall line and that was about the extent of it. Because it had been a weed infested issue, what we have done is we have agreed and Scott Noriyuki has met with Joe Silva, we have mowed it down and we are going to keep it mowed down and happy to have it as a condition to keep the weeds mowed down to approximately three inches, which is, actually, a little longer than my front yard or just barely. And also it currently has fencing around the cell tower. I have photographs for you of the existing facility. I apologize, I only have three sets, but you can probably share them. The cell tower and the anchors are each fenced with six foot chain link fencing, three strand barbed wire, so that they are presently fenced off. We will be requiring as a condition on each of the lots that the lot owners install a six foot cedar privacy fence, which will also go along the perimeter and as soon as a lot is sold if perimeter fencing is not installed immediately, we will put up temporary construction fencing, so that we don't have any debris blowing over onto any of the neighboring properties and we will be submitting a detailed fencing plan with approval of the final plat if this project goes forward with approval tonight. So, that is a condition of the approval. We agree with all of the conditions and I did want to make one small comment about the homeowners association. I know that some of the neighbors were concerned that we would not be building a project that would be compatible with the neighborhood. I'll get Scott to play my Vanna White one more time and show you we have taken photographs of our intended product. I have worked with the Gemstar people for about ten or 15 years and every single project that they have done has restrictive covenants, a homeowners association, an architectural review committee and most all of the projects also utilize a profession management company to be sure that everything is taken care of and well maintained.. So, we have tried to reassure the neighbors about that,. but they are not entirely convinced that we are going to have as quality of product as they have. We looked at the CC&Rs for both Turtle Creek and Tumble Creek and., actually, we think ours are better. So, we are going to be integrating this project in visually. This is an example of the kinds of homes that we are projecting will be built out in this area and would be required by the restrictive covenants. The issue with regard to the pressurized irrigation system -- I have had a number of phone conversations with Nathan Draper at Settler's Canal and also with John Anderson from Nampa-Meridian Irrigation. They met last Friday and had another discussion on Monday and what they have agreed to do and we will be working with them to accomplish all of this, Settler's -- if you will excuse me. I have marked in blue -- you can see this existing connection to pressurized irrigation. This is aNampa-Meridian stub. This is another one. This would be immediately on the east side. That's a stub, Nampa-Meridian. Another stub here to the south. Another one also to the south on either side of Whitelaw. These are all stubbed into the property from the Tumble Creek - Turtle Creek projects. Settler's has a canal that basically dead ends with the property Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 8 of 69 on the west side of the property, with a head gate up here in the southwest corner -- is that southwest? Yeah. Southwest -- northwest corner. We will be abandoning this ditch and what we will end up doing is de-annexing or requesting exclusion from Settler's Canal. They will retain the water, which will give them more water to service other projects. We will be annexing this area that is currently in Settler's into the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation Company and they will be able to service. By looping through the entire system in here, it will solve some pressure problems that Nampa- Meridian currently has out there in both Tumble Creek and Turtle Creek where the water comes to an end without a loop, so we would be able to fix that problem for those other subdivisions and, actually, create some better water connection for the pressurized irrigation. We will coordinate with Nathan Draper at Settler's and with John Anderson and those will, basically, be done at the same time. So, we will submit all the documents, make sure that everybody is happy with what we are doing. In addition to constructing it, we will be engineering the system. Stan McCutchisen at Stanley is -- has done work that's well respected by both irrigation companies and they were reassured that he would be doing the designing. We have at least one pumping system that we will have to be upgrading and so we will also be taking care of that and that engineering will be reviewed by Nampa-Meridian Irrigation. So, we think that we have integrated the water, as well as the lot sizes. Most all of the lots surrounding the project are identical in lot sizes. One of the major differences -- and if you could put that back up, Justin. The big map showing all the surrounding.. We -- yes. Thank you very much. There -- if you look at the surrounding projects, there is virtually no open space anywhere in Turtle Creek or Tumble Creek. This open space lot that would be, basically, on our northwest corner is actually a two to three acre lot that's privately owned and I'll talk about that in half a second.. None of the rest of these have open space. We have five percent open space in our -- could you put back the plat, please? In -- we have open space up here.. This is common area number five. We also have common area here. If you will excuse me, I will put the lid down and I will show you that. So, we have this common area against these lots offering some buffering to these smaller lots. We have this buffering against these other lots in this area and larger lots against the two to three acre property. We are also stubbing a street out. Currently it only has access out through this other subdivision and staff has recommended and we are happy to plant, for lack of a better term, this road access so it actually comes in at more of an angle, rather than coming straight in the property line, we will move that. at a ten foot angle. They are happy that we are going to be working with them, giving them access. That means that they will have legal access in for future development of that property. We will also be working with them when we do Settler's irrigation abandonment there may need to be a walk on the system. Their headgate is roughly in the northwest corner of the property, so we will be looking at that to insure that we don't affect the current flood irrigation for any of those properties that would be taking service off of that line. I'm trying to see if there is anything else. When we redevelop there is also open area that will be in phase two, Lot 22, and we will have a cul-de-sac that, essentially, will come in where the cell tower is now and that's sort of hence the name Sun Dial. So, we have got this great big tower that we hope to retire and get out of there in seven years and we are going to be back with that. .,Madam Mayor and Meridian City council • • April 3, 2007 Page 9 of 69 Members of the Council, I would be happy to stand for any questions and, hopefully, have run through all those questions. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for the applicant at this time? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Wildwood: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Thank you. Huebschmann: Madam Mayor, Council Members, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening. De Weerd: Sir, if you could, please, give your name and address. Huebschmann: I was just coming to that. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Huebschmann: My name is Michael Huebschmann, I have provided the Mayor with my business card so that you can have a hope of a chance of spelling it correctly. I live at 2328 West Whitelaw Drive, which -- if I can get this right -- is located right there. I'm encouraged to see the progress that the applicant has made with the homeowners association in terms of coming to agreement on how the two subdivisions will be integrated visually, that there are a few concerns as to the solicitor has just mentioned in terms of integrating the two homeowners associations into one at some point in the future. That would be our preference. I'm speaking as a private citizen, not as a member of the board of the Turtle Creek Subdivision, so anything that I say here should be construed as my own comments and not as representing the official position of the homeowners association. I think the only major concern I have right now is that the access to the tower be graveled or some sort of provision be made such that when the tower construction or maintenance crews come in and do any maintenance on that facility, that the street, Whitelaw Drive, not be littered with all kinds of dirt and debris and so on. Also, again., just to stress that when the construction is taking place that appropriate barriers be erected to prevent sedimentation or other debris leaving the site. Also, that as -- or while the tower is still standing for those additional seven years, that the site be maintained such that it does not present more of a fire hazard than what it does already. I do appreciate the fact that, finally, that hazard is about to go away and I'm also looking forward to not having all the noxious weeds to flow directly into my Meridian Ciry Council • April 3, 2007 Page 10 of 69 backyard.. So, with that I think I will concede the floor and stand for any questions you might have. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird.: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Thank you. Huebschmann: All right. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Okay. Scott Noriyuki. If I mess your name up, I apologize.. Noriyuki: Scott Noriyuki with Gemstar Properties, 738 South Bridgeway, Eagle, Idaho. I was stand for any questions. De Weerd..: Okay. No? Noriyuki: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. and Meredith? Thank you.. Okay. Any other testimony on this application? Yes, sir. If you will, please, share your name and address for the record. Schafer: John Schafer. I live at 2788 West Ustick Road and there was a letter submitted that -- didn't hear of any acknowledgment on that regarding the irrigation down the west side of this property. There is flood irrigation that provides us over off of Ustick Road and we just want to make sure that that's maintained substantial flow to irrigate our properties on that site. That would be the only thing I'd have, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Wildwood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Susan Wildwood. And not rebuttal, but just some comments. I neglected to mention that we are going to be doing as Mr. -- think it's Huebschmann -- indicated.. We are going to be putting in a gravel road from the intersection -- the cul-de-sac. ACRD is -- would be requiring that we do some all surface road, because that also assists the fire department in case there is a fire, so that we will have an all-surface -- or, excuse me, an all weather road that goes in there. Gravel. We will also be paving into what would be probably termed an apron, a pavement that goes off of the cul-de-sac in far enough so that the gravel drops off the truck tires before they go out onto Whitelaw. In addition, I was familiar with Mr. Schafer's concern, that's why I wanted to mention that we would be working with those neighbors to insure that when that ditch is abandoned that we don't have any affect on that flood irrigation. They, actually, are at Ustick, which is north of this, but there is some connection here to that particular headgate, so we will be working with Settler's to insure that we do nothing to interfere with that headgate and make sure that that irrigation water does arrive up there. With regard the homeowners association being Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 11 of 69 integrated into one, that's probably a long ways off and not necessarily out of the realm of possibility, but we want to be sure that we get the project developed .out and we have to come back with the cell tower Lot 22. So, we will be seeing how that works and we want to work with them, the homeowners association, we have had a lot of dialog and we have really appreciated that level of communication back and forth and as far as the barriers, there will be the perimeter fencing, as I indicated, and we have to be a little bit careful., just because the cell tower lease, how they are able to access this cell tower. We can't put in barriers, but we are going to post it and we are going to make it as difficult as we can for folks. It will be posted no trespassing and we have to keep some of that access open, just simply because of the terms of that lease. So, some of it we are kind of stuck with, but with that -- with those comments we are actually very delighted with all the cooperation we have had from the neighbors and a lot of help from staff, so I want to thank the city. Hopefully we can get this project off the ground and eventually get rid of that cell tower. I'll stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Rountree: I have none. Wildwood: Thank you, gentlemen. De Weerd.: Thank you. Okay. Council, any further information needed? Rountree: I have none. Bird.: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to close. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd:: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we close the Public Hearing for Item No. 9, PP 06-060. Zaremba: Second.. De Weerd,: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd:: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 12 of 69 Rountree: A comment and if there is no further comments, I'd make a motion, but I just wanted to thank the folks that are not here., but in reviewing the record there was close to 30 folks at one point in time that were not particularly happy with this application and it seems a thank you also to the applicant that you have gotten together, you have listened and you have resolved the issues -- I think pretty much all of the issues that I can see and it certainly, though our job is not easy, it does make it easier at times, and, again, for you folks in the neighborhood's time and the applicant's time, thank you. No further comments, Madam Mayor, I would move -- Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 8, preliminary plat for PP 06-060. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8. Rountree: If I might add to that, that -- help me. Is fihere going to be a development agreement? Hood.: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, there is no development agreement. Rountree: Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you. De Weerd: He was going to tie the elevations to it. Rountree: Can't do it. It's already annexed. De Weerd: But we trust that you will keep the concept of your elevations. Rountree: My motion for approval is based on the testimony received this evening. Bird.: Second agrees. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton.: And that includes the applicant's comments? Rountree. The applicant's comments. Yes. De Weerd.: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian Ciry Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 13 of 69 Item 9: Public Hearing: VAC 07-006 Request for a Vacation of the 20-foot front yard setbacks for Lots 4-7 & 11-13, Block 34 for Paramount Subdivision No. 13 by Paramount Development Inc. -West of Meridian Road and North of McMillan Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 9 is a Public Hearing on VAC 07-006. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next item on your agenda is a vacation in Paramount Subdivision No. 13. Paramount is -- Paramount No. 13 is zoned R-8 and it's located approximately a half mile south of Chinden and a half mile west of Meridian Road. The applicant is requesting the city consent to vacate the special setbacks that are depicted on the face of the plat for eight lots. They are Lots 4 through 7 and Lots 11 through 13, Block 34, of Paramount Subdivision No. 13. This phase was recorded in 2006. As you can see on the screen, there is a special setback on those aforementioned lots, the eight lots that are mentioned there, and the -- seven lots. Excuse me. And the applicant is requesting this, because the rest of the lots that aren't encumbered by that special setback are allowed a ten foot setback. So, you would have some lots that could be to within ten feet of the back of sidewalk and., then, these ones would be setback the 20 feet from right of way it looks like. So, the applicant has submitted a letter with justification for that request. The city has required - - has required compliance with this standard, which is a DEQ best management practice standard for a couple of years now anyways, that there be a 20 foot minimum separation between infiiltration trenches and building foundations. Again, that is a minimum. The DEQ actually -- their BMP, best management practice, actually states in some circumstances that they would like to see a hundred foot setback from some of those trenches. This came about primarily because of what crawl spaces and the associated complaints from homeowners, so it is now a standard condition that the Public Works Department puts on plats as they come forth with this design, having the roadside swales, trenches, be in fhe streets, like Paramount 13 has. Let's see if I have anything else to add. This BMP, as I mentioned, is still a standard requirement and, therefore, staff does not believe it is appropriate to vacate this standard setback, somewhat standard setback, the best management practice, and it's in the best interest of the future residents that are going to be living on these lots to try to avoid any wet crawl spaces and adverse impacts that may occur from those swales. So, again, staff is recommending that the Council deny the applicant's request and either I or Len will stand for questions, as this is primarily a Public Works issue, if you will. De Weerd: Very good, Len. That was a nice presentation. Grady: Thank you. De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff at this time? Rountree: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council ~• April 3, 2007 Page 14 of 69 De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Not to let Len off the hook or anything. Help me understand the location of the infiltration beds. Are they in the alleyway or the roadway there or what's the situation with the -- Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, they are right on the property edge. When this plat came forward as a pre-plat, of course, a lot of that detail isn't in the pre- plat. We did pick it up on the final plat that these infiltration trenches were right on the property line. That's when we imposed the 20 foot setback, that final plat, was the first time we became aware of that trench. It was right on the property line. I did speak with DEQ and they were pretty adamant. I spoke with them yesterday. They were pretty adamant that 20 foot is really -- it is a BMP, it is the minimum. Normally, it's a hundred foot, especially if the trench is upstream from you, so -- De Weerd: Any further questions? Rountree: No. - De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Turnbull: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is David Turnbull. Address is 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. I appreciate the staff report, not necessarily the conclusion, and I will try to explain why. This -- Paramount 13 is the first phase of our -- what we call carriage lane home sites in Paramount. We introduced this product initially to the Meridian market in Heritage Commons project and, as you know, this product is on smaller lots, it's a higher density, and we feel like density requires -- when we are increasing density it requires a higher degree of attention to design and there are certain principals involved with this sort of development that are important to us, to the market, and to the esthetics of the project and one of those is the front setback. You will notice in our Heritage Commons project all those homes were built pretty much to a ten foot front setback. That concept is to bring the porches and the front door closer to the street, get more intersection between the street and the porches and so forth. You know, some of that may be a little bit feel good, but feel good counts. I think everybody appreciates the ambience and the character we have created in the Heritage Commons neighborhood. We wish to create that here as well. That density does require a greater level of detail to design. These homes are on smaller lots and we take advantage of almost every square foot of those lots and we design the lots around the product and we also design the product around the lots. Now, we have a product ready to go. The first time this came to my attention was not on the preliminary -- or the final plat that we submitted, but when I saw the recorded plat and those 20 foot setbacks were on there, we thought, well, you know, this is a mistake, we should get it resolved with the staff level, but we were unable to do so. This is a huge deal for us. I wouldn't be here arguing this if I didn't think it -- if it weren't a big deal for us and I wouldn't be here arguing this if I thought there were some of the concerns about water in crawl spaces were valid.. It may be valid in certain locations where you Meridian Ciry Council • •' April 3, 2007 Page 15 of 69 have a high groundwater table, where you're required to put your storm drainage retention basins, those can fill up, those can flow over hard pan, they can .possibly get into crawl spaces, but we don't have that situation in Paramount, nor did we have it in Heritage Commons. I have got Glen Logan, who is our soils analyst and engineer here. He has prepared a report that shows the groundwater in this area immediately surrounding some of the monitoring wells don't go any deeper than ten feet, but the ones immediately surrounding this are 14 to 18 feet deep and still dry. So, I'm going to submit this for the record. And I also have Gene Smith, our civil engineer and Glen Logan here to answer any questions you might have on the drainage of these facilities. Essentially, these underground drainage facilities are put in seepage beds. Those seepage beds go to clear free draining soils. Water goes in them and they are going to go straight down. Glen can answer questions if you have any in that regard. Like said, if we thought that there were a sound engineering reason to require these additional setbacks, I wouldn't be here arguing. But for the esthetics of the project, it is a big important part of us. Not only that, our builders design to this -- these specific dimensions and to require them to go back now and lop ten feet off of a house plan will give us an inferior product with inferior esthetics. So, we respectfully request that this extended setback requirement be removed from this plat and it's going to be an issue in future plats in this project. We have in the surrounding area more of this type of product coming on line. So, I would address the issue of Heritage Commons 9 there in the staff report it says that additional setbacks were required there as well. Heritage Commons 9 had probably a dozen kind of standard lots with front entry garages and about 28 lots that were the carriage lane homes. The increase setbacks were not required on the carriage lane home sites specifically because of this issue. So, to say that it's been required in the past is true, but not in this type of a situation, and we, frankly, don't see any reason or justification for it and we appreciate your granting our request to remove this from the plat. I will stand for any questions you may have. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: David.., how deep do you go with your -- with your drainage? Turnbull: Ten feet. Ten to 12 feet. Bird: And how much of that is concrete -- or concrete. How much of that is gravel? All the way? De Weerd: And for the record, that was filled up all the way. Whatever that meant. Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page Y6 of 69 • L 1 Rountree: David., you talked about this wasn't required with the carriage lots in Heritage Commons. Turnbull: Right. Rountree: Were there infiltration beds in the carriage lots in that particular subdivision? Turnbull: Yes. And I have that plat. Right here, if I -- if you would like me to show it to you. Rountree: Sure. De Weerd: Do we want to try and put it on the overhead? Turnbull: Okay. I don't know if you can see this. Can you zoom in on this area here? Okay. Right here is a seepage bed that would go right up to our property line right on the fronf. Now, there is a ten foot setback requirement, that's standard ACRD setback requirement, so that is clearly delineated with that ten foot setback requirement, but there is no additional setback requirement there. It also occurs I believe right here. Now, if you go over to this area here -- actually, the rest of it's a note on the plat that requires 20 foot setback from these lots that don't access from fhe alley where there is seepage beds, as in this location here. And that's defined as a note on the plat. De Weerd: Did that answer your question? Rountree: Yes. De Weerd.: Okay. Anything further from Council at this point? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I know nothing about water and soils, necessarily, other than the clay that run into in my own backyard, but I would just wonder if there are other things to explore. I assume Polk Street is probably crowned in the middle and I -- I wonder if there would be an opportunity to instead of making it high in the middle, make it low in the middle and put a few drains in and have this field underneath the road, instead of at the property lines. Does that make any sense or is it possible? Turnbull: Well, it's already ,paved. Zaremba: Oh. Okay. That's not going to be worth doing. Another thought would be to have the first ten feet of the buildings slab on grade and, then, the rest with a crawl space.. Is that -- I have no idea whether these ideas make sense or not, but -- .Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 17 of 69 Turnbull: If I thought it was a problem I would come forward with alternative solutions. Zaremba: Okay. Turnbull: I just -- I am not convinced, nor is our soils engineer convinced that there is an issue here. Now, I mean talk about DEQ and best management practices, they probably have a hundred or two hundred of those, but, you know, they are not universally applied to all situations on all plats. Best management practice is just that, it's a guideline and it's not a requirement. If you can show that it doesn't make sense in a certain situation, that it's an unnecessary condition, then, the best management practice can be waived. And that's what we are asking for. And regarding the hundred foot setback, that's where, you know, a property would down grade from a detention basin or an irrigation facility or something like that where the water is, you know, likely to seep down. That's not the case here. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Turnbull: I would just say if you have any questions for somebody that's much more knowledgeable on this than I am, Glen Logan, who has been doing this in the valley probably longer than anybody, is here to answer any questions, as well as Gene Smith, our civil engineer. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: I'd like to hear from both of them at some point in time. Turnbull: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there any public testimony? Okay. So, Councilman Rountree, would like to hear from -- has some questions or would like to hear comments from the two mentioned individuals. Smith: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Gene Smith with Engineering Northwest at 423 Ancestor Place in Boise. So far as the seepage trenches being located in the street, there was a question as to whether or not in the future they can be located in the street. There is a specific requirement for setbacks between seepage trenches and water mains, so where you have a water main in the street you can't have a seepage trench adjacent to that water main, so we have to locate them on the opposite side of the street of the right of way from the water main and keep it away from that. So, the answer is, no, we can't do that. Zaremba: That makes sense. Thank you. Meridian city Council April 3, 2007 Page 18 of 69 Smith: So far as how the seepage trenches work in this area., because of the permeable soils, the pit run material, the sand and gravels, we have dug sewer trunk lines to approximately 20 -- 22 feet deep, it's sand and gravels all the way. I'm sure it continues down to the Boise River basin to the Boise River bed. Those materials are extremely permeable. We are limited to our design percolation rates. ACHD limits us to eight inches per hour, when, in fact, those soils -- those pit run materials will take water and I'm sure Glen can give you some better numbers, but in excess of 25 inches per minute -- or inches per hour. Here, again, we only -- we only calculate eight inches per hour and so these trenches will carry a lot more water down than what we design for. So, there is a huge factor of safety there. There is factors of safety in the sizes of the trenches. We are required to oversize them for basically sediment storage, sediment debris. We are required to oversize them -- we are not allowed to calculate the water that infiltrates out of the sides of the trenches. ACHD only let's us take the water that will infiltrate out of the bottom of the trenches. So, these are -- these are oversized from that-standpoint. So far as water getting into crawl spaces, I have looked a numerous homes where people have had complaints about water in crawl spaces over the past ten., 12 years here in the valley. I have never found a single instance where water was coming out of the bottom of a seepage trench that's 12 feet below the foundation of a house going up into the foundation -- or into the crawl space. I have tried to design water to go uphill. It doesn't work. It goes down. And I can't imagine any case where water could get out of these seepage trenches into the crawl space of a home. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor. You have indicated you prepared analysis and studies on this. I assume you reached the same conclusions that you have testified to this evening in your study? Smith: Have I prepared studies on this? I designed the seepage trenches. Rountree: You designed them? Smith: Based on the existing soil conditions, yes. Rountree: And did you reach the same conclusion in your analysis that bears your certification or stamp? Smith: Absolutely. Water doesn't go uphill. Rountree: Okay. Smith: You bet. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 19 of 69 De Weerd: Mr. Gorton. Borton: Mr. Smith, it sounded like from the way you said it near the end that -- I guess in this example of -- with 12 foot seepage beds that finding the groundwater at 14 feet to 18 feet, still dry -- Smith: Uh-huh. Borton: -- isn't necessarily dispositive on your recommendation? For example, at 14 or 12 or 10, does that give you cause for concern? Is there a depth where you say 20 foot setback requirement does alleviate the concern or does the seepage bed design in and of itself alleviate it? Smith: Well, in this particular area there is a hard pan as you go down. -- as you dig down into the strata there is a~ hard pan in the neighborhood of four to six feet, somewhere in there. If you -- if you were to place apond -- if you were to place a reservoir on top of that hard pan., it would be feasible for the water to follow that hard pan transversely, instead of going down through it. However, with a seepage trench once you break down -- break through that hard pan and get into the free draining materials, it doesn't go back up through the hard pan. Borton: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Smith: Thank you. De Weerd: Council, did you want to hear from the other individual? Rountree: Yes. Bird: Yes, we do. De Weerd.: Okay. Good evening. Logan: Madam Mayor and Council Members, my name is Glen Logan. I work with Associated Earth Sciences. My address is 6238 Edgewater Drive in Boise. De Weerd.: Thank you. Logan: And in this Paramount 13 area we have monitoring wells, pisometers, on all sides of it and it was monitored from 2002 through 2006. Not all of the wells were monitored that long, but, basically, we have information that would support the water table not coming higher than 12 feet below ground level and at that point it's still in the sand and gravel pit run material that Mr. Smith referred to. I see -- this is very well Meridian City council ~, ~~ April 3, 2007 Page 20 of 69 drained in this, area and I see no possibility of having water in crawl spaces and storm drain facilities should drain very well down through the pit run material. So, do you have any questions about this? De Weerd: Any questions, Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I do have a question. Are you a registered engineer or a geologist? Logan: Am I a registered engineer or geologist? There is -- I'm a soil scientist. ; Rountree: Okay. Logan: And there is no registration in the state of Idaho -- Rountree: I understand that. Logan: -- for soil scientists. Rountree: Thank you. Logan: Professionally I have been doing this for 53 years. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Logan: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions from Council? Do you have any concluding remarks, Mr. Turnbull? Is there any testimony before I ask the applicant to conclude? Thank you. Turnbull: Well, again., Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would just add one thing. I know that water in crawl spaces can be a concern to the city and as Gene mentioned., he's examined numerous cases like these and we have, too, as a developer, sometimes we are called out to examine somebody's crawl space and almost without exception, unless you're in an area with high ground water and you have probably encountered that in some of the areas in Meridian, because they are areas in Meridian that have extremely high groundwater tables. But in these areas like we have here in Heritage Commons and Paramount, the only way that water is getting in the crawl space is if people grade their landscaping improperly and., then, they either, A, overwater, which happens a lot, since we, basically, provide free water in their -- and Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 21 of 69 they use much more than they need to. Or they have improperly drained their roof down spouts into the craw space. And other than that, we haven't had any issues. You might get other issues around drainage ditches or something like that, but we don't have that circumstance here. What we have is seepage beds, they are free flowing to the -- to avery deep groundwater table. So, again, I would reiterate this is a big deal for us. This was important for us moving forward on this kind of a product and we ask for your consideration and favorable response to our request. Thank you. De Weerd': Thank you.. Any -- Bird..: Madam Mayor, Iguess -- De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird... Bird: Yeah. I mean I should have asked him earlier. How deep do you go with your foundation and footings? Turnbull: They are generally about 30 inches. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would ask a question of staff if I may and that is just to clarify if we vacate the 20 foot required front yard setback, does it automatically default to a ten foot setback for some other reason or is there no requirement? Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, I believe it defaults to -- there is an overriding ten foot easement there already, so I think it goes back there. De Weerd: Thank you, Len, is there anything else you would like to add? Grady: Well, a couple things when you consider this is we have been enforcing this 20 foot for years. Brad enforced it for several years before me. If it's not 20 now, you know, is it two or is it five -- those are kind of the concerns we have is we have been toeing the line at 20 and if 20 isn't right, where do we set it. So, something to consider. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess I'd like to explore that a little bit. With a little background in BMPs, they pretty much are site specific and condition specific and in guidelines or design criteria, generally, are with a safety factor for the protection of the public, which is our business. If, however, those guidelines may not specifically apply in a certain instance and in those instances the city has on record documented • Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 22 of 69 engineering analysis with an engineer's stamp and subsequent errors and omissions and liability coverage on the conclusions reached, is that support enough to say in some cases the guidelines -- they might need to be more or could be less. Grady: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I think I understand where you're going and I know that -- it's my understanding DEQ tried at one time to build in enough what ifs and therefores to accommodate most situations. I think in the end they came back to just keeping it black and white: As far as this situation, I'm not quite sure -- I know heard that the groundwater is deep and we are not concerned about the groundwater flowing uphill, we are really more, concerned about the storm water deluge that hits this infiltration gallery, finds one of the sewer services, which has got chips in it and heads back in the other direction. So, I know that Gene -- I believe I heard him confirm that he was okay that the ground water is deep and, again, we are not contesting that. I'm not sure I heard Gene specifically sort of stamp and seal that these are going to be dry. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any further questions? Any additional information needed from the applicant? If not, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we close the Public Hearing on Item 9, VAC 07-006. Bird.: Second.. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 9. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRfED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Do I have a motion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: From my perspective and what I have heard from the applicant and staff and Mr. Smith and Mr. Logan with regard to the 20-foot wide setback and somewhat competing interests at stake here, the single concern of mine is the water in the crawl space issue and protecting future residents from that potential problem and the best management practices that are cited are intended to alleviate. There is nothing about the way I look at this request or any requests coming forward about the type of product which is to be placed in the subdivision that's persuasive to me and at least from my Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 23 of 69 perspective it's not a factor that I would ever consider as to whether or not the type of product that's intended to be placed in there be consistent with the intent of a potential water problem in crawl spaces. I do agree that the best management practices and drawing a line at 20 feet does allow the unlimited -- in certain circumstances a waiver if the -- on a case-by-case basis if the facts support it. I'd prefer that decision to be made, you know, by a Council here, rather than DEQ or some other arbitrary more distant government entity. So, with regards to this particular application, I feel comfortable approving the vacation in light of what we heard.. I think that the concerns that the 20 foot separation they are intended to alleviate are addressed and I feel comfortable that with these unique facts on this unique request that the vacation is proper. Bird: Ls that a motion? De Weerd: is there any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would like to comment that I never take staffs recommendations lightly. They are recommending for denial. However, I also agree with Councilman Borton that there may be situations where the explanation is good enough for us to, first, say thank you to the staff for alerting us to this, but, then, go the other direction and approve it. was satisfied by the explanation given. I'm also satisfied by the staff that they raised the issue and I appreciate that, but I believe I could support the vacation as well. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Just briefly I want to echo what Councilman Zaremba said and I appreciate and I think -- and perhaps developers going forward maybe get frustrated with the process, but I appreciate staff -- if there is a line drawn in the sand, so to speak, and whether it seems arbitrary or not, if the staff errors on consistent application of it, I think that's fantastic. If it means a couple more things coming to Council, it's probably frustrating -- maybe frustrating for the applicant, but it gives us a better chance to carefully review any limited particular exception. We see it in variances, you know, in different aspects. So, I -- we can disagree on the end result, but I do appreciate consistent efforts at applying the rules.. Rountree: Madam Mayor? • Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 24 of 69 De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I can certainly see staffs position. I support their position. I understand what Mr. Borton and Mr. Zaremba are saying. I could agree with them as well if, as part of the motion, it was made that the city had in hand a professional engineering analysis with supporting conclusions of the information provided here in testimony this evening and an engineer's stamp on that report for the file. Been around long enough that these things come back and haunt us. I don't think either one of you have had phone calls from people that have had their sewers back up in their basements. I have. And it's not fair to them either. So, I would want some assurance -- my background is that if you vary a guideline, particularly based on engineering, that you have an engineering analysis that supports that variance. So, that would be at a minimum what I would need to support this particular variance. Bird..: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird:: I, too, echo from the staff. I appreciate everything they do and I realize that they have laws they have to go by and we once in awhile change it, because we once in awhile make it, but we -- I have to agree with Councilman Zaremba and Borton, because I don't think you're going to find an engineer -- and I, too, have had calls when sewers have backed up and they got water under there, but I can think of about three instances where sewer pipes have come undone right under the crawl space and filled up. I happen to live in an area that's very high water table. In fact, you can't have basements and I have never once had water under my mine, so I -- while we have the guidelines, I think this is -- I could certainly support the vacation. De Weerd: Okay., Council, do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Mr. Bird. Bird: I could get Mr. Borton to do it, but I will. I move that we approve VAC 07-006, request for vacation of the 20 foot front yard setback for Lots 4 to 7 and 11 to 13, Block 34, for the Paramount Subdivision No. 13. Zaremba: Second.. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, will you call roll Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Meridian City Council w • April 3, 2007 Page 25 of 69 Item 10: Public Hearing: PP 06-064 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 building lots and 4 common lots on 4.0116 acres within the R-4 zone for Cold Creek Subdivision by BSC, LLC -north of Ustick Road and east Ten Mile Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 10 is a Public Hearing on PP 06-064. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next project is called Cold Creek and it is a subdivision as well. Just a preliminary plat. Again, this is the second one on the agenda tonight where the existing zoning is in place for the development and it is located on the north side of West Ustick Road., approximately a third of a mile east of Ten Mile and on the south side of the Five Mile Creek. So, the five mile traverses through here. This is one of the one entrances into Bridgetower and this is the subject site here. To the west is an R-1 zoned county parcel, four acres in size. To the east is a medical office building in Bridgetower, also known as Primeland Subdivision. To the north are single family homes in Bridgetower, zoned R-4. And., as you can see, the site is currently vacant. The present Comprehensive Plan designation is medium density residential. The applicant has applied for preliminary plat approval of 16 single family residential building lots and four common lots on the four acres. The sole access to the development, excuse me, will be provided from a public street intersecting Ustick in alignment with Quarystone Avenue to the south. I'm going to jump back real quick to the aerial.. There is Quarystone, so the entrance that you see here does align with that entrance. And.., then, a stub for future connectivity is provided at the west boundary to that four acre parcel that I mentioned in the presentation. The gross density is 3...99 dwelling units per acre. There are no elevations for this project. The applicant is proposing to sell the lots and has not provided elevations at this time. The Commission did recommend approval at the March 1st, 2007, hearing. There was one adjacent neighbor that testified on the project. Let's see. The Commission talked about the configuration here and the plat on the left is what was discussed and talked about, submitted by the applicant at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and., then, on the right is the revised plan representing those changes after the hearing. So, some of the things that were talked about at the hearing were the odd configuration of Lot 6, which is this lot right here, it kind of had this odd side yard, if you can call it a side yard. Now it's just a true flag log. It's been straightened out. These two lots now have a little bit more., quote, unquote, regular shape to them. They are still a little bit different than most standard lots. That has been adjusted. And perimeter fencing was also talked about. The applicant did offer up to construct fencing along Ustick Road, as well as the west property line. A couple of things, I guess, that staff would like the Council to do this evening. One would be to review the revised staff report. That's what has been reflected in the staff report for tonight, so disregard this. I guess the other change to maybe talk about real quick is the sewer service to this site was originally proposed in this location. That has now been relocated over further to the east in this location. So, maybe just point that out, too. And there has been some minor tweaks to some lot sizes here, but they all do conform now to the minimum frontage and lot size • • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 26 of 69 requirement of the R-4 zone. As you can tell, it's substantially the same, just some minor tweaks to that. So, staff would recommend that you review and take action on the revised plat this evening. Let's see. The other thing that we did have the adjacent property owner come in -- what was it, last week I think, and I talked to them for a few minutes. I think he has a couple of concerns still about the type of fencing along that that -- the adjacent property. I see that. they are in the audience here tonight, so I won't take too much time, but they probably have a couple of concerns that I'll let them speak to as well. Other than that, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission are recommending approval to the City Council of the subject preliminary plat and I will try to answer any questions you may have.. De Weerd.: Thank you, Caleb: Any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Yes. Rountree: Caleb, would you take me back to how it fits into the rest of the world out there? Thank you. Hood: So, this is -- I believe it's a dentist office or maybe an orthodontist office and, then, there is another vacant site here in Bridgetower that they are going to be constructing another medical office on soon and this is also an L-O type business there and everything else is single family around going up through Bridgetower. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Caleb, that kind of sparked a question for me. Is there any concern that the. one access point to the west being so far north, does that create any difficulty with the future development of this parcel that -- that northern street perhaps might connect there, but will there be a means, then, to get down to the southern portion or is it too narrow? Hood.,: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Borton, the width of the lot I'd' have to look at that. I'm not quite sure. And probably the property owner could tell you exactly how wide his property is. Just eyeballing it -- I mean you need a 50-foot right of way, 42 as a minimum if they are going to do a cul-de-sac there north-south. It looks like they could, potentially, get a street down there. Another option may be just a common driveway for four homes. I don't know what -- if they thought about redevelopment of that property. Staff would not be real supportive of a public street coming all the way down and • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 27 of 69 intersecting Ustick, just because of the other Quarrystone that's real close as well. So, you're looking at a short cul-de-sac or maybe a common driveway as well. But I haven't done that analysis, it wasn't my project, but I could sure look at that and get the dimensions and see if it's feasible or not. Borton; Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Is the applicant here tonight? Carney: Good evening, Madam Mayor .and Council Members. I just kind of reiterate some of the things that Caleb brought to -- De Weerd: Sir, please, state your name and address. Carney: My name is Ryan Carney. I'm with Lochsa Engineering. I represent the applicant. I'm at 1511 West Jefferson in Boise, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Carney: Some of the things that Caleb brought up that were questioned by the P&Z hearing, a couple of -- some of the lots didn't have the minimum 60 foot of frontage or 30 feet at 90 degree and the adjusted plat has met those requirements. Some of the lots were oddly configured and those were adjusted and what you're viewing now is basically a response to those comments. The neighbors questions. One with regard to fencing along the western property line. We had agreed to put up fencing. I .hadn't put a lot of discussion or conditions as to the type of fencing. I think a cedar fence could be appropriate. I think that's what's on the west side of their property. Or we could look at a fence very similar to what the Bridgetower development has. I think it has a four foot with a -- excuse me -- a four foot closed fence and the two foot visual fence above that. Those were kind of the highlights. Some other things with regard to the property to the west where the subdivision had went in hadn't necessarily met existing grades on that property boundary. We haven't done a plan and profile of this street and all the grading yet, but that's, you know, general conditions to meet -- match grade at adjacent properties and we will get a letter of approval to grade in that property, so that won't be an issue. Other than that, I just agree with the staff recommendation and will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I just had one and that's about the easement -- was it for a sewer line that moved in the old drawing to the new drawing. • Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 28 of 69 Carney: Uh-huh.. Zaremba: This piece right there. Carney: The revised plat you will see on the right includes a 20 foot common lot width as required by Public Works. The one on the left just had an easement. So, in an effort to adjust the lot sizes, the common -- the common lot width 20 feet was moved to, basically, a shorter dimension. Functionality-wise the sewer still works the same. The lot generally drains to the north. It's not moving from a low point to a high point, so the change is to address a Public Works concern -- requirement for an open space common lot, rather than an easement through a private lot. Zaremba: I guess my follow-up question is whether there is any concern about making that attractive or difficult to be a pedestrian access closer to the canal. Carney: Well, we didn't have a proposed pedestrian access to the canal. For maintenance purposes I think they will need access to that, so we could not -- Zaremba: Will the back of it be fenced with a gate or anything that discourages people from going there or -- Carney: I believe the UDC requires agate -- I'll have to defer to Caleb -- across rear lots is the gate required, but not a common lot? Hood.: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Zaremba, and the applicant, there is no requirement that a sewer line be gated off or at the perimeter be fenced off, for that matter, so nothing in the UDC would require that. Carney: I guess, then, maybe another question for engineering. Are we going to require that maintenance to be open from manhole to manhole or can you use the route north of the Five Mile to get to that manhole? Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we don't encourage locked gates, but we will need access. If you want to gate it off and provide with -- provided we have a key, some means of getting through there, we are okay with that. Carney: I mean it doesn't really address the esthetics question. I know what you're saying. There is a 20 foot wide lot there with -- Zaremba: Well, I guess my concern is whether people might go back there and do things they are not supposed to do. It looks like an attractive place to go hide. I don't know if that's a concern for anybody else, but if it were accessed to a multi-use pathway that went along there, then, I would want it to be open, but since it doesn't go anywhere that anybody needs to go, except for Public Works, I might like to see the access cut off. Carney: We certainly have no objection to putting a fence there. i ~ Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 29 of 69 Zaremba: And then Public Works -- Carney: As long as Public Works approves of what we want to put there for their access, I guess. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: So, I guess that does raise a question. If both lots on either side of it fence their yards., you're just going to have this narrow path to nowhere and so it would be -- indeed, does become a real issue and certainly a maintenance issue of who maintains it. Is this part of the homeowners association or -- Carney: Yeah. To answer the maintenance issue, the homeowners association is .responsible for maintaining the landscape within the common lot. De Weerd: And which one is your common lot? Carney: If you look to the plat to the right, yeah, it's right where the pointer is. A 20-foot wide common lot. De Weerd: Okay. Do you have open space in this? Carney: The open space, depending on clarification -- or classifications and -- what we are providing common lot open space-wise is a 25 foot buffer adjacent to an arterial as per any residential subdivision adjacent to an arterial in the City of Meridian and this common lot. Other than that we do not have any open space. De Weerd.: So, Caleb, can you explain that one. Hood: Madam Mayor, I can. This site is four acres. Our minimum open space requirement doesn't kick in until you get to five acres. De Weerd: Okay. Sorry, I didn't know it was so small. Any other questions, Council? I guess there still is that lingering question of the safety aspect and the esthetic aspect of that easement or that common lot. Carney: Okay. De Weerd: So, I'll let you sit there and think about it while we take additional testimony. Carney: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. I have two people that signed up as neutral. I have Tammy Schafer and John Schafer. Would either of you like to provide testimony? Or both. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 30 of 69 Schafer: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members. I'm Tammy Schafer. I reside at 2788 West Ustick Road in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Schafer: Thank you, Caleb, for helping me with the pictures. Picture one just shows our house and to the west is Hartford Subdivision and the fence that they constructed for us before they began the development there. Picture two shows just a little to the east where the Cold Creek property line is and Bridgetower there in the back. I understand that development is inevitable, but I do have a few concerns that I'd like to share with you. First and foremost I hope the developer will ensure that a portable toilet will be placed on the property on the very day that work will begin. When Hartford went in they didn't have any and we saw on several occasions where workers stepping behind our haystack with toilet paper in their hand.. So, if you will pardon my candor, we don't want to put up with that crap again, so -- fencing, with the existing elevation, is a concern. At the Planning and Zoning meeting we were encouraged when the developer's representative offered fencing between our properties, but with some elevation difference retaining walls might be necessary. As you can see in pictures three through ten -- and, Caleb, if you just want to scroll through those. The fence between Bridgetower and Cold Creek, weeds are difficult to control if that difference in elevation and the fencing doesn't hold up well either. That's me. And, then, picture 11 and 12 you can see the sidewalk from Bridgetower to the Cold Creek property line. The elevation is a considerable difference there. Without some kind of retainage between our properties, overfill from that proposed road that will continue in the future, as well as the sidewalk, could be a problem. As you can see from pictures 13 through 16, this is our backyard. The Hartford Subdivision fence where -- that's the road that will continue in the future -- they didn't offer any kind of retainage and the contractor did come and take several truck loads of sand and gravel, because it extended further, but that's what we are left with. To this day you can see we have a portion of the asphalt and concrete in our yard as a permanent reminder of poor ,planning. We later added boards at the bottom. You can see in picture -- you can go onto 16, 17, that just shows how the structure doesn't hold up well with the difference in elevation. And in picture 18 you can see that we added boards at the bottom to try to retain the runoff, trash, and debris that we were getting from the Hartford side. The last pictures -- oh, I'm sorry. Pictures 21 -- 2D and -- okay. I'm sorry. Numbers are hard for me. In this picture you can see when they were doing the sidewalk from Hartford to our property their sand and gravel extended into our grass, killed the grass, covered a sprinkler head. They finally removed that for us and added a retaining wall you can see there and in the next picture. They did put sod in there, but our grass just won't ever look the same. And picture 21 I think is another shot of that. And, finally, the last pictures -- when we were rolling down Ustick Road near Black Cat, this is what they described as an affordable housing neighborhood and they just provided chain link fencing. Some of the neighbors opted to put their own privacy fencing., but that just creates a dead zone with weeds and really hard to manage. So, Ryan, I appreciate you offering to put fencing between the Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 31 of 69 property, so we won't have to have our neighborhood look like that, because we are real proud of our neighborhood. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Questions from Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Ma'am, is there a fencing type that you are encouraging or opposed to? Schafer: Well, like Ryan suggested that would match the other side. Hartford.. Cedar -- you know, high quality cedar fencing or if they wanted to bridge the gap with Bridgetower, that vinyl fencing is nice, too.. So, we can certainly entertain some -- something other than Cyclone fencing would be in agreement to talk about. Borton: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd:: That's not allowed anyway, is it, Caleb? Schafer: We just think it's a good neighbor policy. Up and down Ustick Road it looks rather nice. There is some continuity, even though it's not code, I understand there is some continuity with the development to make it look nice. De Weerd: Well, that chain link, it's usually allowed only in -- I think that was along a ditch or a canal where you need a visible fence to look through. Schafer: Okay. De Weerd: Any other questions from Council? Rountree: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Let's see. One of your pictures showed the sidewalk that comes from the west to your property. That appears to be right along Ustick. Schafer: That's correct. Zaremba: The other one showed from Bridgetower and I wasn't clear if that was a sidewalk along Ustick or is it -- Schafer: That is correct. It's on Ustick. It's on the east side of -- Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 32 of 69 Zaremba: Also along the road? Schafer: Uh-huh. It's the border between the Cold Creek property and, then, Bridgetower to the east. Zaremba: Okay. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a pathway that came into the project that we are talking about midway up the property line or something. Schafer: No. Zaremba: So, if it's along Ustick -- Schafer: And for the record, at Hartford, they -- the sewer line is adjacent to our western fence line property and they put a fence with no access gate to the rear, just to try to keep the riff raff from accessing, because once you get to the ditch bank, then, you can walk up and down and we have things back there and we have had some problems with damage and theft and I believe access to the sewer manhole is obtainable through the development itself, like through the street. So, we would be happy to see that that fence would be blocked off, too., to the creek, so it wouldn't encourage foot traffic up and down behind our property. De Weerd: Caleb, while I have Mrs. Schafer up here, is there a plan for a pathway on the north side of that waterway? Hood: Madam Mayor, there, actually, is a pathway on the north side in Bridgetower. They constructed the -- and that's why I count the south side here and why we aren't encouraging amicro-path or anything to get through this property, because pedestrians should be using the other side. Schafer: Yeah. See, that's what you were speaking of, sir, that's -- Zaremba: Thank you. Schafer: -- right along parallel to Ustick Road. De Weerd: And so I guess, Mrs. Schafer, I would like to -- one of the issues where you had to board., if they would have put a retaining wall and built that up, it would have solved that issue? Schafer: Uh-huh. De Weerd: And that's what you would like consideration if they don't grade it appropriately -- Schafer: Right. Meridian Ciry Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 33 of 69 De Weerd: -- that they do this kind of mitigation. Schafer: Since I'm not an engineer, I'm not sure how that will all work out, but it's just something that's a lot of afterthought. A lot of things they should have done and nobody knew at the time or didn't disclose. So, we just want to make sure that something can be done, so we don't have this again. De Weerd: Thank you. Appreciate that. Schafer: Thank you very much. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would just like to add the comment that as they say a picture is worth a thousand words and I appreciate the visual. It certainly helps me. Schafer: Thank you for -- Zaremba: They are very clear and a good selection of pictures. Schafer: That's great. I have to thank my daughter Kelsey, because the only benefit of having a teenager is they know how to do these things. De Weerd: They do know how to take pictures. I have two and we use our camera a lot. John Schafer, would you like to provide testimony as well? J. Schafer: Yes. I'm John Schafer. I live at 2788 West Ustick Road and we are to the west of the proposed development. First off, I'd like to say that we do not oppose the development of the property. We know that it's imminent that development does grow. In the past 12 years there wasn't a house around us and now we are completely surrounded and -- De Weerd: I can see you from my backyard. J. Schafer: Oh. So, about 12 years ago we developed the property and., then, we built our house. It was a modest 2,800 square foot house, compared to some of the houses that are developed in Bridgetower and when they developed the property to the west of us we were told the houses would be comparable to ours. The developer went broke halfway through the project and the housing development was picked up by a track home builder and when the development was basically done, they were very moderate vinyl sided homes, not a composition wood or a cementitious siding as promised. I hope I don't offend anybody by saying that I'm not a real fan of vinyl siding, but I have a feeling that it kind of lessens the value of a home. The Bridgetower Subdivision was, then, developed to the north and it was constructed of 2,500 to 5,000 square foot homes, which I felt put the property values of our property back up to where we felt that it was a good value again. And they built an upscaled dental facility at the entry to the Bridgetower, as well as an orthodontic clinic, and now they are trying to insert an Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 34 of 69 affordable housing circle in the dead center of some upscale -- I guess you might say development, which I don't think is really appropriate. At least I feel that it will down -- or devalue our property, because if we ever decide to develop, we will have to access our property through Hartford Subdivision or through Cold Creek Subdivisions. With the development of the Cold Creek Subdivision -- I'll get into kind of the basics here a little bit later on. And we also understood that there is no specific builder assigned to build these homes and we do have concerns that the neighborhood will be a mishmash of quality and design by not having a specified group of builders and the developer represented or stated that there is a need for affordable housing and this side of town, but we don't feel it's adjacent -- or appropriate and adjacent to Bridgetower Subdivision, our residence, or the upscale or dental facility next door. The neighborhoods directly in front of the Bridgetower Subdivision, so they are keeping the neighborhood design. It would be nice to see these homes with wood, composite, or cementitious exteriors installed, rather than the vinyl in a natural color. All other subdivisions up and down Ustick Road provided fences, which I think we have all talked about and we would ask. that -- and they have offered that the -- it would be a cedar fence of four or six inch boards with a number one grade. These are on metal posts or a vinyl fence, something similar to that. Also, there is a headgate that comes in on the Cold Creek property that feeds our irrigation -- flood irrigation that will have to be addressed, how we get that water off of their -- the headgate that comes in on their property as well. We would also request that single level homes be constructed along the west border, if possible, to the subdivision. And also there was some discussion about the -- I don't know if there is a possibility to go back to the plat again. The -- De Weerd: And, then, sir, I will .have to ask you to summarize, please. J. Schafer: Okay. Along the western border -- this lot right here at the Planning and Zoning we requested the easement for the sewer line be run across this -- or at this location right here. I think there is already a ten foot setback from property line required. We requested. the 20 foot easement to go right here. That would give a buffer between our property and the first house to be built here, because that's a very narrow lot, very long in shape, and look to be more like an in-fill housing., it was constructed there by a long, narrow construction.. Also, that -- my wife had mentioned about the fill - - having to fill in the slope of the grade onto our property. As you can see that it is a maintenance nightmare, either by spraying for the weeds, weed eating, or whatever you have to do. It's -- as we are getting up in years we are not quite as able to go out there and use the weed eater like we used to. One other thing -- not to bore you real quick like -- De Weerd:: Sir, I'll need you to summarize, please. J. Schafer: Okay. De Weerd: Your time is over. Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 35 of 69 J. Schafer: Okay. Let's see. Right here. There are five lots of the 16 lots that have 31 feet or less of road frontage. There are two additional lots that adjoin these narrow accesses that have 57 feet or less of road frontage. Lot 2, west of the entrance to the subdivision requires parking no closer than 30 feet to the stop sign, which would be this lot right here, so I have got a stop sign right there. You have to be 30 feet back from the corner with a driveway entering these and these two lots -- usually in a subdivision you come in off of side streets to access these lots, so you will be accessing these two lots directly as you enter the subdivision., which could be a hazard or -- for incoming traffic into the property. There are also five outside corner radiuses in the subdivision, which parking is not very easily done on the outside corner. And, then, you also have inside radiuses, which really don't accommodate parking as well. And, then, you have three lots that have narrow entry into the subdivision -- or into their residence, if there is anybody that visits these houses or they have a party or something like that, there is very very very limited parking on the street. De Weerd: Okay. Sir, I'm sorry, but your time is up. J. Schafer: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Thank you. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there any additional testimony? Okay. I would ask the applicant if they could come up and respond. Hood.: Madam Mayor, as he comes forward, I just wanted to answer the question that I believe it was Councilmember Borton brought up about the width of that adjacent parcel of the last two people. It appears that it's about 250 to 260 feet wide, which a typical lot is usually right around a hundred. I looked at the lots in this subdivision, there is a couple that are right at a hundred, 102, 105, 110 foot lot depth, that's -- so if you have hundred foot wide lots on either side and a 50 foot right of way, it appears they can put a street right down the middle of that and get lots on both sides. So, I just wanted to get you that information as well. De Weerdc Thank you. Carney: Madam Mayor and Council Members, once again Ryan Carney, 1311 West Jefferson, Boise, Idaho. I can address some of those. I didn't maybe make note of all of them. If you have concerns from neighbors, then, you can bring them up as they go on. One, with regard to grading adjacent to the western property boundary, I believe we went over that. I know along that sidewalk adjacent to Ustick, both the project to their west and the project to our east the sidewalk is two to three feet higher than adjacent grade. As we grade across there, should we, to not match property -- or match grade of their property boundary on the east, we will simply put in a retaining wall, probably a temporary type retaining wall for the next connection piece to go in. Same as with the road that connects along our northwestern property boundary. With regard to the construction, it's a little bit ahead of where we are in the preliminary plat to discuss some of the construction things that went on during that for the property to their west. I Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 36 of 69 know as an erosion control permit is issued that does cover things like portable restrooms, you know, waste management, and erosion control. Those are managed by the EPA and City of Meridian for the construction. The sewer line location was requested to be along our western property line. That would wind up costing us a lot if maybe the applicant was willing to dedicate ten feet to get the 20 foot required common lot on their property, if they would be interested in looking at that. Also, that lengthens that sewer line by a considerable length and the crossing becomes more difficult and lengthy, because there is a boring we are going to have to put under that canal to avoid going to a permit through the Corps of Engineers. I can't really speak to architecture at this point. I know -- I had heard a statement to the effect of we are looking for affordable housing -- I'm not sure that's the case. I'm not really -- I don't know where that statement came from. The applicant, nor the applicant's representative, have stated that this would be an affordable housing solution. I guess I'm kind of out of responses. If there is anything specific that they had brought up you want answered, please, feel free to ask me. De Weerd: Can you tell me -- I would understand -- wouldn't they have CC&Rs. Or do they not have to submit that? Or because they are four acres they don't need to do that? Hood: Madam Mayor, the city does not, on a general matter of practice, require covenants for subdivisions. That's a civil and a private agreement that a developer usually puts on the homeowners and we don't enforce those, so -- De Weerd: I understand that, but don't we require that they have them? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we don't require them, we normally would seem if they are common areas to maintain, pressurized irrigation to maintain. This one there is not a lot of common area in this, so -- and I don't recall if there was .pressurized irrigation. Those are the only two things normally we would see an HOA -- someone -- homeowners association to maintain those two things. Otherwise, we would get -- as Mr. Hood said, we don't require it as an ordinance. You know, it is a common practice at least when there is some maintenance issues. De Weerd: Well, I guess the reason I ask that is usually in those CC&Rs you would require what kind of treatments that the houses would have and that's probably what I was more getting to is what -- what is the annotation of the type of materials and will you require accents and -- and I would have a question, then, if you have -- if there are not rules that will say who maintains that common area. It, again, becomes a concern. So, do you have any materials that you are identifying that will be used in this area? I guess in some regards -- and maybe for the very fact of what Mrs. Schafer had brought up is some of these properties are flipping and what we are anticipating happens there doesn't necessarily happen. So, we do like to see what kind of product is being considered and I would ask if there is a vision for that if you could., please, share that. Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 37 of 69 Carney: To address architectural and materials and building concerns, I can probably open that up by saying the anticipated cost of sales of the lot are going to drive up the price of these beyond what you would see in affordable housing. I have got some kind of mock up building plans that I can show you. Whether or not these get built to those standards or whether or not those architectural drawings get used to build these buildings is kind of beyond my scope of preliminary plat approval. So, I can show you what we have been looking at, show you what we are anticipating., but the teefih to that -- I'm not sure would be enough to satisfy your concerns, so -- if you would like to see what we are thinking, I can definitely show you. De Weerd: I don't know. I think if you showed us we would tie it to annexation and you would be required to do it, so -- Carney: We are not seeking annexation or a rezone. Rountree.: They are already annexed... De Weerd.: Oh, wow. Yeah. Council, do you want to see what they are contemplating at this point? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: I do not. He's indicated that he's just showing pictures and we have no means to bind anyone, let alone the applicant whether they show us or -- I don't want to see the pictures. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor, I don't need to see pictures either. De Weerd.: I would recommend that you show it to the neighbors. I do have still that remaining question as to who maintains your common area. Carney: At this point an HOA will be formed to maintain common area lots and we have three of them -- well, four if you count what we are putting in the -- there are four common area lots, one in the center of the cul-de-sac, the two adjacent to Ustick, and the one that ties to the sewer line connection and an HOA will be required to maintain those. De Weerd.: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor, I do have aquestion -- De Weerd: Yes. Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 38 of 69 Bird: -- regarding the common lot with the sewer line. I want a better explanation of why you can't take your 20 feet down to the west side and put it in down there, other than the fact that maybe it costs a little more. To me, that sounds very practical. Carney: The reason is that the limited square footage, available on this lot and the way it's configured, a 20-foot wide common lot adjacent to the western property line is another 30 feet long, I guess, basically, and would require reduction in lots based on the minimum square footage of 80 feet. If you look at the location of where that common lot is now, that is a shorter and less area consuming common lot. Bird: Yeah, it is, it's shorter. It's shorter, but you move 20 feet on down with your lot lines, I don't see where you're going to -- where you're'going to damage your width and might be wrong., but Idon't -- I don't see -- other than it will be a few feet longer to go and you. say you have to bore through the canal to get'to the sewer there? Carney: Yeah. There is a 30 inch sewer main on the north side of the canal that we need to tie into and provide a manhole for. We will do that in either location. Bird: Okay. So that's no different. Carney: It's not different. It's just a slightly longer for construction. I'd have to scale it out. I mean it's 30 feet, maybe. ; Bird: Thirty feet more? Carney: Just because of the angle.. The actual sewer line -- 30 to 50 feet long or the portion that is boring, which is a more extensive construction style -- or method, would be maybe 30 feet longer -- 20 to 30 feet. And I have' looked at several variations to try to appease the neighbor to the west on providing that 20 foot common lot and the lot square footages couldn't be met in the zoning that. we are currently in. At least in several iterations. De Weerd: Any further questions from Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Len, is the only way to get sewer to this property is from the north? These two options that we have described? Is there a third option that wouldn't require a 20-foot wide strip to nowhere? Grady: .Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, I'm not positive, but I think the issue -- think -- I think any other avenue would also eat up common space and I think the bottom line is I understand they are right on the threshold and the extra 30, 40 feet Meridian City Council ~ ~ • April 3, 2007 ~ Page 39 of 69 going to the -- if he moved it to the west puts him over' and he loses a lot. But as far as other availability, I'll have to do some checking real quick. I'll see if I can check the utility map. Zaremba: Madam Mayor -- De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: -- a follow up to Councilman Gorton's question. Do we have, let's see, maybe an aerial or something that shows this property and the property to the east of it, the Bridgetower? Maybe it was the aerial. That was a~question for Mr. Hood. Hood: I'm sorry, can you repeat the question. I'm having some technical difficulties with the computer, so -- Zaremba: Yeah. I was looking for an aerial that would show this property and the property to the east of it. i Hood: Yeah. My computer froze up, that's why I was focusing on this, so I'm going to have to get back with you, too, with that. It's completely frozen right now. Zaremba: Okay. Well, I'll ask it anyhow and people can imagine that. What I was thinking -- along the lines of what Councilman Borton ;was asking, is if there was a way to connect to a sewer whose source was over here, then, this could also be a pathway over the top of that sewer easement common property lot and provide a way for people to get back and forth to the dentist office and I thought there was going to be a day care over there -- possibly without getting in their cars. So, ~we are still back to Len. De Weerd: Well, while we wait, are there any other questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Council, why don't we take a five minute recess while we try and get the computer to unfreeze and you can stretch your legs or -- Len, do you -- Grady: Madam Mayor, I'm not showing any sewer to the south whatsoever. I show water, but no sewer. Zaremba: Not to the east? Grady: Sorry, to the east. Zaremba: Not that could be accessed to the east either in the Bridgetower office area? Okay. ' Meridian City Council ~ • April 3, 2007 Page 40 of 69 Grady: No easements.. There is sewer stubbed,, but doesn't appear to be an easy way to get access. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Did that answer your question? Zaremba: That answered mine. I don't know if it answered Mr. Borton's. Borton: It did. Thank you, Len. De Weerd: No unanswered questions any longer? Zaremba: Back to the treatment of the existing common lot sewer. Did we settle on a locked gate fence at the north end of it? ' Carney: I would actually propose at least one at the north end., perhaps one on the south end. I'm not sure a 20 foot gated corridor is any better than being behind those lots, so maintenance -- or the HOA's responsibility and agated -- a .locked gate along the northern property line and kind of investigate what we do adjacent to the street frontage and .how that works with what planning would approve. I'm not sure they have got an answer. Zaremba: If I could ask the police department for comment, if they have a preference. De Weerd: Well, Mr. Zaremba, I guess I would just say that because that would be an easement, the two sides -- the two lots on each side of it would not be allowed a six foot fence and so if you locked the gate on the south side, you would just jump over it. I think I could even do that one, but -- so -- Rountree: I want to see that. De Weerd: Okay. I'm not going to do it, but -- Zaremba: And we will take pictures. Bird.: You're going to what? De Weerd: So, you know, that would -- and that is also a note to the applicant, when that is an easement, those property owners on both, sides would have just -- what, a minimum of a four foot fence. I don't know. I think it's all the way down. Caleb, what is the UDC -- UDC on those situations? It goes clear to the back fence line; is that correct? Hood: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor, are you talking about: fencing a long that common lot? Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 41 of 69 De Weerd.: Uh-huh. Hood.: Yeah. It would extend from the -- actually, it's even restricted further. As you mentioned, it could be four foot solid and a six foot ;open vision adjacent to common lots. At the first 20 feet up to the right of way it's a maximum three foot tall fence, but that would extend all the way to the rear of that common lot and the adjacent build-able lots. De Weerd: Okay. So, do you still need the chief to answer a safety question there? i Zaremba: I would like to hear his opinion, if we may, Madam Mayor. De Weerd,: Okay. Musser: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, Members of the Council, frankly, the common area seems to be more of a problem in my mind. That's my opinion on it, irregardless of the fence height or anything else from where it's at. It's in the middle of nowhere. It doesn't seem to go anywhere, except back to the canal. So, from a safety standpoint it becomes an attractive nuisance and I don't have much more to add other than that. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Thank you De Weerd: So, now that we know that, what do you want to do about it? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I probably would suggest that there be a locked gate at the north end of it and go with the city requirement, since it is an open space, that the two properties next to it have no more than a four foot or a six foot open vision fence, but at the back wall that it be a six foot -- six foot locked gate. North wall I mean. North end. I would rather have the front of it open and visible. De Weerd: Len, is it -- is it required to have some kind of a treatment over the top of it? You know, can they pave? Can it -- does it need to be planted? Can it be grass? i Grady: Madam Mayor, just provided it's not large trees, it can be paved, Grass is fine. Landscaping -- normal landscaping is not a problem. De Weerd,: Okay. Grady: Just avoid large trees and permanent structures. And paving is okay. De Weerd': So, I guess one more maybe more specific question. What are you going to do in that area? Is it going to be landscaped? Will it tie grass? ~ • Meridian City council April 3, 2007 Page 42 of 69 Carney: Well, I guess I would prefer a landscape option there. If it's paved, I think that's inviting access to it. We are just anticipating alandscape -- grass in that area: don't think Public Works need access to it vehicularly,'they just need to be able to dig it up. De Weerd: Right. i Carney: And that's where that comment comes from. So, I was proposing just a lawn. De Weerd: That would be maintained with the setbacks and all of that? Carney: Right. De Weerd: Okay. Sorry. Anything else, Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have nothing. Borton: Madam Mayor? _ De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Unless there is additional information needed -- De Weerd: Thank you. Borton: If not, I'd move we close the Public Hearing on Item 10, PP 06-064. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to;close the Public Hearing on Item 10. All those in favor say. All ayes. Motion carries. '~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~ De Weerd.: Okay. Any discussion? Borton: Madam .Mayor? ~ De Weerd: Yes. Borton: It's no fault of the applicant, it's a challenge of the site, but this sewer issue to the north to me is fatal to the -- to the plat, whether it's in its current location or whether it's on the western property boundary, I think the police chief properly pointed out that we are going to be left with a 20 foot wide attractive, nuisance to nowhere for eternity ;, ~ i • Meridian City Counc April 3, 2007 Page 43 of 69 and there doesn't seem to be an alternative source that will satisfy this particular plat option. It is a challenge, perhaps, when -- if and when the property in between -- or I guess, excuse me, the property directly to the west develops, that would afford additional opportunities, but I see an unanswerable challenge with regards to the 20 foot strip, whether it's landscaped or gated, it a problem forever, as I see it. So, that is a fatal flaw on the plat fihat can't be overcome in my mind. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion, Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree.: My comments on the plat, it seems to me, is that -- and., again, no direct comment to the developer or the engineers, they fall on the desires of someone., but it's -- it looks to me like they are putting five pounds of coffee in a three pound can and we see a density in an R-4 on this small acreage that we don't ever see in an R-4. It's seldom that we see four acres -- or four lots per acre in an R-4. It's a very small parcel. It's a tough parcel. We have more problem accesses in this four acres than we do in larger parcels. So, I would like to see some thought given to redesign, re-layout, the possibility of maybe abutting the property to the east with a roadway, as opposed to yards. That could maybe develop at some point in time in the future with some kind of a cross-access.. I'm not going to solve the issues with the plat. I -- it falls, again, in the category I'm not in that big of a hurry. So, I'm at this point not favorably inclined to approve this. De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments? Do I have a, motion? i Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Councilman Rountree expresses a thought that I can support as well and not to reengineer the project, but it would seem to me it would make sense if it were to be redesigned to have the stub street fall a little farther south. That would allow the neighbor, should that ever be redeveloped, to actually have a little better access than just right straight across at the top and J think it would help the neighbor more in their far future planning. Just a thought. De Weerd: Okay. If there are no further comments, I~would entertain a motion. Rountree: Oh, Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 44 of 69 Rountree: If this is not a successful application and we see it again, I would hope that we would also be presented with some design considerations. That has been our practice. I hope it remains our practice. Not having design review in the City of Meridian, but, basically, on staffs shoulders, as well as ours, ultimately, before making a decision I'd like to know what it is we are deciding on. ~So, that's my last comment. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion? Boston; Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Boston: I move that we deny Item 10, PP 06-064 Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 10. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea.; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Boston, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 06-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 95.57 acres from RUT to R-8, R-15 and R-40 zones for .Barava Subdivision by RMR Consulting., Inc. - 3935 West Franklin Road and 280 South Black Cat Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 06-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 118 single-family building lots on 26.41 acres in the proposed R-8 zone; 216 single-family building lots on 38..26 acres and 1 school lot on14.98 acres in the proposed R-15 zone; 2 multi-family lots on 13.01 acres in the proposed R-40 zone; and 30 common lots for Barava Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc - 3935 West Franklin road and 280 South Black Cat Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 11 and 12 are a Public Hearing on AZ 06-061 and PP 06-062. will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The last application -- at least Public Hearing application on your agenda this evening is for Barava Subdivision and it is located on the south side of Franklin Road and on the east side of Black Cat Road. To the north is Silver Oaks Subdivision. L'et's see. Which is a mixed use development proposed with some multi-family units inn the future, as well as some -- a day care and some L-O zoned property there. Everything else around this -- around this project is currently in the county and zoned in the county. R-1 and RUT are the I Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 45 of 69 dominant zones in this area. There is the aerial. You can see it's agricultural land today. There are some homesteads on the parcels in this area and, again, you know, it's pretty much rural out there right now. However, the Comprehensive Plan does designate this site currently medium density residential and mixed use regional. As you`re aware, we are going through the Ten Mile area plan and this is within the boundaries of that Ten Mile specific area plan and, the draft designations that are proposed for this site include a civic school site, green space and park land, medium density residential, medium high density residential, and high density residential. So, those are the designations on this specific property that are proposed with the Ten Mile plan. Before I go any further, I do want to stop and give you some of the history behind this property and also behind this subject application'. In late 2005 an application for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat were submitted on this site. That project was called Bryce Canyon Subdivision. Bryce Canyon included a request for an R-8 zone, TN-R zone, and it included 475 single family residential lots. That application was withdrawn by the applicant shortly after submittal. Then, in May of 2006 the applicant again submitted annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat application for the site. That application submittal was called Baraya. The applications for Baraya proposed 406 single family residential lots, one office lot, and 23 common lots and L-O zoning designations. The applications were brought before the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 15th, 2006. The Commission recommended approval of the project. However, on July 18th, 2006, the City Council voted to deny Baraya. Council's basis for denial fell primarily upon the lack of conformance of the proposal with the anticipated outcome of the Ten Mile area specific plan:. I want to stop right there for just a second., because we were just pretty much in the heat of the discussion for Ten Mile when this was before you, again, in July of this last year and the applicant subsequently asked that you reconsider your denial action. The action that you took was to remand this project back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. That has occurred. Some further changes have even occurred at the Planning, and Zoning Commission level to get you to what you see here tonight. So, I'm going to jump into that project and staff believes that this project now does comply generally with the anticipated Ten Mile plan that you will be seeing here some time this next -- late'spring, probably. De Weerd: Caleb, is that -- that plan does not have a recommendation on it from Planning and Zoning yet? Hood.: It does not. It's actually scheduled for hearing April 5th. So, the proposed development -- and I apologize, the plat is on a couple different pages and trying to get all this on -- on one screen doesn't happen very easily' and jumping through five different sheets you can't really see what's going on. So, this is, essentially, a plat, although there aren't any dimensions or anything on it. But it's a layout of the project and it's -- there is 95.57 acres and 28 acres is proposed for R-8 zoning. Sixty-four acres is proposed for R-15 zoning. And 13 acres, plus some change, is zoned R-40. Generally speaking the R-8 stuff is more near the north. R-15 would be on the southern. Now, I'm being real general here. And., then, the R-40 would be on the east side of the subdivision. The subject preliminary plat proposed is 334 single family residential lots, 28 common lots, and one school lot within the proposed R-8 and R-15 zones. So, I'm Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 46 of 69 going to stop right there real quick. You can probably; make out the school lot, but this would come out over on Black Cat Road and that's the property talked about there. And, then, I mentioned that the R-40 -- there are two lots in the R-40 on the east side of the plat as well. Access to this site is proposed from three public streets that connect to Black Cat Road and Franklin Road. So, there is one off of Black Cat and two off of Franklin. Sorry. Two off of Franklin. Right in there. That's a collector roadway, South Glen Canyon Avenue is proposed near the east boundary of the property and divides the property along the proposed zoning designations~of R-15 and R-40. So, this is a collector roadway that stubs to the property to the south. That is also consistent with -- the Ten Mile plan has a traffic component to it and a collector was generally anticipated in that location. They also are aligned with the entrance into Silver Oaks Subdivision on the other side of Franklin Road. Sixteen percent of 13 acres of the site is set aside for open space. Jump to the landscape plan. A multi-use pathway, landscape parkways, a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along South Glen Canyon Avenue and two community park areas, which include a pool with changing room and tot lots are proposed as amenities. The gross density of this project is 5.16 units per acre. That does exclude the school site and the future multi-family dwellings, as we don't know the exact densities that are going to occur on those R-40 lots ;in the future. The applicant has submitted some elevations since the Commission hearing. I believe the only elevations we had at the Commission hearing were some townhouse elevations. We now have elevations for the townhomes, the alley loaded lots, and your typical single family detached, so I'm going to come back to those in just a minute. The Commission did recommend approval of this project on March 1st of this year. Some of the things that were discussed at the hearing included providing quality building exteriors for these -- forthe residential products, to include stucco, stone, and brick and the Commission also accepted the applicant's proposal that the high density portion, the R-40 zoned portion, comply with the specific guidelines of the Ten Mile area when adopted, as it appears that those guidelines should be adopted prior to -- prior to the development of those R- 40 lots and they will require Conditional Use Permit approval, so they will be back for a Public Hearing in the future. Let's see. Some outstanding issues, I guess, for you. We do have some elevations, which I talked about and I'll run through those. A couple of things that I would ask that you modify in your recommendation. The applicant did submit an a-mail to staff here this last week. Condition 1.1.7, references 315 lots, is actually 334 lots proposed tonight. So, I would just note that. That is an error in the staff report. And., then, condition 1.1.12 should have said that, you know, with the development of each phase the required landscaping and sidewalks need to be installed along the adjacent arterials. I know it's been the preference of this Council to get some of the sidewalks going to schools in with ~ the development as they occur. Excuse me. There is not a very large piece of sidewalk on Black Cat. As you can see, there is a very limit amount of frontage. I looked -- we just a couple weeks ago received a map from Wendell Bigham at the school district and, I looked on his map and this site still. shows up as being a negotiated school site. So, timing -- I was looking to see when construction of this site was in their plan and it looks like it's still a negotiation site, so don't know what that means necessarily. To me that implies that they don't have it scheduled for construction anytime soon. The applicant may -- and, hopefully, does have some more information on that, but I just thought I'd let you know, because I tried Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 47 of 69 to see if that school was planned next year, then, probably getting the sidewalks in is important, you known, if you have kids going to be showing up there in a couple few years. But it looked like it's on a time plan that's a Horizon that's out there a little bit further. And the applicant also in that a-mail stated that they have met with the fire and police department on a couple conditions in Exhibit B ;and I'll let the applicant touch on those if they need those to be amended as well. And, now before I yield the floor I did want to run through a couple of the slides, particularly some of the elevations. First, this exhibit shows the mixture of lots. I don't know if you can read that or not. The yellow are the townhome lots. The next color down -- I'll call that pink -- are R-40 zoned lots. And, then, red is 40 foot wide lots. The orange would be 50 foot wide lots. The baby blue is 60 foot lots. Purple are alley-loaded lots. And,', then, green is common area or it looks like the school also shows up in that common area. So, that's kind of a mixture of the different sizes of lots and different typologies for the residential units that are anticipated throughout Baraya. And, then, here is a blow-up area of the -- a blow up of the Ten Mile area, with this property overlaid on it, the. -- just so you can kind of see the designations. And:, again, moving from left to right, medium density residential is kind of that yellow color that is on the northern part of this. ;,The orange would be a medium high density residential. The elementary school pretty much is on -- excuse me. The high density residential would be the darker brown, again, where the R-40 is proposed. So, you can see it generally conforms pretty well to the overlay that the Ten Mile --draft Ten Mile plan has for this site and it's not exact, you know, there are some streets that are off a little bit or this designation floats a little bit, but generally staff said, you know, this is pretty close, especially for a plan that hasn't even been adopted by the Council yet. We felt this was pretty close. So, just wanted you to see that overlay as well. Here is the tot lot structures that are proposed. I vaguely recall seeing something about the color of these maybe changing, but this is, essentially; the layout of the tot lot, so I don't think it's going to be that blue, but I'll let the applicant maybe clarify that. I think he could clear that up as well. But I vaguely remember seeing an a-mail. And, then, they have this, as I talk about before. And there is some comments and I'm not even sure if these comments are from Anna or they are from Amanda, but they are comments and I did review them and I would concur with most of them! I guess I'm going to maybe jump to the punch line here before we go through all the slides, but a lot of them are garage dominated.. That's what I saw on quite a few of them. Not only just the single family homes, but the townhomes specifically. There are some components -- and I apologize I haven't been probably as diligent of reading up on this Ten Mile plan as I should be, but I have other duties and I do know that one of the aspects, though, is to -- oh, similar to what Mr. Turnbull was talking about earlier tonight with his vacation request was berm the residences to the street, create the friendly environment, pedestrian friendly environment, bring the homes to the -- to street level and kind of create that and I think they do that with some of these units, not -- not all of them, and that's what a lot of these -- these comments from the staff are and I'll just lef you kind of review and read for yourself, I'm not going to comment on all of them. ~ Materials -- you know, there are some that do a better job of using materials and others that are pretty monotone and don't use very many materials. So, there is some more single family. And if you want me to stop or go back, please -- so, now onto the townhome projects. So, these are attached single family. The one on the bottom of this slide is not the same, it's similar to i • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 48 of 69 what was proposed at the Commission meeting. I do see there are some modulation in the garages. Some of the buildings, if you can notice, it's slight, but there are some modulation between the face of the garage and ;the street, so your driveways, essentially, get longer and shorter with some of those. That fourth unit is set back it appears a little bit further than the third unit. So, there is some modulation, but, again, it's pretty garage dominated in front of the street. That's a lot of what you see. Here is another set of townhomes that we feel does a lot .better job of downplaying the garages to a mix of materials, even though that's still street, that's a lot of what you're going to see.. And here is some other ones that we have found somewhere. I'm not even sure where -- that we thought were attractive and did a nice job of making it not feel so, again., garage dominated. I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, but it does down play that garage and makes it more street friendly, if you will. And., then, some alley loaded products. Again, we don't run into the garage problem with these. They are going to be off of alleys, so you aren't going to see the garage, but for going down the alley. So, these are going to be on your 40 foot wide lots, essentially, in the alley loads. And., then, I have a bigger Ten Mile map. But that's -- that's what I have for elevations and, again, most all of those, I believe, are new since the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting., so I just wanted to share those with you and ;with that I believe I touched on all the notes that I had and I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions at this poinfi? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I have two. De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Let's see.. During some of the, I guess, public open houses on the Ten Mile area plan there was talk in this general area or this direction of some industrial -- is that farther west or north of this or is this where it was suggested? i Hood: Yeah. It is a little bit further. I could put the draft area map on there. I was trying to stay away from this, as -- it will be -- you will, have your chance at it here soon enough. But, yeah, it did end up further to the west as you can see and that would be the border with Nampa as well, so -- Zaremba: It's not this property that's -- Hood: Correct. Zaremba: -- industrial. Hood: Correct. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. The other question is there was a letter I believe from the church that's going to locate across the street from this, about a signal at Silver Oaks. Does one of your plans identify where Silver Oaks is? • I ~ • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 49 of 69 Hood.: Yeah. I'm sorry, I didn't touch on that. That is in the staff report. I didn't mention the letter that we did receive. So, this may not -- let's go to this one, maybe. So, again, this is Silver Oaks or Umbria is what the final plat ;was called. They just have the smallest amount of frontage there with the triangular piece. So, that's where this subdivision also ties and aligns with, so I believe that's what their -- again, on this side, that would align with. the Umbria. That would be a collector roadway here. So, the warrant probably in the future would be -- on the south side, anyways, I don't know about the north side, would probably be there for a signal, but that's the location. Zaremba: Great. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Schultz: Good evening, Mayor and Council. Matt Schultz, 2127 South Alaska Way in Meridian, here representing this application and it's good to be back. It's been awhile, last summer, and we have been working hard since then and, you know, one thing we were lacking last summer, as I thought back on it, was there just wasn't a consensus as to what this area was. It wasn't that our plan was bad; it was just we didn't know if there was industrial going to be pointed out in the area or if'it was -- if the mixed use regional that it shows right now was going to be commercial or what was it going to be. We had an idea, but that wasn't good enough. So, we did immerse ourselves in the Ten Mile area plan. We were one of the large stakeholders in the area and we believe brought a lot to the table as a suggestion, some regional issues, but we suggested and a lot of suggestions were made towards that that we were able to comply with and I can say that we have complied with everything that was recommended to us to get to this stage and that we do come before you with a consensus now that we didn't have before from your staff and Planning Commission, which is no easy task, as well as your HDR, your consultant that was hired to orchestrate the charrette process and everything, worked closely with Mr. Mark Sawyer through that process as well. But not only that, but your police department., your fire department, your parks department. If you remember, there was a question about a park in this area last year that through that process it was kind of moved across the freeway, I think. You know, it moved when they looked at the bigger picture. And, then, the school. Wendell Bigham last year said, oh, we don't need a school out here right now. Well, when it became apparent to him through the charrette process that this might have a lot of kids in the area at some point, he went we need a school. And so that changed as well. So, what we bring back before you is a highly evolved project that I think that we have covered all of our bases, crossed our I's, dotted our T's, and I think we have done -- you know, we have taken our time and I don't think anybody is going to accuse this thing of going through quickly, so, I think it's good and let me if I can -- if you can go to the landscape plan, please. Maybe point out some of the main regional type things that -- that we identified through the Ten Mile plan and also point out that we do comply with the current comp plan, which has been in force since -- what does it say there, 2002. It's on your floor over here. You know, we do comply with that, as well as the anticipated recommended outcome of the Ten Mile i • ~ I • Meritlian City CounciF ~ i April 3, 2007 Page 50 of 69 plan. So, we do comply with both and we are subject to the current one. We are not saying that to get around anything, we are just .pointing that out that we do comply with it. But this regional collector here does line up with' Silver Oaks and, yes, we will be contributing towards half of the signal through the ACHD staff report at whatever time they dictate that that be put in. This is a 70 foot wide collector, with landscaping on both sides, and to the middle, similar to E1 Dorado or 'Silverstone, a nice regional type entryway that we don't necessarily need for our side, but it is built to get to the south and also to get to the east. The school site, 15 acres that we have set aside to -- to work with the school district. Wendell's been busy. It's not on the top of his priority list right now to get that through, but if anything other than a school goes there, we would be back in front of you. I mean it's set for a school, we are going to -- you know, Wendell negotiated very astutely to get the best deal the can on the property and we are going to put a school there, because it adds value to the area, it adds value to have walk-able paths to the elementary school. It's just a good location and it's kind of an odd shaped piece. It works well, because it's off of Black Cat and, yet, it's set back from Black Cat, so it's a good piece for a school. We have got the regional pathway that's ten foot wide pavement with an additional five foot on, each side for -- so that the big fire, EMT trucks can get down there. We have kind of,worked that out here recently. It needs to be a little bit wider in case somebody has; a problem here, say, that the big truck can get in there and the EMT guys can get right to a person. So, we have made it extra wide to allow the emergency vehicles to get to it and we have got the room in there to do that. The Black Cat trunk, fortunately, is built through here and across the highway and, you know, it's to Overland Road now and that's -- it's all in the ground and .all good. We have got a couple parks. This one ; has a pool and a changing area. Another one here that we have been working with police. We moved the playground from here to the middle to make it more visible. That was one of the conditions that we worked through with the police department staff. The R-40 that we set aside, not really our thing, not -- you know, we are a single family residential developer and -- but that was our contribution to the area plan. If you remember before this collector road used to run along the property line. We have since brought the whole thing onto us, set this aside as R-40, as our contribution to the regional plan that will be residential, will be commercial, will be employment, and I'm really excited that this piece long term -- people won't even have to drive out to the main road potentially. You know, they could work in this area down here, they could recreate, they could go to school, you know, shop, you know, kind of live, work, play in a bigger picture. Not necessarily all within our site, but as one of the pieces of the bigger puzzle. I think it fits quite well. It has been a somewhat painful process just to open ourselves up to that public design process, if you will, but I think in the end we can look back and say the process worked.. It was a good process. We have a good diversity of product styles in here. Our contribution to deemphasizing the garages is we have set aside 20 percent of our homes to be alley loaded.. That's one way of handling it. There are other ways to design houses. A lot of people have opinions. It's hard to quantify in writing and say you must build exactly that product in this free market economy, but we want to comply with whatever this Council says we need to do. We want to comply with it, with what -- while still giving us some freedom to compete and d,o nice things with our product. But Caleb did -- I appreciate your bringing up the ~e-mail about some of the minor • , Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 51 of 69 corrections, that two I need to hit on are the police and fire. The police was we met about moving the tot lot and met about stop signs.; You know, there is a fine line between encouraging high speed traffic and also ; making good connectivity and Lieutenant Stowe and I agreed on that. Said, yeah, ~ you're right. So, we have good connectivity, but at the same time, somebody might say, hey, you're kind of encouraging people to drive fast and so we are going to four way stop this and two way stop these two here, plus, we have traffic calming circles here and here for this north-south and this north-south. So, we have -- in this area up here we Nave rounded off to prevent a real long block, too, to kind of try to calm the traffic as well,!as well as this area here. So, we tried to break up some of the long straight stretches the best we could. So, the police -- that was the police department. And, then, the fire, we talked about the pathway needs to be extra wide from ten and also secondary access, -- I want to clear all these things up up front before we get to final plat. This first phase up here, our secondary access was going to be out here. Out to Franklin Road. So, ;I like to get all those out up front, instead of having to negotiate them later on down the road. And we have all agreed that that is a viable secondary access until we can get over to this one over here. And, then, there will be another access when the school goes in and we just don't know when that's going to happen or how fast Wendell's going to think he needs a school out there. So, we have covered the police and fire. I wanted to point out kind of our lot mix. We have got about 26 percent townhomes, 20 percent alley loads, 15 percent 40 foot fronts -- can you go back to that color, please. So, the townhomes, about 26 percent. About 20 percent are alley loaded. About 15 percent are in the red or 40 foot fronts. About 30 percent are the orange and about ten percent are the blue or the 60 foot. We don't have anyone that's below ten or any other one that's over 30 of those -- of those five different product types, so I think we have got a really good mix and that last iteration with Planning Commission helped us get to that point where we added in some alley loadeds and we added in more townhomes and we really tried to meet the intent of that R-15 zone, which is get something more than just straight, you know, single family detached front loaded and our contribution -- where are the townhomes and where are the alley loadeds in that. You can see that's a pretty high percentage in there. Where we differ from the proposed Ten Mile plan slightly -- they have R-8 abutting up to R-40. We feel wrapping that R-15 around., so you go R-8, R-15, R-40 is a good step that way. Like Caleb said, it's minor that we are off a little bit on that delineation. I really think we have that consensus that we didn't have before. I really hope that all the work we have done on the renderings, as you can see that we have done the work, we have paid an architect to really put a pencil to it and that's an ongoing process. We are not done with those renderings. If there is any input we can have,'we appreciate it. We have spent the money, we have spend the time to do the renderings, to do something quality, something that we can all be proud of in this area and look back and say, hey, that was a good process we went through. We didn't waste our money on that Ten Mile plan., because it was a good process, even though we gave up a school and set aside some areas, I think in the end for the greater good it was -- it's a good project that I can stand behind and stand proud of. So, I guess with that I will stand for any questions or if there is anything I missed., appreciate it. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you, Matt. Any questions for the applicant? Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 52 of 69 Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Gorton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. • Borton: Just one quick question, Matt, and -- would this particular design -- is it -- is there an opportunity to utilize some connectivity for these future students? You know, think you're exactly -- you're right on the money, you're going to have a pile of kids in here, but there is really -- unless there is a pathway along this -- Schultz: I apologize for not pointing that out. I knew I was missing something. Borton: I was unsure. Schultz: One of the things that we did -- it was two fold... One was to buffer ourselves to the south as a transition. So, we extended these roads down up against here and said, hey, that's a good spot for a path, because that makes that path very visible. It's not a very long .-- behind the lots for a thousand feet path,; it's just open, so the police or -- could see it for only 200 feet, but that is an interconnected path -- Borton: Okay. Schultz: -- set aside for the school pedestrian traffic, which kind of came about as, oh, yeah, that's how that -- that worked out good to put that transition there. Borton: Okay. Schultz: Sorry about that. I knew I was missing something. Borton: That's okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I do have one other name on the sign-up sheet and that's Steve Moore signed up against. Moore: Madam Mayor and Council, my opposition to this request -- De Weerd: Sir? Moore: Yes. De Weerd.: Would you., please, state your name and address for the record. • Meridian City Council ~ April 3, 2007 ~ Page 53 of 69 ' Moore: Oh. Okay. Sorry. Steve Moore. 820 South Black Cat Road in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Moore: My opposition to this request is based on the conclusion that land between Interstate 84 and railroad tracks is a unique community resource. The amount of acreage is limited and should be developed carefully, reserved for commercial, industrial use. There are numerous places far more appropriate for residential development in this city and for the future annexation for that purpose. The present planning and zoning designation names this mixed use, which can, theoretically, include residential. In public testimony in the past relative to this project it has been acknowledged that allowing for residential in this area in hindsight was a mistake. I reason two wrongs don't make a right. This Council already rejected a prior request for this subdivision and development, reasoning well (last summer that a community planned for this acreage should be established, calling for at least an 18 month planning process for the area. That charrette planning process has been undertaken and at those meetings I attended I was assured that residential was not the best use of this area. The first development, whatever it is, in that acreage area, will affect all future development in the area between I-84, Franklin, Ten Mile, and Black Cat. Putting residential, especially single dwelling residential first anywhere along an artery as busy as Franklin Road is destined to be in Meridian's future seems an obvious mistake. Far more appropriate is commercial development. Think of the property by comparison along Fairview Avenue from Eagle to Main Street in Meridian. Isn't that the kind of artery that Franklin will be in the future connectedness to Nampa's city limit -- city limits and all the development in that direction? Residential require a buffer to commercial and industrial south where it's been admitted tonight that south would include residential -- or commercial and industrial and this development only steals more land from a better use for this unique acreage. A school next to offices,.warehouses, motels, seems poor placement to me, especially an elementary school; Safety issues such as traffic speeds, truck traffic that frequents commercial and industrial, mixed in with residential seems a logical mistake. Kids walking and bicycling to school with trucks, delivery trucks, tourist traffic, office, manufacturing traffic, seems very hazardous to me. If this is a good idea, why don't we take an empty field like the Quenzer farm at Black Cat and Ustick and reserve it for industrial and commercial in the middle of all the residential growth northwest of Meridian. And why not have a business park with restaurants, motels, et cetera, in the middle of a subdivision like' Paramount Subdivision. Rather much more wisely, just commercial and office space has been reserved along Chinden Boulevard relative to the huge residential area. The answers to those wise., in my opinion, are seemingly obvious. There is a good deal of public testimony given against this proposed subdivision months ago. That rationale, in my opinion., still stands. Please reread that testimony, if you have not, before approving this proposed development. Though revisions have been made in this second proposal, it is still primarily single family dwellings. I commend the city for the decision previously made to reject this residential proposal. Please continue the excellent planning process with resources committed., spent, in the next months to have a better Comprehensive Plan for this unique acreage along Interstate 84, at least to Franklin between Ten Mile and Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 54 of 69 U Black Cat. I recommend that you reject again with a view to a higher, more appropriate use of this acreage. De Weerd: Thank you. Moore: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Seeing none., Mr. Schultz, if you want to -- i Schultz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. Matt Schultz, 2127 Alaska. I do appreciate Mr. Moore's comments and the thought process that we go through and give people -- thought Iwas going to get through this tonight with nobody, because I haven't seen Mr. Moore since last summer, but I do appreciate his comments and just would like to respond to them that one of the foundational things that we and HGR discussed right out of the gate of the planning is this residential and there was so much commercial potential on that Ten Mile corridor, of which we are away from, that we are not commercial, and the industrial -- this isn't the best spot for industrial from what everybody has decided. So, it really is a good place to establish a residential base that feeds the future commercial that feeds the future office, that is where people live and. that section, like I said, they wouldn't have to go out on the main roads and clog everything up. So, we decided right from day one that this was, indeed, residential. The existing Comp Plan shows residential on the west half, mixed use regional on the east half and we have decided that it is all residential, there is just a higher use of residential. And one thing that we are trying to keep intact is -- I'll admit it, we are trying to keep intact a single family component, because people that live in Idaho like to have a little bit of privacy, they like to have a little bit of yard, you know, so we do have some multi-family, but we are trying to maintain some single family component to our residential. We are almost a year into the 18 month process. I mean I think the process has -- has fully evolved and fully went through the process. We need to go through the final public hearings. But there is a big consensus to what we think that this area is residential where we are at and that surrounding us'there are compatible uses. That industrial is not right across the street or right to the south of us, it is not incompatible in this area. And I think the way we have -- we do have a semblance of density. That is the highest and good use of our -- of our land, especially around these transportation nodes. If we are going to put density anywhere, 'let's put it around the Ten Mile interchange. If we are going to do it anywhere, let's do it here, so people can take advantage of -- of the transportation opportunities on the interchange and also create that energy to capitalize on the commercial that's going to go in along -- along that Ten Mile corridor right around in here. That's going to ,be the highest commercial uses. Probably on this side, who knows if it's a mall or whatever it is, but that will be the highest use commercial and, then, there will be some; other commercial here and., then, it fades away, some residential, and we are -- we kind of have the opposite to what we are used to. I'm used to submitting some where our perimeter needs to be lower density, our perimeter used to higher density. I don't know if you have noticed that. It's almost the reverse of what we usually see where we are transitioning inward instead of • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 55 of 69 outward.. So, you know, I do respect his comments, but I do believe it is the right time. I do believe it is the right location and that we are note jumping the gun by approving it, because it does comply to the existing Comp Plan, as well as a large consensus of what the future one is going to be, so I guess with that I will leave it at that. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Rountree: I have none. Schultz: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Caleb, can you tell me on this -- on the road structure, as we look at Franklin being a major east-west route, in the Comprehensive Plan that is coming through the process right now, how is the transportation infrastructure set up to minimize the access out onto Franklin and does this fit within that? i Hood.: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there is a -- as I briefly mentioned earlier, there is a transportation overlay scenario that we are hoping that development follows as they come in and is a component of the Ten Mile area plan. The text -- don't have too much of the -- I don't have any of the text memorized, but I know that the idea is -- like on a typical arterial is to limit the amount of access. points, but we do specifically show where those access points should, be located. I wasn't part of the discussions about talking about the accesses, particularly on Ten Mile, because of the interchange, and where those were going to align between Franklin Road and being far enough away from any on and off ramps, yet not too close to where Franklin comes in. So, actual policies in there, again, I'm not too familiar. Maybe some of the others that were at the charrette some more and have studied that as they prepare for -- but I do know that that is a component and something,, you' know, essentially starting with a blank slate that we are trying to do is limit those access points. It doesn't show up as well on this map, but there are some -- and, basically, the connections between the arterials do serve, as you notice, as buffers, if you will, between different land uses on one side of the street and the other and are limited `to thirds of a mile, to generalize. Again, you know, this is a guide, like the Comprehensive Plan is, but -- but in order for this thing to work the street layouts for these collector roadways will have to look something similar. De Weerd: Well, it looks like Mr. Schultz is just itching to answer that question. Schultz: Mayor and Council, Matt Schultz, 2127 Alaska. I was really involved in this process from the beginning with the charrette process and Ten Mile plan. We proposed roads. They adopted their plans to conform and vice-versa. So, we really are very compatible. This is the road that lines up with Silver Oaks with the signal here. Here is the transition between what they showed medium and high, we show medium, medium high, and high. But here is the transition going into high. We have high and continues high. The important component of this that I see as critical to the rest of this developing down here is because some parcels are kind of land locked -- is this east-west collector i i Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 56 of 69 C~ • of which we connect into here and, then, also this. is =- we have got this connection as well leading down to these properties. We have worked real closely with this property down here to make sure that this access would get to them and give them the connectivity that they needed out to Black Cat without having to run all the traffic through up to Franklin. So, we have really tried to spread the traffic out to Black Cat, up to Franklin, and limit it to only two spots. But long term this is going to be crucial to these properties really getting their connectivity out to Ten Mile and out to Black Cat and spreading that flow around. But we did look at this. We made sure this did not need to be a collector and that was confirmed, because it's not a collector, that's our internal road and so we doing it the right way this time, I think; in terms of -- this is a 2,200 acre master plan, I believe, and we are putting in the pieces where we think they are supposed to go up front and people are matching it, instead of trying to fix it, retro fit it. So, I really think this is the right way to do it and master planning it from the beginning and we have done that. ' De Weerd: And you have a pathway along that -- that;canal? Schultz: The regional pathway will continue. I think in the end this is going to continue at a diagonal. I think he's thought about straightening this out, but I'm not sure what he's going to do when he develops this. But, yes, this will lead all the way down, the regionat pathway, parallel to that. The sewer runs parallel to that. And, then, we have also got a pathway leading here and a gray line we ,only have a little short section of that, that's the Williams Pipeline. We have shown a~ segment of path in there as well that as we continue that, you know, north, west, south, east, why not build those sections, because that's just going to be 60 to 90 feet of open area. It may as well beautify it and put a pathway in it, you know, that you could actually use. I mean at least the drain is a visual usable space, but that's all flat space. So, they will let you cross it, they just don't want you staying in it too long'with a road, so you got to cross it quickly and not run diagonally across it. They just want you to get across it quickly. So, we really have., you know, looked at the long term picture and master planned a big area and we fit right in as that foundational piece, so -= thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any other question's? I guess I asked that one, so I don't have anymore questions. Do you? Okay. ' Rountree: Well, yeah, I guess I have one for Caleb. De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor. Caleb, what's the rough estimate of the Ten Mile plan to get to Council? Hood: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Rountree, aS I mentioned earlier, it's on this Thursday for the Planning and Zoning Commission.; I don't believe they are probably going to take action, they are going to probably need to sleep on some things before they take action.. At least that's what staff is going to recommend to them. • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 57 of 69 Rountree: I'd rephrase that that they are going to have to think about some things. Hood: Yeah. Think about some things. We have got not only Ten Mile, but South Meridian is also on the agenda, so there is some big :Comp Plan amendments coming up and there is just a lot for everyone to take in. So, that being said, we are asking them to continuing it for two weeks, so that would be the 19th of April. So, probably the first part of June, first week of June, something roughly in there. Projects are usually running four to five weeks after Planning and Zoning Commission to get to the City Council. Yeah. There will be -- the clerk is saying -- you know, we are going to have six or seven of these, so we are going to have to do them probably two at a time, so they will be spread out four or five, six, seven. weeks. So;, I don't know who is going to get .priority. I'll have to talk to Anna about that, but anywhere between four and eight weeks, probably. From the 19th. I should clarify. De Weerd: Okay. I guess., Mr. Schultz, I do have one last question for you. Well, won't promise it's the last one, but it's the only one I can think of right now. As staff showed us some of the -- the housing product, they h'it on probably one of the areas of concern that Council has about with the dominants of garages on the street side and they did offer some -- some examples that they donit all have to look that way and guess that's been -- I won't speak for the Council, but I can speak for me personally, that's been my major concern is the products for the higher density that have come in front of us that have not alley loaded have lacked imagination. And I know you have tried to break it up with different treatments and paint colors and that sort of thing., but is there anyone that builds something different out there' that you could find to build in this development? You know -- and that's a frustrated question and maybe rhetorical, but -- Schultz: I haven't seen this before, so to me this is different, but I know that, yes, the garages are in the front., so in that way they are similar, but you have two options, the garage in the front or the garage in the back. I guess;you could do one on the side, but when you get to the higher density, that alley loaded is an option. There are a lot of quirks when we start dealing with alleys, as you're aware, with the fire department issues and some of these other no curbs are allowed in them and they have to be straight in, so you get into some geometric situations'.where we are doing alley loadeds and they get very complicated. Which is unfortunate, because they do deemphasize the garage.. As you noticed in some of our alley loaded products that look good. I think the architect has done a good job of differentiating every part, so it looks like a different house, at least, different materials, you could do different colors. We could modulate the front some and my concern, when we start to talk about enforcing architecture, is -- and the Planning Commission took this tact, was, Matt, here is our four criteria that we wrote down, like stucco, stone, or brick, you know, emphasize the windows, create shadows, usable porches, deemphasize the garage., Does that mean do all of them non-garage? No. We suggest that 20 percent. Now;, is that 40 percent? Is that 50? I mean we are just looking for some number, because the most efficient way to build a house is this way and we start adding costs, but we like to provide a variety, we like -- I think the danger is if he show pictures and say you have to build it this way, is the next • • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 j Page 58 of 69 l guy going to build it that way and fihe next guy going to' have to build it that way and, you know, at what point do we tell people exactly what to build. I'm okay with -- with making -- you know, like Planning Commission and staff did, making -- and Peter Friedman did, your regional planner, some -- it's in the guide -- Baraya design guidelines. It talks about stucco, stone., or brick and varying the fronts and things like that and we can do that. I mean we have done that. We will continue to do that. It's just when you start getting these -- can you do exact picture, yeah, we could do that exact picture, but how many do you want, what color do you like -- houses are a very nebulous thing to pin down when it comes to architecture -- De Weerd': So, the answer is no? Schultz: What's that? De Weerd: I just thought I would help simply your answer. Schultz: If you want us to do those townhomes in an alley component, we could do that. De Weerd.: Well, I'm not saying alley, but have you looked into different ideas, like has been shown to you up here? I was just out at Mountain Home Air Force Base -- Schultz: I'm not sure those -- De Weerd: -- and I swear if the Airforce base can build attractive housing, I think the development community can. Schultz: I'm not sure these are four-plexes here, Mayor. I'm not -- I'm just not -- haven't looked at these close enough to see what these are, you know, that they are shown us. I see pictures that look kind of -- this looks like a single family residential to me that's -- and we have -- , De Weerd: Well, I just asked if you had looked at other ideas. Schultz: We are trying the best we can -- De Weerd: And that was just my question. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We can get rid of those garage dominated fronts by not allowing 30 and 40 foot wide lots. Anytime -- I mean I will guarantee you that these aren't on 30 or 40 foot lots that you're showing right here. When you get a 30 foot garage, what are you going to have on a 40 foot lot and you got a four foot setback? That's not the -- in defense of the ~ • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 59 of 69 developer, that's isn't their fault. That's the four people's fault right here. And that's what the planners are shoving at us now. Schultz: You know, if you say we don't want 3D, 40 foot lots, we can live with that, too. We are just trying to make everybody happy to get -- Bird: If I had my way we would have hundred foot lots;on everything. Schultz: I know. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I would prefer half acre myself, but -- Schultz: So would L. De Weerd: Yes., Mr. Borton. Borton: A question for you or Kent. Thinking out Iqud, it's important for me -- and know for the rest of the Council, with regards to this'. particular area and the Ten Mile plan, we think that we have got it pretty much pinned down. But there is still a public process and review from Planning and Zoning is of critical importance. To me the rest of the Council I'm sure -- and my thinking out loud is if this matter gets continued now, it might be two months.. To allow that processing to go through -- because I'd hate to -- De Weerd: Undercut. Borton: Yeah. You sort of -- you sort of might be undercutting that process and the valuable input that the Planning and Zoning provides to us -- and I don't expect there to be any drastic changes. I think the Ten Mile plan has~been combed through extensively well, but that is an important part of what we do and so do you have any reaction to -- Schultz: It's disappointing, but I'm not going to stand up here and draw a line in the sand and say you either got to vote for me or against me tonight. I'm not into those kind of runs anymore. My whole -- I'd rather -- if it's important that we -- that we wait to make everybody feel a hundred percent sure and, then, let's do it. If we can say it conforms to the existing, you have done a good job of transitioning, now, you have done all those things, then, let's move forward. But I'll leave it up to you to -- I would ask for either a vote of approval or a continuance, obviously. Those are my choices. Borton: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? Schultz: In that order. • i Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 60 of 69 De Weerd: 1 guess there is three, but he only wants two. Schultz: We have been at this way too long to let it go ,down. Bird.: My thoughts', thinking out loud, is I agree with Councilman Borton. If you want a positive one out of me we are going to continue it. We can sit here and say, yeah, Ten Mile plan is going to bought off, but we don't know what the public is going to come and do and we are going to -- we are charged to do what the majority of the public and what's best for the deal. I might like it, but the public, don't. So, if you want a positive vote. out of me, it's not going to be tonight. ' De Weerd: And just because Mr. Nary will say -- and it doesn't mean if it's continued you will get a positive one out of him anyway. Schultz: Well, I think we found that out earlier; right? t was here for the first one on that one, so -- yeah, there is no guarantees and we -- Bird: We do like what you have done, Matt, don't get me wrong. Schultz: In the remand we acknowledged that there was no guarantee when we came back for you tonight we would get anywhere, but we have -- Bird: We have the cart out and we are waiting to get the horse. Schultz: But we are so close.. The timing has been a;little bit unfortunate on my end on this thing twice now, so they are so close you should wait. If they were six, eight apart, maybe you can move ahead, but I understand. I do understand. De Weerd..: See, staff reads Council pretty well, don't they? Schultz: They do. They are getting good. So, as soon as I can get back in front of you the better. We'd like to be on -- I don't know if it's possible to be on the same hearing or if it matters to be on a different hearing as that plan or if there is anyway to -- because we'd like to, if possible, to get going this year still and; that would just be our preference if we co u Id, so -- De Weerd: Well, you're a member of the public; right? Rountree: He can testify. Brown: Kent Brown. 15D0 East Iron Eagle., Eagle, Idaho. And the only reason I want to speak is that you talked about the small lots and getting around the garages and other things and., you know, I think from research we find that people want to live in a detached home for the most part. I mean Idahoans like their garages, they like their cars, and they like to be in a detached home, but ;as these property values for raw ground have gone up, the challenge that we as planners and developers and City • Meridian City Council ' April 3, 2007 Page 61 of 69 ' i Council face is how do we provide that in a smaller piece of property, because that's one of the bigger elements in them buying a lot and when you're spending a hundred thousand dollars in Meridian for a lot to build your house on, you know, you're kind of pricing a lot of the market out of those and so as I go to the different city councils and different planning and zoning commissions, we are faced with trying to look at that. One of the things that make it kind of difficult is the zoning ordinances and the building setbacks and where you're allowed to do that. In some parts of the country one of the things that they have done and you guys have allowed it, you have even approved one of my projects where we are proposing to do that, is that in between the homes you grant an easement to your neighbor to allow them toy use that ground.. So, instead of having ten feet, five of it being on one lot and five of it being on another and having a fence down the middle and not being able to use than ground., because we are building -- we are meeting a building code requirement, we now grant that to one and allow them to use up to that area. The key to those things is can we provide privacy. If we can orient our windows and do those things and so the building community needs to be a part of the plan approval and I -- you know, I hear Councilman Rountree saying we want to see elevations and that's going to be a part of making that work. The garages -- you know, ask ourselves why is the garage out front? Well, the reason the garage is our front is that they are trying to create the private space behind, that's where your family room usually is behind your garage and you have that private space in your area and you kind of go along with having that garage out front.; De Weerd: Well, see, but, Kent, even in those they build the living part of the house in front of the garage, so the garage is a little bit tucked back, it's not the first thing you see. So, you know -- and.., like I said, we have been'-- I have been collecting pictures, so I could offer different ideas and., yeah, they are not built in this area yet. It's frustrating. But I know I have heard it from a number of people -- those are ugly places. Now, they are not ugly to everyone., because someone buys them. Usually they turn into rentals and the ugly ones I have seen are rentals: So, I just -- I ask that question to -- and I will continue to ask that question, because it is a challenge that I have to the development community, find some products that are different, you know, let's see something different. ; Brown: And I know that -- I have got clients that are trying to adapt to that. You have a building setback for your driveway against your property line. If you can, again, use a shared driveway and go back using the same space, now you're making that a part of how you can accomplish that. Doing the key shaped lots or flag lots and, then, making those face so that the garages are all in that back space and you don't have any garages facing the front. De Weerd: Well, we are always looking for new ideas. Brown: I understand,. And it's not that we are not trying. I mean it's -- there is a little give and take I think in this process and we are listening, it's just going back to the builders, because they have to be a part of that process. Instead of making a product that is salable to all generic builders -- I don't how many years -- the nine years I sat at i • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 i Page 62 of 69 ' the City of Boise, how many times I had the builder co"me in with his plan and said, you know, this doesn't fit on that lot and I said, well, change your plan and he says, well, you understand I do this, I flip it over, that's the only thing I do to this plan and -- and so, you know, it takes -- it takes a -- kind of a trickle down effect in trying to make that happen and not that you're not being heard, that's the reason that I stood up, is that we are hearing you. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I just would comment that I see some refreshing changes in this, as opposed to the previous application.. I'm encouraged to hear Matt say that they continue to work on the design, the elevations. I'm appreciative of the elevations you brought and., staff, I appreciate your comments on those. I think you reflect to a large degree what you have heard from us over the past few months and I would hope that you got that much of an edge -- probably more of an edge than most people get in what's going to sell and what isn't. I, like the rest of the Council that have spoken, think that, you know, we spent a fair amount of time and you spent a fair amount of time in what was considered a public process to come to a conclusion on the Ten Mile plan. We are not there yet and it seems to me if we were to take action on this tonight in the affirmative that we would tell those folks that it was a1l~for naught and we are going to go ahead and do whatever and if you want something different when you see the Ten Mile plan in June or in April, whenever it goes to P&Z, this is already taken care of, you can't comment on that. So, I would like to see us consider deferral and that also gives the applicant more time to work with their architect and put together some things. I have got genes that came here from Missouri -- and that's, g-e-n-e -- and show me what you want to do, so we are comfortable with it. We have; taken the word on a lot of things that are out there that we have to look at every day ,right now and that's probably why we are getting -- become more sticklers on what it is we are wanting to see in our community, because we have seen some things that have come to our community on trust and it didn't pan out. And so I appreciate your effort, Matt, and it was nice to see driving by there this evening that they have reclaimed the topography out there and you can hardly tell that there has been anything going on out there. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Unless there is further discussion, I'd move that we continue Items 11 and 12 -- I'll pick a date that might have wiggle room based on what takes place with P&Z. Let's say June 19th. That's two months after P&Z's had their two weeks to chew on it and if it is earlier, that's fine. But for now say June 19th. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Rountree: I'll second that. _ f ~ • Meridian City Council • April 3, 2007 Page 63 of 69 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 11 and 12 to June 19th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1121 A: AZ 04-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.5 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Christian Family Matters, Inc. by Don Weber -' east of South Linder Road and south of West Overland Road: De Weerd.: Okay. Amendments -- Item No. 13 is amendment to Ordinance No. 07- 1121 A. Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is one here because they had the wrong attachment when we passed it, so when it went to the -- to the recorder the attachment had gotten lost somehow and a different attachment was sent, so that's why it's back in front of you. To clean up. '. i De Weerd: So, would I just need a motion to -- i Bird.: Approve the amendment? Nary: Right. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Bird: Madam Mayor? i De Weerd.: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the amendment to Ordinance 07-1121~A, request for the annexation and zoning of 4.5 acres from RUT to R-8 ;zone for Christian Family Matters, Incorporated. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIES: ALL AYES. De Weerd..: Mr. Berg was there something that we;needed to do on Item 9 about a resolution? Berg: Well, Madam Mayor, this item here -- this is an amendment -- amended ordinance that we are wanting to pass. The legal description was not correct. It didn't i • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 64 of 69 close.. So, we got a corrected legal description and so that's why we are amending this ordinance. Nary: Yeah. I'm sorry. ~ Berg: So, maybe the wording was not quite right, but it's an amended ordinance that we need to approve. Bird: So, we need to read the title. Berg: Yes. I'm sorry. I was trying to look through the memo that I found and that's refreshed that maybe I was correct when I thought iti was amended,. So, if I could do that. De Weerd: And., then, maybe after we move off this item I do need you to -- did we need to do something on Item 9? It approves the vacation -- Berg: Yeah. I just questioned you what we -- what the process we needed to go, because if we needed to change the note on the plat, if we are vacating the setback. Hood: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes. Hood.: Members of the Council, usually an order is prepared for those vacations. There is no findings with the vacation, so I believe the legal department usually does those.. So, we took the motion to mean that that would occur. I don't think that needs to be a specific action. We will take care of that. De Weerd: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yeah, occasionally when we have done those we have also included the direction to bring a ,resolution back. Even when you don't, we bring it back anyway. So, if you don't do it, we just do it, because that's how it gets recorded, so - De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read Item 13 by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 07-1121A, an amended ordinance for property located and described in Attachment A of this ordinance and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian., establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands as R-8 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Meridian City Council ~ I • April 3, 2007 Page 65 of 69 Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. Item 14: Ordinance No. 07-1307 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 15: Ordinance No. 07-1308 AZ'06-064 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 27.05 acres from RUT ' to an R-8 zone for Normandy Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc. - 4145 South Locust Grove Road: Berg: If you would like me to read the other two ordinances for one motion? De Weerd: That would be excellent. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 07-1307, an ordinance for annexation of property being along -- being all of Lots 1, 2, 4, and 6 and roadways within Golden Eagle Estates, Book 33, Page 2017, Ada County records and a portion of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to, the corporate .limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to: R-4 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. ; Berg: Ordinance -- excuse me. Item 15, Ordinance 07-1308, an ordinance for annexation of property being a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho., and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to -- I'm sorry. It's R-8 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by Ilaw, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Is there anyone who would like to hear an;y of these ordinances read by title -- by more than title only? In its entirety? Okay. No. Thank you. No. Okay. Council? Bird.: Madam Mayor? i • Meridian City Council April 3, 2007 Page 66 of 69 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. ' Bird.: I move we approve ordinances 11 -- or 07-1121A, 07-1307 and 07-1308, with suspension of rules. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. A motion and asecond -- Zaremba: I would request that we vote on them separately. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve all three and a second. So, in discussion you would like to ask them considered separately. Maybe you can give a reason and we could ask the motion giver to withdraw it if you would so desire. Zaremba: My reason is I don't intend to vote the same way on all three. De Weerd: Okay. 1 Zaremba: I must be the only person planning to do that, so it may not make any difference. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think it would be great for this, because I think it shows us that we need to go back to the old route where you did them one at a time. It costs us about five minutes, but I'm with you, we can vote on it separate -- De Weerd: So, would you withdraw your motion? Bird: I would withdraw my motion. ' De Weerd: Second agree? Borton: Yes, he does. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for the five extra. minutes that we would have saved otherwise. Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor'? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council • • April 3, 2007 Page 67 of 69 Bird: I move we approve 07-1121A with suspension of rules. Borton: Second.. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. i De Weerd.: Okay. Item 14. i Bird.: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. ' Bird: I move we approve Ordinance No. 07-1307 with~suspension of rules. Borton: Second. , De Weerd: Okay. I have motion and a second to approve Item 14. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. De Weerd.: Item 15. Bird.: Madam Mayor? i De Weerd: Now that the question's been answered on which one he was going to vote no on. Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 07-1308 with suspension of rules. Borton: Second. De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. ; i Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 1 Meridian City Council • ' • April 3, 2007 ~ Page 68 of 69 De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 -- Zaremba: Sorry to make it difficult, but thank you all. De Weerd: Well, next time you do that you have to explain why, so -- Rountree: At least make an argument, so somebody~else might go with you. Zaremba.: That's the one, as I recall, that has four cul-de-sacs that I was not attracted to and an access to Eagle Road that I think is in the wrong place. Item 16: 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). Rountree: Second.. Zaremba: Once again discussion. If we are likely to discuss the continuation of things we were discussing earlier,. do we also need to include (1)(a) and (1)(b)? Bird: Probably wouldn't hurt. De Weerd.: I don't know. Bird: Then we are under the umbrella. We need (1)(a). (1)(a). Rountree: (1)(a). ' Bird.: I include (1)(a) if the second agrees. Rountree: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. So noted. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree., yea; Zaremba, yea; Gorton, yea MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION.: Meridian City Council ~ April 3, 2007 Page 69 of 69 De Weerd: Okay, I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. Rountree: So moved.. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Motion to adjourn. Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:43 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: O~ '°% MAYOR TA de WEERD ,~~ CT~T~ 0 A~ED: ''~~, QTY ~ ~.~`~ ~ / ~i~ DATE APPROVED G. BERG JR., CiT CLERK March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 20Q7 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of January 30, 2007 City Council Joint Meeting: 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: Ernailed: ~ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cfty of Meridian. i March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, X007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-B REQUEST Approve Minutes of March 6, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: 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. March 30, 2007 ~ PP 07-003 MERLDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Ken Lenz ~ ITEM NO. 5-C REQUEST Findings: Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 commercial bldg lots on 8.06 acres in a C-G zone for Medina Subdivision - SWC of S Meridian Rd & W Overland Rd -- 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: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT H€ALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: fDAHO 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. • CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER • I KK C~~%~~~r~~ ~~d A ~. v. In the Matter of the Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of 6 Commercial Building Lots on 8.06 Acres in a C-G Zone for the Proposed Medina Subdivision AND Development Agreement Modification to Allow aRight-in/Right-out Access Point to the Site From S. Meridian Road. Case No(s). PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 20, 2007 (Findings on the Apri13, 2007 City ~. Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 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 Tittle 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning reaps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The .conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 , • • 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 March 20, 2007, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided ; in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by~having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated January 9, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Tirne Limits 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 applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of tune to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 ;~ • • 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 maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 20, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 , LJ U /'~ By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on~the ~ ~ day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA ~ VOTED__~~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED_Z~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD ~ VOTED-~~~ ' ~- MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Attest: G. Berg, Jr., City Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. ~ ~U~ Ma~pr fI'~'I'rl7r~y,, ~ ~/, ; eerd ~~ F o ~~~ ~' ~~ \_ ~ .~ The Plannin ~Il~p~~e~}~`~Public Works Deparhnent and City By: ~i" l0(/2 /Y~ G) l~?it-(~ ~~ Dated: ~~ Ur J~~ 7 City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & OR-DER CASE NO(S). PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR. THE HE • DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: March 20, 2007 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Sonya Waters Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 884-5533 SUBJECT: Medina Subdivision • PP-07-003 ~ crrv qF ~~z~z Preliminary Plat of 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres in a C-G zone • MI-07-002 Development Agreement modification to allow right-in/right-out access point to the site from S. Meridian Road (NOTE: a variance for the subject access point has previously been approved by the City Council.) 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, White-Leasure Development Company,' has applied for Preliminary Plat (PP) approval of 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres in the C-G zone for Medina Subdivision. The applicant is also requesting approval to amend the Development Agreement by allowing an access to Meridian Road, as previously approved by the Council. The applicant is proposing to modify the stipulations regarding the previously allowed right-in/right-out access point to S. Meridian Road (see Section 10, Analysis, for more detail). The site is located on the southwest corner of S. Meridian Road and W. Overland Road, in the northeast '/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West. This property is currently referenced as Assessor's Parcel Number 51224110105 and has not been previously platted. This property is within the City's Urban Service Planning Area and is currently within the corporate boundaries of the City. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (PP-07-003 & MI-07-002) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the PP & MI applications. Staff is recommending that the PP & MI applications be approved with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the staff report. Note: The Commission is not required to make a recommendation on the Development Agreement modification request (MI-07-002). The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the PP request on February 15, 2007. At the public hearing the Commission moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing:. i. In favor:. Van Elg (Applicant's Representative) and Peter Oliver ii. In opposition: Bryan McGrath iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Joyce & Ken Weland v. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters vi. Other staff commenting. on application: None b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Reduction to the required street buffer width in a portion of the buffer along S. Meridian Road; and Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 1 -• i i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE • DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 ii. The alignment of existing access points on the. north side of Overland Road: c. Key Commission. Changes to_ Staff Recommendation: i. The applicant shall apply for Alternative Compliance for the reduction in buffer width along S. Meridian Road prior to the City Council meeting. (The applicant has applied for Alternative Compliance as requested by Council and the request has been approved by Planning Staff.) d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: , i. None The Meridian Citv ouncil heard thec items nn March 1.11 2nm A+ the nuhlir hParina fhay approved the sLbiect PP and MI request ~_, ummarv of Citv ouncil P ~blic Hearinv~ i. favor: Jeff Huber (Applican ' Repre en ativel and Matt ith. Bri h o Corporation ii. In oRnosition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written. testimony: None v. taff presenting application: aleb Hood vi. Other staff commenting on application• None 1L ev I spec of Dice ~ccion by ouncil• i. he alignment of driveways on he north side of Ov nand Road: ii. rocs-parizn~ and cross-asses a reem nt rea Firemen (Wal r n'c does no want cro c-par in 1 ~, ev Council Changes to Commission Rernmmpnrlafi;nn• i. None 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers PP- 07-003 and MI-07-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 20, 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 PP-07- 003 and MI-07-002 as presented during the hearing on March 20, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers PP-07-003 and MI-07-002 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: Southwest corner of S. Meridian Road (SH 69) and W. Overland Road NE '/o of Section 24, T.3N., R.1 W. Tax Parcel: S 1224110105 b. Applicant: Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 2 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING. DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 White-Leasure Development Company 416 S. 8"' Street, Ste. 200 Boise, ID 83702 c. Owner: Same as applicant d. Representative: Van Elg, The Land Group, Inc. e. Present Zoning: C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial District) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres of land in a C-G zone along with a Development Agreement modification to amend the portions of the agreement that prohibit curb cuts or access to the site from S. Meridian Road to allow one right-in/right-out access to be located on Meridian Road, no closer than 500 feet from the centerline of Overland Road per VAR-OS- 027. Further, the VAR & CUP requirements for the driveway from this access to extend directly to the west property line for future cross-access is requested to be modified to re- locate the access point on the west boundary to the northwest corner of the property, as shown on the plat. 1. Preliminary Plat, labeled Sheet P1.0, prepared by The Land Group, dated 1/9/07 (attached in Exhibit A) 2. Landscape Plan, labeled Sheet L1.0 and L1 1, prepared by The Land Group, dated 1/8/07 (attached in Exhibit A) h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres of land in a C-G zone. A Development Agreement modification is also requested to amend the portions of the agreement that prohibit curb cuts or access to the site from S. Meridian Road to allow one (1) right- in/right-out access to be located on Meridian Road, no closer than 500 feet from the centerline of Overland Road per VAR-OS-027. Further, the VAR & CUP requirement for the driveway from this access to extend directly to the west property line for future cross- access is requested to be modified to re-locate the access point on the west boundary to the northwest corner of the property as shown on the plat. Sewer service will be provided via the sewer main on the west side of S. Meridian Road and water service will be provided via the existing mains on the north side of W. Overland Road. Pressure irrigation serice will be provided by connecting to the existing water mains as well, with approved back flow prevention. The proposed retail and office uses fit within the current C-G zoning. The project will be anchored by a Walgreen's shown on Lot 1, Block 1. No variances are being requested with this application. 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before the Commission and City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will, in fact, constitute a development agreement modification. Miscellaneous applications are not currently addressed in Title 11 of the Unified Development Code. It has been determined by the City's Legal Department that a miscellaneous application to amend a recorded development agreement will in fact require a public hearing before the Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 3 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAWNG DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 City Council. d. Newspaper notifications published on: January 29, 2007 and February 12, 2007 (Commission); and February 26, 2007 & March 12 2007 (Gifu Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on January 19, 2007 (Commission); and February 23, 2007 (Gifu Council) f. Applicant posted notice on site by: February 5, 2007 (Commission); and March 9, 2007 (City Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is currently vacant. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: There are existing single-family homes to the south of this development and commercial businesses to the north and east. The property to the west is currently vacant and in the process of being re-developed. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Commercial (Jackson's Food Stores convenience store/gas station, Sandman Motel, vacant property), zoned C-G 2. East: Southern Springs commercial development, zoned C-G 3. South: Single-family residential (Elk Run Subdivision), zoned R-8 4. West: Vacant (in the re-development process), zoned C-G d. History of Previous Actions: • Property was annexed in 2004 (AZ-04-031) under the name of Meridian Gateway. A conceptual plan for a commercial subdivision was approved with the AZ application. • A Development Agreement (DA) (Inst. No. 105134293) was recorded at the time of annexation that required all future uses on proposed lots or parcels within the annexation area to be approved through the Conditional Use Permit process. The DA also prohibited curb cuts or access to the site from S. Meridian Road (State Highway 69) per the Comprehensive Plan. • A Variance (VAR-OS-027) was approved in 2006 that allowed. one right-in/right-out only access to S. Meridian Road, to be located no closer than 500 feet south of Overland Road. Further, said access drive was to extend directly to the property to the west for future cross-access with the property to the west. • A Conditional Use Permit (CUP-06-015) was approved for Walgreen's on this site (proposed on Lot 1, Block 1, of the subject plat). e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: This property would sewer to mains located in Meridian Road. Location of water: There is water in Meridian Road and W. Overland. Issues or concerns: This property is proposing using City of Meridian potable water as its main source. City Code requires subdivisions to provide a pressurized irrigation system using surface water as its main source. If the applicant is proposing to waive this requirement they shall provide proof, to Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 4 • . CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 I the City Engineer, that this property has no existing water rights prior to being heard by City Council. ' 2. Vegetation: None 3. Floodplain: NA 4. Canals/Ditches/ItTigation: No major facilities are located on this site, however all ditches on this property shall be tiled per City Code (see Exhibit B of the staff report). 5. Hazards: None known 6. Proposed Zoning: NA , 7. Size of Property: 8.06 acres £ Subdivision Plat Information: ' 1. Residential Lots: 0 2. Non-residential Lots: 6 ' 3. Total Building Lots: 6 4. Common Lots: 0 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 6 7. Open Lots: 0 8. Residential Area: NA 9. Gross Density: NA 10. Lot Sizes: Lot sizes range from 1.088 acres to 1.877 acres. g. Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): UDC 11-2B-3 requires a minimum 35-foot wide buffer along S. Meridian Road and a minimum 25-foot wide along W. Overland Road. Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7, Landscape Buffers Along Streets. With CUP-06-O1 S, the applicant was allowed to request alternative compliance for the width of the landscape buffer along S. Meridian Road, where the deceleration lane will be constructed. However alternative compliance has not yet been requested and the full buffer is required until such time as alternative compliance is requested and approved by the, Planning Department. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: A 25 ;foot wide buffer is required along the south boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the existing residential subdivision. Per CUP-06-015, this buffer as not required to be installed until another building, other than the Walgreen's building, is constructed within the subdivision. 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Other landscaping standards: NA h. Dimensional standards for the C-G zone per UDC 11' 2B-3: Minimum Dimensional Standards (in feet unless otherwise noted) Proposed Required Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARI~G DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 Front setback* Rear setback* Interior side setback* 0 0 0 0 Maximum building height 65 65 Maximum building size (without design standard approval) 200,000 s.f. 200,000 s.f. * All setbacks shall be measured from the ultimate right-of--way for the street classification as shown on the adopted transportation plan. No changes to the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2B-3 were requested or approved with this application.) Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to this development will be provided from one right-in/right-out access point from S. Meridian Road and one right-in/right out access point from W. Overland Road. Additionally, this property will share a full access point to W. Overland Road that is provided on the adjacent property to the west. Across-access agreement with the property to the west should be recorded. Further, all lots within the subject subdivision should be provided with access to the access points listed above. Other than the access points approved with this application, direct lot access to W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road should be prohibited The Planning Department and ACRD are supportive of the proposed cross-access and access points to the subdivision, per the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the staff report. As of the print date of this report, ITD has not submitted formal comments on this application. '.However, ITD (Sue Sullivan) did submit an e-mail stating that if the subject development complies with all items in Meridian's ordinance for development along state highways, that ITD would have no further comments. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On January 26, 2007, 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 "Commercial" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, "Commercial" areas are anticipated to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area residents and visitors. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics): • 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 in the following manner.• - Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 6 • I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resources and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. - The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Police Department (MPD). - The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACRD) and Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District No. 2. This service will not change. - The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change. 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. • "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation comdors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective D, Action 4) The applicant is required to install and maintain landscaping within the street buffers located along W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road in accordance with UDC 11-3B-7. A 35 foot wide buffer is required along S. Meridian Road and a 25 foot wide buffer is required along W. Overland Road. • "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal 1, Objective B) Staff believes that the future commercial and retail uses on this site will contribute to the variety of uses in this area. • "Require al'1 commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action 5) The applicant is not required to install internal landscaping with the subject preliminary plat application; however, street buffer landscaping is 'required with this application. Internal landscaping will be required upon development of each lot within the subdivision with CUP & CZC approval. ~ Staff also finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application: • "The capacity of arterial ...roadways can be greatly diminished by excessive driveway connections to the roadways. The City should cooperate with ACRD to minimize access points on arterial...roadways as development applications are reviewed." (Chapter VI, page 72) The applicant is minimizing access points to the arterial roadways adjacent to this site by only proposing one right-in/right-out access to S. Meridian Road and one right-in/right-out access to W. Overland Road. • "Develop methods, such as cross-access agreements,' frontage roads, to reduce the number of existing access points on to arterial streets." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Obj. A, #12, page 79). Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 7 • ~ • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR,THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 Cross-access is proposed at the northwest corner of the site for a shared access point to W. Overland Road on the property to the west to reduce access points to W. Overland Road, a principal arterial roadway. • "Restrict curb cuts and access points on ...arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Obj. D, #5, page 107) Curb cuts to W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road, both principal arterial roadways, are restricted to those shown on the plat. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists a variety of uses that .are principal permitted, accessory, conditional, or prohibited within 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. Structures Subject to Design Standards: All future structures on property adjacent to an entryway corridor (S. Meridian Road) are subject to;the design standards listed in UDC 11- 3A-19C. d. 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 internal 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 PRELIMINARY PLAT ANALYSIS.: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposal with the Unified Development Code, Staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed commercial subdivision. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings for a preliminary plat. Dimensional Requirements of the C-G zone per UDC Table 11-2B-3: There are no minimum setbacks, lot size, or street frontage requirements for lots in the C-G zone. Proposed lot sizes range from 1.088 acres to 1.877 acres. The maximum building height allowed in the C-G zone is 65 feet. The maximum building size allowed without design Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 8 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 standard approval is 200,000 square feet. Future buildings proposed on the subject lots shall meet the minimum dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2B-3 and #6h above. Development Along Federal and State Highways (UDC 11-3H): Because this property is located along S. Meridian Road (State Highway 69), the standards listed in UDC 11- 3H-4 apply to this development. However, as noted above in section 6d, a variance (VAR-OS-027) and conditional use permit (CUP-06-015) were previously approved that allowed one right-in/right-out access. to State Highway 69 with the requirement that said driveway extend duectly to the west property boundary and cross-access be provided between the subject property and the property to the west. UDC 11-3H-4B3 requires that a street be constructed, generally paralleling the state highway, to provide future connectivity and access to all properties fronting'the state highway. Staff believes that the internal driveways proposed within this development meet the intent of the afore- mentioned requirement. Further, with the previous approvals for access to this development, staff believes that no other portions of this section of the UDC apply to this development. Thus, staff is not requiring any conditions of approval in Exhibit B of this staff report pertaining to this section of code. Landscaping: The landscape plan submitted for this project, prepared by The Land Group, labeled Sheet L1.0 & L1.1, dated 1/8/07 shall be modified as follows: Provide a minimum 35-foot wide landscape buffer along S. Meridian Road or apply for alternative compliance for a reduction in buffer width where the deceleration lane will be constructed, as provided for in CUP-06-015. If alternative compliance is requested, the applicant must obtain approval prior to submittal of the fmal plat. The width of the buffer shall be calculated outside of any right-of--way that ITD may require along S. Meridian Road. A 25-foot wide landscape buffer shall be installed along the southern boundary of this subdivision adjacent to the existing residential uses upon development of the second building within this subdivision. (The first building, Walgreen's, was allowed to be constructed without installing this buffer, per CUP-06-015.) Include landscaping for this buffer on the south side of Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, in accordance with UDC 11-3B-9, Landscape Buffers to Adjoining Uses, on the revised landscape plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted to the Planning Department upon completion of the landscaping prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the site. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Proposed Streets and/or Access: Access to this development will be provided from one right-in/right-out access point from S. Meridian, Road and one right-in/right out access point from W. Overland Road. Additionally, this property will share a full access point to W. Overland Road that is provided on the adjacent property to the west. Across-access agreement with the property to the west should be recorded. Further, all lots within the subject subdivision should be provided with access to the access points listed above. Other than the access points approved with this application, direct lot access to W. Overland Road and S. Meridian Road should be prohibited The Planning Department and Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 9 • C[TY OF MERPDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 ACRD are supportive of the. proposed cross-access and access points to the subdivision, per the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the staff report. As of the print date of this report, ITD has not submitted formal comments on this application. However, ITD (Sue Sullivan). did submit an e-mail stating that if the subject development complies with all items in Meridian's ordinance for development along state highways, that ITD would have no further comments. ' A cross-access agreement should be recorded between the owner of the subject property and the owner of the property to the west for the, two shared driveways to Overland Road and the driveway to S. Meridian Road. All lots within the subdivision should have access to the access points approved in this application. The agreement: should also allow for cross-access/parking between the lots within this subdivision. This agreement shall be recorded and a copy of said agreement submitted to the City prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat (see Exhibit B of the staff report). Elevations: Sample elevations were provided with the subject application for future buildings for this site (see Exhibit A of the staff report). Future buildings shall substantially comply with the construction materials and design elements shown in these elevations. All future structures on property adjacent to S. Meridian road, an entryway corridor, shall also comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19C. Further, the DA for this property requires that all buildings obtain CUP approval prior to construction. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If asingle-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. Fencing: The Applicant is not showing any fencing on any of the submitted plans. Permanent fencing is not required for commercial subdivisions. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: As per UDC 11-3A-6, all imgation 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. Future Uses: All future uses on the subject lots shall be required to obtain CUP approval per requirement of the DA. After CUP approval, a Certificates of Zoning Compliance must be obtained prior to building construction. Further, all structures located adjacent to S. Meridian Road shall be subject to design standard approval per UDC 11-3A-19C. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) MODIFICATION ANALYSIS: The DA (Inst. No. 105134293) for this development is proposed to be modified as follows: • Exhibit B, Section A, first bullet: ". ~ ee=nplianee-~,}t}~ +~ ==~~e~si;-~~ no curb cuts shall be allowed on Kuna-Meridian Road (SH 69) except for one (1) right-in/right-out access to be located on S Meridian Road no closer than five hundred (500) feet from the centerline of W Overland Road." • Exhibit B, Section J, last paragraph: "...Staff finds that no curb cuts or access to Kuna-Meridian Road shall be taken from this site upon development except for one Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & M'I-07-002 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARI~G DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 (1) ri t-in/right-out access on Meridian Road to be located no closer than five hundred (500) feet from the centerline of W: Overland Road." Staff recommends that in Exhibit B, Annexation and Zoning Comments, under #5, an additional bullet item be added as follows: "This site is allowed one ri t-in/ri hg t-out access to S. Meridian Road to be located no closer than 500 feet from the centerline of W. Overland Road. No other accesses or curb cuts shall be allowed to S. Meridian Road." Further, staff recommends that an exhibit be added to the DA depicting the approved access points for the subdivision as shown on the preliminary plat attached in Exhibit A of this staff report. Staff supports the proposed modifications to the Development Agreement, as the access point to S. Meridian Road was previously approved and the applicant is still providing cross-access to the property to the west, so they both can use the access point to Meridian Road. Staff believes that this modification will' clean up the DA to reflect the previous and concurrent approvals for the site. Note: Staff has not reviewed the internal parking lot improvements shown on the plat and landscape plan submitted with this application for compliance with the UDC or Comprehensive Plan. Internal improvements will be reviewed upon CUP/CZC application for each future building within this subdivision. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds that applications PP-07-003 & MI- 07-002 substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends that the PP application be approved with the conditions stated in Exhibit B of the staff report. Note: The Commission is not required to make a recommendation on the Development Agreement modification request (MI-07-002). The Meridian Planning. and Zoning Commission heard the PP request on February 15, 2007. At the public hearing the Commission moved to recommend approval. itv Council heard these items on March 20.2007. At the uublic hearing ev auuroved the subiect PP and MI reauest 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat, prepared by The Land Group, labeled Sheet P1.0, dated 1/9/07 3. Landscape Plan, prepared by The Land Group, labeled Sheet L1.0 & L1.1, dated 1/8/07 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Central District Health Department Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN• PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAI~G DATE OF, MARCH 20, 2007 9. Idaho Transportation Department C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Medina Subdivision PP-07-003 & MI-07-002 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN• PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEA~G DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map iNTERSTATE'84 $~ :: ' ~ : . Q~ ~ ~ . , : . ~~~~ ~ KING SALMON J d' I, Q Z W J J ~ ' ~i = m ~ Y r ~ ~ LL $ OVERLAND _ _. _ __ ~ I x a y ~ i w (7 x d a a W 5 UNKNOWN Y~, ~~ ~~` DAVENP RT U4VENP_ORf ~ ~, Q4VEN _~ Q O C~ ~ 0. EL-ILLS ~ O m J 7 ~ ~ 0. K M H C.4iDERWOOD GALDERWO ~ D _ . _._ } ~ g J \ ~~ ~ ~~ m ~ 9 ~. ~ /r;ir~ /~f I /\1 Exhibit A • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIPG DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat ~ oHeoi N~no-i+31a savoy navioia3w s ariv=raano~ - - ` e~ ~ I d;$ t~~ . ~ Q `'~ ~ i~d ~ad~Iiwn~ad ~ ~ ~ ~gigA ! g ~~~ ~1~' .:: _ NOIS!/.11a9fiS~t/NIQ3W` ~~a, ,--. I o ff'-~ 3~ili .~` S_{~~ r,. ~ `E ~ ' e g § pt gg 9 .Q ~ C ~ ~~. ~ ~ p ~- Oa 2~ ~6' at ~i~ ~~~¢~cY Q4 i~ °~jF I~" ~ ~19~ i~~ ; ~} d C ~~~ "' Q ~ ~ ~ r , . ~ s ~' Y qq m oi. !¢$$~gcpa ~~ C ~ .Fn~ ff ~ " " m ~ ° ~' pp [~ i i : '3'~ f YO ~Qatl9Srl; ~ ~ ~a §pc ? Y. V Q~ ~f S 'Z ~ p ~:s ~ S r ~ a ~' sp a~:~~'.. Z ~ ~a "if a~~ ~5- ".8gy~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ;~~ a m ~g~~ '~~, (.~I I I ~Q j® YYJp "2j ~R.' r`'~ [a9j ~09 aG~ g., d~ Q'~ ~S !. ~ I ~~ ~ P: • r ~.oll.o ~ ~ " ~a~eS~S ~ ~,~~ E ° ~ ~QA~~ ~Sa 5 ~' ~ ia~A ~, ~ ~, ;P. d o ~~, ~ ~ ~~ ~~ - m ~ ~ ~ o - ~ ~ ~_ m t' ~ w~ ~~'r -ar.i ~. c k ~ L Q f ! 7 9~ ,5~ '~ ;~ Bi : • ~ e g a8~.3 ~ a i ' u~cnn. ~~ u: d~.~ ~ opg~~ s 9 ~ }}1y'',''~~ ~ i :;! + 4,: ,~`i I { r~ - ~.~ P !'~~ 1 ~ .111 " ~., ~ r~~~~_ it. .T y { _ , ~~ i4 ~e .i F~: ~. § -.~1. n_`~I Ira ~,\y~r~ ~~ ~~~-~ ~. c, ~" t. ~'~• ~ " _` ii g _ t r 7 ~'J 7% ~ .~ '~z^~ai~'~, ~ }rr `'4 WdQ! ~ a1~ ~ ~r,f{4~ I t ~ " ~ .. µb ~~ ~ ~v~.yC 11 j,'t~.' ~~. _ _ 1 _ ~+~ ~..' ~ I 4 ~~) ' ~- e( cst s~ r ~, '.~~ _.~~ , ~ Kc~~~B~a-~a. fla~ n i ~ 97r. # r ~~. rJ ','~ 2~~R~Zxe~ •-'.. _ - Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAI~G DATE OF MARCH 20, 2007 3. Landscape Plan '~ , i, o4~Ai ueiPua~ry; & ~ j i;~ t; i ~ 8 ~: ~ ~+~ ! ue~d ade~spue~ ~°4 I~t~~ ~.,ii~Ea -i ' ~ ~_ ;, ~• ~~'. NOISI<11,Q8f1S~flNIa3dV 51~ ,. ~s~r.} e ~I~~ I . 't ~ r 1 ~~ i r~ I , ~, P i ~V~ ~, ~ ~.: ~ IIII- A J ~ ._ --. -Q --- ..~!_. - - ~s t t _ -~~~•~}--...~~...~~-.-nom. ., .. ., ..-. •, :. .:. -... ,. rr. -- .. .. ... .... ~ ... /F ~il ~ ~.~. a'4~ ~ 1 ~'.I~ q lyp~ ~ ~' ts'll Iy! t. rT Y ~ . it }< ~ ~ T . ~' ~- I.~ 1......t_e; ~ ;, r: i# , ~ ~~ r-~ y •~ r a ....-» . t : k' ~ ,~ ~. ~ ,i ,.~ . ~. ~ , - r ~~. ,~~ ~fl ~ ,` ~, ~~ ~ _ _ °: [Ll, __ - ._, f ~ ~. ~ ~: I ,~ C' I (, .j. ;~'' I.I' ~` ~. ,L r 1~ - ~ ~~, Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING. ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~DATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATIONS 1.1.1 The Development Agreement (Inst. No. 105134293) ,for this property shall be modified as follows: • Exhibit B, Section A, first bullet: "... T^ ^ ^'~^^^° ~ ~~*'~ *'~° "~°~:a:.,.. ~'^m~~°'~°~°~••° P-l~rr, no curb cuts shall be allowed on Kuna-Meridian Road (SH 69) except for one (1) right-in/right-out access to be located on S. Meridian Road, no closer than five hundred (500) feet from the centerline of W. Overland Road." • Exhibit B, Section J, last paragraph: "...Staff finds that no curb cuts or access to Kuna- Meridian Road shall be taken from this site upon development except for one (1) right- in/right-out access on Meridian Road to be located no closer than five hundred (500) feet from the centerline of W. Overland Road." • Exhibit B, Annexation and Zoning Comments, under #5, add an additional bullet item as follows: "This site is allowed one right-in/right-out access to S. Meridian Road to be located no closer than 500 feet from the centerline of W. Overland Road. No other accesses or curb cuts shall be allowed to S. Meridian Road." • Attach a copy of the preliminary plat shown in Exhibit A of this staff report as an exhibit in the DA depicting the approved access points for the subdivision. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY :PLAT 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as P 1.0, prepared by The Land Group, dated January 9, 2007, is approved with the conditions listed herein. The Applicant shall comply with all previous requirements of this site associated with AZ-04-031, VAR-OS-027, and CUP-06-015, as well as the Development Agreement (Instrument No.105134293) in effect for Meridian Gateway. 1.2.2 All future structures on the subject lots shall be required to obtain Conditional Use Permit and Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval prior to building construction. Future buildings on this site shall substantially comply with the construction materials and design elements shown in the elevations attached in Exhibit A of this staff report. Further, all future structures located adjacent to S. Meridian Road shall also be subject to design standard approval per UDC 11-3A- 19C. 1.2.3 Access to S. Meridian Road and W. Overland Road shall be consistent with the approvals of ACRD, ITD, and the City of Meridian. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting direct lot access to these roadways other than the access points approved with this application. 1.2.4 Landscaping: The landscape plan submitted for this project, prepared by The Land Group, labeled Sheet L1.0 & L1.1, dated 1/8/07 shall be modified as follows: ~ ~ ..1;,..,.,t .,~, ,ter .,L.*.,:., ., ,.,1 ., .- t., ~„1...~:r+.,l .,4'•L.° f:...,1 ..1.,r Tl.° ..:.-1*l. „~'tl.° l.,.FF .. Reams (The applicant submitted a request for Alternative Compliance to the required street buffer width along S. Meridian Road prior to the City Council meeting. Staff approved a reduction in buffer width to 31.92 feet for the portion of the buffer that is Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING•ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEDATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 adiacent to the deceleration lane.) Upon development of the second building within this subdivision, a 25-foot wide landscape buffer shall be installed along the ,southern boundary of this subdivision adjacent to the existing residential uses (The first building, Walgreen's, was allowed to be constructed without installing this buffer, per CUP-06-015.) Include landscaping for this buffer on the south side of Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, in accordance with UDC 11-3B-9, Landscape Buffers to Adjoining Uses, on the revised landscape plan. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted to the Planning Department upon completion of the landscaping prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the site. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B- 14. Submit copies of a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). 1.2.5 A minimum 35-foot wide street buffer is required along S. Meridian Road, except for the portion of the buffer that is adiacent to the deceleration lane as shown on the plat in Exhibit A of this .staff report, which was approved through Alternative Compliance to be reduced to 31.92 feet in width, and a minimum 35-foot wide street buffer is required along W. Overland Road, as shown on the plat. These buffers shall be depicted on the plat as a permanent easement or included as a common lot in the subdivision and shall be maintained by the Business Owner's Association. 1.2.6 No signage is approved with this application. All signs proposed for this site shall obtain separate sign permit approval. 1.2.7 Across-access ingress-egress easement/agreement shal!1 be recorded between the owner of the subject property and the owner of the property to the west for the two shared driveways (located in the north, center of the plat and off-site, on the property to the west) to Overland Road and the driveway to S. Meridian Road. All lots within the subdivision should have access to the access points approved in this application. The agreement should also allow for cross-access/parking between the lots within this subdivision. This agreement shall be recorded and a copy of said agreement submitted to the City prior to the City Engineer's signature on the final plat (see Exhibit B of the staff report). 1.2.8 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. 1.2.9 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 1.2.10 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. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIIZEMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.3.1 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to City Code. 1.3.2 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- Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIIV• ATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 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 stil'1 meet the standards, of UDC 11-3A-18, then the Applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.3 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. 1.3.4 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. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.3.5 Staff s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved Preliminary Plat does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.3.6 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 in Meridian Road. The applicant shall install mains to and through this subdivision; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public'Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in W. Overland Road, and S. Meridian 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 The applicant shall stub sewer and water to the edge of their property, in which ever cross-access is approved. 2.4 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. 2.5 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). 2.6 The applicant has proposed a waiver to the pressurized irrigation system required by City Code for this development. Per Meridian City Code 9-1-28, the pressurized irrigation requirement can only be waived if the particular property can prove they have no water rights in an irrigation district. UDC 11-3B-6D requires non-potable water to be used in pressurized irrigation systems when deemed available. Therefore, the applicant shall be required to install a pressurized irrigation system using any existing surface water. If the applicant does not have existing water rights, they shall provide documentation of such to Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• ATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 the City Engineer prior to the City Council Hearing. 2.7 If the City Council waives the requirement for a pressurized irrigation system, the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of well development fees prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. 2.8 The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be,required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. If it is to be owned and maintained by an Irrigation District then a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 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 water for the primary source. If a surface source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior ~to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.10 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 maybe 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 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 Storrn Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited iii~iless 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. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted required improvements prior to signature on the final plat. These include but are not limited to, fencing, landscaping, .amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, and water. 2.15 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 maybe bonded for prior to :obtaining certificates of occupancy 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. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING•ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• ATE OF FEBRUARY I5, 2007 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 maybe 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 subdvider'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. 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 ''h" 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'. £ 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 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.4 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. 3.5 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent sheet signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIIV~DATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 3.6 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-fl'ow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall, be placed per Appendix D. 3.7 The 6 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 3800 by the year 2010. 3.8 Maintain a separation of 5' from any buildings to durnpster enclosures. 3.9 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 3.10 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). ; 3.11 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. ' 3.12 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.13 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes.. 3.14 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 sprinter system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903..3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.15 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all Fire Department connections. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The proposed development shall limit landscaping shrubs and bushes to species that do not exceed two feet in height. Trees shall have a canopy of no less than six feet. 4.2 The loading areas shall be separated from all public parking areas. 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 Exhibit B • I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 7.1.1 Consult with District Staff regarding improvement construction, access construction, and right-of- way implications due to the fact that the site is being constructed at the same time as the District's Five Year Work Program prof ect on Overland and Meridian Roads. 7.1.2 Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 44 frontage and access. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340. 7.1.3 As incorporated in the ACHD Overland Road project abutting this site, access should be approved located approximately 255-feet west of the intersection with Meridian Road (right- in/right-out only); AND located at the east property line of the adjacent parcel to the west (shared full access with a cross access easement). Aside from the driveways specifically approved with this application, no other access is allowed to Overland Road; and a note of this restriction should be included on the final plat. 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 right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed uriless 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 ACIID 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 ACRD 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. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING•ARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE • ATE OF FEBRUARY I5, 2007 7.2.1,2 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. 9. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 9.1 As of the print date of this report, comments have not been received from ITD on this application. Please contact ITD to determine if additional right-of--way or improvements are necessary on SH 69. Exhibit B 1 ~' CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 15, 2007 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; The City Council finds that the proposed plat is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Staff 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. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The City Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their own cost, the City Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; , Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon continents from the public service providers (i.e., Police, Fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See Exhibit B, Agency Comments and Conditions, for more detail.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not aware of any health, safety, or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Staff is unaware of any natural, scenic, or historic features on this site. Therefore, the City Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which staff is unaware. Exhibit C March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN,CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO S REQUEST Approve Transfer of Location of Beer & Liquor Licenses for Jokers of Boise dba Jokers of Meridian from 906 N. Main St to 3266 E. Pine Ave 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 Affached Approvals Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • March 30, 2007 • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 200':7 APPLICANT Parks Department ITEM NO. 5-E REQUEST Resolution No. A Resolution Adopting the Park Properties Naming Policy for the City of Meridian; and Providing an Effective Date: 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 Resolution 8 Policy v p~, w~ • • CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. d ~~ J ~~ BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PARK PROPERTIES NAMING POLICY FOR THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on March 27, 2007, the City Council of the City ofMeridian received a report from the Parks & Recreation Deparhnent regarding revisions to the City of Meridian Parks Properties Naming Policy; and WHEREAS, after receiving said report, the City Council directed that the revised City of Meridian Park Properties Naming Policy be brought forward in Resolution form to establish a Park Properties Naming Policy for the City of Meridian. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the City of Meridian Parks Properties Naming Policy be adopted, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. ADOPTED by the City Council of City of Meridian, Idaho this ~ r~day of 2 , 2007. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~ day of !~'i 7 , 2007. APPROVED: AT'I'ES ~/~i~~/~ CITY CLERK Resolution for City of 4 \~' ~ r~ n~ o _~ ~~~ - `~ ~ . ~air~0 0 ~~~ es~ng Policy Page 1 of 1 • • MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION PROPERTIES NAMING POLICY Adopted March 27, 2007 I. PURPOSE: A sound-naming policy can add meaning, significance, and uniformity to the park and recreation properties of the City of Meridian by developing park names that embody the values and heritage of the local community. iIt is the intent of the naming policy to establish reasonable criteria in which to suitably honor and acknowledge both individuals and organizations for their contributions to the City of Meridian. II. POLICY: A. It is the policy for designation of names for park and recreation properties to be in accordance with criteria and procedures set forth below: 1. To minimize confusion, proposed park names that are similar to those of existing parks in the system shall be avoided. 2. Conditions andfor stipulations of original property donation, deed or development shall be honored regarding the name of a park. 3. To avoid the appearance that the public park is a private park, the name of the adjacent or surrounding subdivision shall be avoided as the name of the public park. 4. If a park is to be named after a living individual then their permission should be secured prior to the name being selected or the City Council may consider a change if an objection is made by the person after the selection. 5. When a park is proposed to be named'after a person who is deceased, then the permission of the closest living relative of an individual, if practical, should be secured prior to the name being selected. The City Council may consider a change if an objection after the selection. 6. Park names should represent community values and be mindful of future generations. III. PARKS OR PORTIONS OF PARKS MAY BE NAMED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: A. Park Names: An attempt should be made to name parks utilizing the Department theme for naming parks. The theme is as follows: MERIDIAN PARKS A1VD RECREATION PROPERTIES NAMING POLICY Page 1 of 4 • • Community Parks and Neighborhood Parks should be named for easy recognition; utilizing reference to historic sites, geographical features or descriptive names. The words "Community Park" or "Neighborhood Park" shall be affixed to the end of the park name. B. Temporary naming: 1. The Parks Commission may recommend the temporary naming of portions of facilities. The Commission shall work with the individual organization seeking a temporary name to determine the appropriate criteria for the temporary naming to be consistent with the rest of this policy. The Commission may allow a variance from this policy for a temporary name. 2. This temporary naming policy may apply to any playground, sports field, sports court, amenity, or any other portion of the park facilities that can be suitably and appropriately named to honor an individual or organization. This temporary naming policy may also be applied to undeveloped parcels in the City's parkland inventory to provide a convenient means of identification prior to development. ~. 3. Temporary naming under this policy can be for any designated period of tune, but shall not be longer than one (1) year from the date of approval with the exception of undeveloped parcels which shall maintain their temporary names until the selection of a permanent name pursuant to this policy. Subsequent requests to continue the temporary naming maybe considered, but such request must be made annually. C. Procedures for a Permanent Name: 1. Preliminary action in naming a park or facility maybe initiated by the Mayor, City Council, Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission or any subcommittee thereof, Meridian Parks and Recreation Department staff, property donor, or individual citizens. A formal letter of proposal shall be submitted to the appropriate subcommittee of the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission which shall consider the proposal(s) and submit a recommendation to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission shall review the proposed name(s), take public comment, and make a recommendation for the name to the Mayor and Meridian City Council. 2. In all cases, the Meridian City Council shall have the authority to accept or reject the proposed park or facility permanent or temporary name and to waive any requirements of this policy. MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION PROPERTIES: NAMING POLICY Page 2 of 4 • 1 • 3. The City Council shall have final authority on the permanent or temporary names and the length of time that such name maybe used in connection with the park or any portion thereof. D. Changing of Names: Nothing in this policy shall be construed to prohibit the changing of names of parks or facilities by the City Council. E. Final Decision: All decisions for the permanent naming of a park facility or any portion of park property shall be approved by resolution of the City Council. This shall not apply to the memorial trees that are placed in the parks pursuant to this policy. IV. DEFINITIONS: A. The following guidelines shall be considered when naming a park based upon a donation: 1. Neighborhood Parks: When at least fifty (50) percent of the value of the parkland is donated or when "substantially all" of the development is donated at no cost to the City of Meridian. 2. Community Parks: When at least twenty-five (25) percent of the value of the parkland is donated or when "substantially all" of the development is donated at no cost to the City of Meridian. 3. Facilities: When "substantially all" of the facility development is donated at no cost to the City of Meridian. 4. Valuing Donations: Valuing donations for the above section shall be determined by City staff with the advice of the Commission. Donations must be without costs or expense to the City of Meridian and are based upon value at the time of donation. Donations that require credit towards impact fees or if impact fees are to be reimbursed to the grantee shall not be considered donations for the purposes of this naming policy. 5. Substantially alit The City staff with the advice of the Commission shall determine whether the value donated is "substantially all" of the development. MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION PROPERTIES NAMING POLICY Page 3 of 4 C~ C~ 6. Development: Development must be in accordance with the approved site master plan or statement of character and/or criteria approved by the Meridian City Council. 7. Donations: For the purpose of this policy, donations may include monetary as well as in-kind donations and may be aone-time or cumulative donation or a bequest. All. donations are~subject to final approval and acceptance by the City Council. MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION PROPERTIES NAMING POLICY Page 4 of 4 ~ March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT MI 07-002 April 3, 2007 ITEM NO. 5-F REQUEST Approve Beer, Wine and Liquor License Renewals 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 List on Agenda • i D. Approve Transfer of Location of Beer and Liquor Licenses for Jakers of Boise DBA Jakers of Meridian from 906 N. Main Street to 3268 E. Pine Avenue: Approve E. Resolution No. 07-552 A Resolution Adopting the Park Properties Naming Policy for the City of Meridian; and Providing an Effective Date: Approve ~F.e _~_A prove Beer Wine and,Liquor Lice a Renewals: Approve • Winco Foods #48 ~ - T-~ - --- - - - - Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar Tobacco Connection Sizzler #215 • Maverick Country Stores #343 Epi's A Basque Restaurant Baja Fresh Mexican Grill Goodwood Barbecue Company Jacksons Food Stores - 412 E. Fairview #1 1585 S. Meridian Road #11. 522 W. Cherry Lane #35 66 E. State Street #56 3100 E. Magic View #97 1950 E. Fairview Avenue #98 180 E. Central Drive #99 3291 E. Pine Street #105 Idaho Pizza Company Big Smoke, LLC Meridian Speedway • Red Robin Albertsons - 20 E. Fairview Avenue 3301 W. Cherry Lane Ultra Touch Carwash . Limelight, LLC A New Vintage Wine Shop Corona Village Jakers of Meridian G. Change Order No. 1 to the contract with Masco, Inc. for the Construction of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACHD for $1946.00: Approve H. Approve Agreement for Professional Services with I~ Frances Company for Entitlement Services and Community Development Block Grant Management for $42,995.00: Approve Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 3, 2007 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48: hours prior to the public meeting. t • Date: March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING ;~, April 3, 2007 APPLICANT MClSCO, Inc ITEM NO. 5-G REQUEST Change Order No 1 to the contract with Masco, Inc for the Construction of Water and Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ACRD 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: MERIDJAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Attached Memo/ Change Order C~ Phone: J I U II I I II-IIUIJ. Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • • CEIV~I3 emo _ MAR 2 ~ 20U1 City of Meridian To: Will Berg; Tara Green City Clerk Office From: Brent Blake CC: File, Len Grady, Keith Watts Date: 3/27/2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for April 3, 2007 City Councl Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the April 3, 2007 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: JCWCI nnurvvernen~s m ~onwncuon Wltn AGI-1U Uvenand Topaz to Cloverdale This change order of $1,946.00 adds 40 feet of water main and a 90-degree angle fining to the project in order to extend water main to the eastern most city limits along Overland Road. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves Change Order Number 1 to the contract with Masco, Inc. for the construction of 40-feet of additional Water Main and a 90-degree angle fitting in Conjunction with ACRD Overland, Topaz to Cloverdale for a cost of $1,946.00 and authorizes the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 • CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, ID 83642 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER • CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 PROJECT NO. 0619b DATE: 3/27/07 EFFECTIVE DATE: 3/27/07 CONTRACTOR: Masco, Inc PROJECT: Water and Sewer Improvements Overland, Topaz to Cloverdale The Contractor is hereby directed to make the following changes from the Contract Documents and Plans. Desclption: Install additional 40-feet of 12-Inch water main and a 90-degree angle fitting. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME. Reason for Change Order: To extend the water main to the eastern most city limits along Overland Road. Attachements: ACRD Change Order #2 CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIMES: Original Contract Price $ 298,397.90 Original Contract Times: Net changes form previous Change Orders Net changes form previous Change Orders No._ to _ $0 00 No._ to _ (calendar days) . .None ConVact Price Prior to this Change Order: Contract Times prior to this Change Order: $298,397.90 (calendar days or date) Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order: Net Increase (decrease) of this Change Order: $~,94s.oo (calendar days or date) Contract Price with all Approved Change Orders: Contract Times with all Approved Change Orders: x300,343.90 (calendar days) RECOMMENDED: (CONSTRUCTION MANAGER) ACCEPTED: (CONTRACTOR) By: Brent Blake By: David Apricio Date: 3/27/2007 Date: APPROVED: (CITY PuRCrIASING AGENT> COUNCIL APPROVAL By: Keith Watts Date: Date: APPROVED: (CITY) - ATTEST: By: Mayor Tammy de Weerd By: City Clerk, Will Berg Jr. Date: Date: • • ~[ Overland Road CHD Change Order No 02 CT206-21 RD072 504002 CHANGE ORDER Purchase order 22120617 Masco, Inc. CHANGE IN BID QUANTITIES Overland Rd, Topaz Ave / Cloverdale Rd Schedule 3 -Meridian Sewer 8~ Water Improvements (Overland, Topaz/Cloverdtale) CODE Bid Item Item Description QTY UNIT Unit Price ltem Total .4.1.A.1b Water Main, Add 90degree Bend / TI LF ~ $34.40 ~ $1,376.00 EA $570.00 ~ $570:00 Change Order Total $1,946.00 This change order will increase/decrease the calendar days of completion by: 0 Original ContractAmount $1,960,043.92 Adjusted ContractAmount $1,987,051.92 Original Completion Date: 07/31/2007 Adjusted Completion Date i 07/31 /2007 ~ Total contract amount and completion date will be adjusted as shown above when this change order is approved and accepted. City of Meridian directed a change on the east end of the water main. nstal an additional 40 If of 12" main and a 90 degree elbow fitting. All project requirements shall be in accordance with current contract documents as mod~ed by this change. The price agreed on, as part of this change, shall be full compensation for all material, manpower, equipment, allowable overhead and profit, and any other appurtenance required to complete the work. ~-°1 C~ ACRD 1~ ~o"~ - - Date ~~to ~0 Authorized Contractor Sig Date ACHD Approval 3~ ~/7 Date Other Approval Date . ` ,~. ~, ~ ;,t.;. r ~ ,THIS DpCI~MFNT SyAL1, BE~OIVI~.A SURPLEMENT TO THE..CONT~RACT '~•'~,- '- •~ - _.-~ ;:~ Adj CO No Amount Comp Date InGDec Comp Date _ CT206-21 RD072 - ,~: - - - _ 001a $1.,960,043.92 07/31/2007 ~0 07/31/2007 , 01 $25;062:00 p 02 $1,946.00 p y-~,yar,uol.yl ... -- - - - 001a $1,698,868.10 08/07/2007 $1,698,868.10 .$3,685,920.02,.? Original Central Files -Copies: Engineer of Record, Res. Engineer, Inspector, Project Files, Contractor, Con Admin, Accounting • March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Kay Frances Company ITEM NO. 5-H REQUEST Approve Agreement for Professional Services with Kay Frances Company for Entitlement Services and CDBG Management for $42,995.00: 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: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: _ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~F` • ~ • AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES is made this day of March, 2007, and entered into by and between the City of Meridian, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and Kay Frances Company, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT," whose business address is 3645 Sanada Way, Boise, Idaho 83702. I. RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY has a need for services involving set-up, management, and technical assistance as to the CITY's participation as an Entitlement Community in the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant program; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is specially trained, experienced, and competent to provide, and has agreed to provide, such services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, terms and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows: II. TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. Scope of Services: 1. CONSULTANT shall perform and furnish to CITY, upon execution of this Agreement and receipt of CITY's written notice to proceed, all services, and comply in all respects, as specified in the document entitled "Scope of Services," a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, together with any amendments that may be agreed. to in writing by the parties. 2. CONSULTANT shall provide services and work under this Agreement consistent with the requirements and standards established by applicable federal, state and city laws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions. CONSULTANT represents and warrants that she will perform her work in accordance with generally accepted industry standards and practices for the profession or professions that are used in performance of this Agreement and that are in effect at the time of performance of this Agreement. Except for that representation and any representations made or contained in any proposal submitted by CONSULTANT and any reports or opinions prepared or issued as part of the work performed by the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 1 of 13 • 1. In all matters pertaining to this agreement, CONSULTANT shal'1 be acting as an independent contractor, and neither CONSULTANT nor any officer, employee or agent of CONSULTANT shall be deemed an employee of CITY. Except as expressly provided in Exhibit A, CONSULTANT has no authority or responsibility to exercise any rights or power vested in CITY. The selection and designation of the personnel of CITY in the performance of this agreement shall be made by CITY. 2. CONSULTANT shall determine the method, details and means of performing the work and services to be provided by CONSULTANT under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall be responsible to CITY only for the requirements and results specified in this Agreement and, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, shall not be subjected to CITY's control with respect to the physical action or activities of CONSULTANT in fulfillment of this Agreement. E. Indemnification and Insurance: CONSULTANT shall indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for any and all losses, claims, actions, judgments for damages, or injury to persons or property and losses and expenses and other costs including litigation costs and attorney's fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by the CONSULTANT, her servants, agents, officers, employees, guests, and business invitees, and not caused by or arising out of the tortuous conduct of CITY or its employees. CONSULTANT shall maintain, and specifically agrees that she will maintain, throughout the term of this Agreement, liability insurance, in which CITY shall be named an additional insured in the minimum amounts as follows: a. Professional. Liability/Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance: One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) aggregate; and b. Automobile Liability Insurance: One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per incident or occurrence. 2. CONSULTANT shall not be required by this Agreement to obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance because she is a sole practitioner; however, should CONSULTANT, in the course of work related to this Agreement, employ any person, CONSULTANT shall notify CITY and shall obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance in the statutory limits as required by law. 3. The limits of insurance enumerated herein shall not be deemed a limitation of the covenants to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY; and if CITY becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurance Limits, herein provided, AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 3 Of 13 ~f, CONSULTANT covenants and agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless CITY from and for all such losses, claims, actions, and/or judgments for damages or injury to persons or property and other costs, including litigation costs and attorneys' fees, arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by CONSULTANT and/or CONSULTANT'S officers, employs, agents, representatives and/or subcontractors and resulting in and/or attributable to personal injury, death, and/or damage and/or destruction to tangible or intangible property. 4. CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with a Certificate of Insurance, or other proof of insurance evidencing CONSULTANT'S compliance with the requirements of this paragraph within at least ten (10) days prior of the effective date of this Agreement. 5. In the event the insurance minimums are changed, CONSULTANT shall immediately submit proof of compliance with the changed limits. Evidence of all insurance shall be mailed by United States Mail to the City Purchasing Agent, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and to the Meridian City Accounting Department, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. F. Notices: 1. Any and all notices required to be given by either of the parties hereto, unless otherwise stated in this agreement, shall be in writing and be deemed communicated when mailed by United States Mail, certified, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: City of Meridian Purchasing Agent 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 Kay Frances Company 3645 Sanada Way Boise, Idaho 83702 2. Either party may change their address for the purpose of this paragraph by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner herein provided. G. Attorney Fees: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by a Court of AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 4 of 13 • 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. H. 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 parry so failing to perform. I. Assignment: It is expressly agreed and understood by the parties hereto, that CONSULTANT shall not have the right to assign, transfer, hypothecate or sell any of her rights under this Agreement except upon the prior express written consent of CITY. J. Discrimination Prohibited: In performing the Services required herein, CONSULTANT shall not unlawfully discriminate in violation of any federal, state or local law, rule or regulation against any person on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or ancestry, age or disability. K. Reports and Information: At such times and in such forms as CITY may require, there shall be fiarnished to CITY such statements, records, reports, data and information as CITY may request pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. 2. CONSULTANT shall maintain all writings, documents and records prepared or compiled in connection with the performance of this Agreement for a minimum of four (4) yeazs from the termination or completion of this or Agreement..This includes any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photo static, photographic and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing, any form of communication or representation including letters, words, pictures, sounds or symbols or any combination thereof. L. Audits and Inspections: At any time during normal business hours and as often as CITY may deem necessary, there shall be made available to CITY for examination all of CONSULTANT's records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall permit CITY to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 5 Of 13 • • audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. M. Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material: No material produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to copyright in the United States or in any other country. CITY shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose and otherwise use, uI whole or in part, any reports, data or other materials prepared under this Agreement. N. Compliance with Laws: In performing the scope of services required hereunder, CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and codes of Federal, State, and local governments. O. Changes: CITY may, from time to time, request changes in the Scope of Services to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of CONSULTANT'S compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between CITY and CONSULTANT, shall be set forth in written amendments to this Agreement. P. Termination: If, through any cause, CONSULTANT, and/or her officers, employees, or agents, fails to fulfill in a timely and proper manner her obligations under this Agreement, violates any of the covenants, agreements, and/or stipulations of this Agreement, falsifies any record or document required to be prepared under this agreement, engages in fraud, dishonesty, or any other act of misconduct in the performance of this contract, and/or if the City Council determines that termination of this Agreement is in the best interest of CITY, CITY shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to CONSULTANT of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least fifteen (15) days before the effective date of such termination. CONSULTANT may terminate this agreement at any time by giving at least sixty (60) days notice to CITY. 2. In the event of any termination of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, and reports prepared by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall, at the option of CITY, become its property, and CONSULTANT shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 6 of 13 • • 3. Notwithstanding the above or any other provision of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall not be relieved of liability to CITY for damages sustained by CITY by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by CONSULTANT, and CITY may withhold any payments to CONSULTANT for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due CITY from CONSULTANT is determined. This provision shall survive the termination. of this agreement and shall not relieve CONSULTANT of her liability to CITY for damages. Q. Construction and Severability: If any part of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other part of this Agreement so long as the remainder of the Agreement is reasonably capable of completion. R. Advice of Attorney: Each party warrants and represents that in executing this Agreement, it has received independent legal advice from its attorney and/or has received the opportunity to seek such advice. S. Entire Agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other agreements or understandings, oral of written,, whether previous to the execution hereof or contemporaneous herewith. T. Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Idaho and the ordinances of the'City of Meridian. U. Approval Required: This Agreement shall not become effective or binding until approved by CITY. Dated this ~ ~ day of ~4a~ir, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN .~ Dated this ~~~ day of March, 2007. BY: ~2~~~, ~,rC~~P~i~C 'ANT Tammy de Weerd, May vKay Frana~ s K Frances Co. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 7 of 13 _ _ ,~, ,~ Attest: ~~ ~ ~' _ SEAL\ m -~ e WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., Y C ERI~,~~~~ B$~ ~ ~ °°°~ /f/so//~~~~~'9E111 a~~a00~4~4~ Approved as to Content A'~°~roved as to Form BY: 3 t57 BY: ~ ~-,-e. ~ Keith tts, Purchasing Agent Bill Nary, City A rney AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ' KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 8 Of 13 • Attachment A SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Step 1: Development of a Citizen Participation Plan • 1. Establish contact/rnailing list of individuals, groups, agencies, organizations, associations, non-profits and service providers (Community Partners) 2. Develop draft Citizen Participation Plan and review components with CITY staff 3. Select dates for public hearings 4. Select location and times for two Focus Group Sessions 5. Develop a Planning Announcement Notice, including a schedule of public meetings and hearings 6. Assist staff to mail Planning Announcement Notice. 7. Finalize and begin implementation of Citizen Participation Plan B. Step 2: Consultations, Preparedness and Background Information 1. Identify all sources to secure appropriate information and documents relevant to housing/homeless activities and community/economic development needs 2. Provide a Housing and Community Development Needs survey form that will be used to collect concise and consistent data from appropriate source 3. Secure pertinent statistical data from CITY-identified sources as available through databases or printed reports 4. Conduct Focus Group Sessions and fact-fording interviews 5. Make appointments with important sources to secure any additional appropriate data/reports, i.e. Chamber of Commerce, Service Organizations, Associations 6. Determine outline, structure, format and layout of the new Consolidated Plan document C. Step 3: Research 1. Solicit and secure area-wide statistical data 2. Conduct on-site interviews and meetings to collect information using the survey form and from appropriate printed materials for housing, homelessness, community and economic development needs 3. Research and review data and printed materials to make determinations on: a. A geographical delineation of the market area b. An analysis of the economic trends c. Historic housing absorption rates d. A determination of demand factors, such as . ^ Employment ^ Disposable Income ^ Population Characteristics ^ Political and Economic Climate AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ' KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE I Of 13 • • ^ Residential Construction Activity ^ Existing Housing Inventory, Including Condition of Units ^ Sales and Rental Activity ^ Mortgage Defaults ^ Foreclosure 4. Specialized Housing Availability and Needs including: a. Public and Assisted Housing b. Emergency Shelters c. Transitional Shelters ' d. Special Needs Facilities and Services e. Permanent and Supportive Housing 5. Lead Based Paint Hazards 6. Barriers To Affordable Housing 7. Components of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing a. Review city ordinances, Land Use Plans, zoning issues, building permits data, and Comprehensive Plan b. Review tax assessment information/abatement practices c. Secure latest U.S. Census data on housing and demographic information d. Identify housing industry contacts, i.e. bankers, realtors, organizations, associations, service providers e. Identify data pertaining to vacancy rates, housing sales, new construction development f. Conduct various interviews, speak before professional organization meetings (e.g. realtors/mortgage lenders) g. Secure Fair Housing compliant data h. HMDA Data i. Section 8 Data D. Step 4: Study Development 1. Finalize compilation of statistical data 2. Create graphs, charts, tables, maps and illustrations 3. Conduct statistical analysis of data and review with. staff 4. Work with the staff/elected officials to identify priorities, strategies, objectives and performance measurements for the Consolidated Plan 5. Work with CITY staff to analyze the CDBG application process including, program timelines, length of applications/form design, review, ranking and selection of grants for the Annual Action Plan 6. Conduct the CDBG Application Workshop (based upon program design) 7. Coordinate with CITY staff to determine findmgs of impediments to fair housing and concur on remediation efforts to be included in the Action Plan 8. Assist as appropriate at a Public Hearing 9. Develop draft narratives and texts for all four documents AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 10 of 13 10. Submit draft documents to CITY staff for review and comments E. Step 5: Final Draft Narrative, Tables and Exhibits 1. Incorporate staff comments and suggestions into narratives and attachments 2. Complete Statutory Certifications 3. Finalize the Citizen Participation Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing and Action Plan, Consolidated Plan, and Annual Action Plan for availability and comment by the general public 4. Assist at Public Hearng/City Council to adopt Plans and obtain comments 5. 30=day Public Comment Period begins F. Step 6: Completion and Submittal to HUD 1. 30-day Public Comment Period ends 2. Document citizen comments and make any necessary changes to the Plans 3. Attend City Council meeting to receive final approval and adoption of the Plans 4. Deliver camera-ready originals, backup documentation to CITY G. Step 7: HUD Review Period 1. Provide assistance during HUD's 45-day review period to insure acceptance of all documents AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 11 Of 13 Attachment B SCHEDULE OF WORK Step 1: Step 2: Step 3: Step 4: Step 5: Step 6: Step 7: Commence March 6, 2007 March 6, 2007 March 16, 2007 April 1, 2007 June 1, 2007 July 31, 2007 August 15, 2007 Completed March 16, 2007 Apri120, 2007 May 18, 2007 May 31, 2007 July 1, 2007 August 15, 2007 September 30, 2007 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 12 of 13 i Attachment C BUDGET Step 1 72 hours @ $55.00 per hour = $ 3 960.00 Step 2 ~ 90 hours @ $55.00 per hour = $ 4,950.00 Step 3 210 hours @ $55.00 per hour = $11,550.00 Step 4 244 hours @ $55.00 per hour = $13,420.00 Step 5 95 hours @ $55.00 per hour = $ 5,225.00 Steps 6 and 7 70 hours @ $55.00 per hour = + $ 3,850.00 TOTAL BUDGET: $42,995.00 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES KAY FRANCES COMPANY PAGE 13 of 13 • e • March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-I REQUEST Approve ACRD Bid Award to King Excavation for Water 8~ Sewer Improve- ments in conjunction with ACHD Project W. 1 st Street, Washington to Cherry Project for $18, 042.50 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: Con#acted: COMMENTS See AHached Memo Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented of public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: File, Len Grady ~~ Da~te~ March 29, 2007 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for April 3 City Council Meeting • ~CEI~I~ MAR 2 ~ 2uuP ~iicy of 1Vieridian fifty Clerk ©ffice The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the April 3, 2007 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Approval of bid for Water and Sewer Improvements in coniunction with ACRD West First Street,. Washington. to Chevy Project ACRD received bids for this project. The bid amount for the water and sewer improvements for the overall project low bidder is $18,042.50. The engineer's estimate was $45,500.00. This work will be done as a part of the ACRD contract. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the bid of $18,Q42.50 for Water and Sewer Improvements in conjunction with ACRD West First Street, Washington to Chevy project and authorizes Engineering to go ahead with the project. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 ~J Contract Number CT207-11 Contract Name 01st Street W, Washington St /Cherry Lane Bidders 01 Bidder Icing Expvation 02 BidderlWF Construction ~ 03 Bidder American Paving Schedule 1 -1st Street (West) CGSP20B-14 806023.001 01st Street W, Washington Ave /Che rry Lane 0201.4.1.C.2 Removal of Obstructions 1 LS 01 Bidder $18,1367.00 :18,887.00 028idder $15,200.00 575,200.00 03 Bidder $15,000.00 515,000.00 Estimate $16,677.00 518,877.00 0202.4.3.A.1 Excavation 3775 CY Ol Bidder $10.65 540,203.75 02 Bidder $12.00 545,300:00 038idder $14.10 553,227.50 Estimate $20.00 575,500:00 0202.4.S.A.1 Unsuitable Material Excavation 150 CY 01 Bidder 03 Bidder $36.70 $20.00 55,505:00 53,000:00 0? Bidder Estimate $31.00 $30.00 54,850.00 54,500.00 0601.4.1.A.01 12" Dia. RCP 92 LF 01 Bidder .. _ $26.77 52,482.84 02 Bidder _. $55.00 55,080.00 03 Bidder $55.00 55,080.00 Estimate $60.00 55,520.00 0601.4.1.A.016 12" Dia. PVC, C-900 52 LF 01 Bidder _ $411.70 52,428.40 _ 02 Bidder _ $55.00 52,880.00 03 Bidder $60.50 53,148.00 Estimate _ $90.00 54,880.00 0601.4.1.A.01 A 18" Dia. RCP 345 LF 01 Bidder $29.30 510,108.50 02 Bidder $65.00 522,425:00 10601.4.1.A01 B 08" Dia. RCP 22 I LF 03 Bidder Ol Bidder $60.50 $38.55 520,872.50 5848.10 Estimate 02 Bidder $75.00 $45.00 525,875.00 5990.00 03 Bidder $60:50 51,331.00 Estimate $58.00 59,278.00 0601.4.1.0.1 Construct Open Ditch 30 LF 01 Bidder $21..66 5849.80 02 Bidder $7.00 5210.00 03 Bidder _ $33:00 5990.00 Estimate $15.00 5450.00 0602.4.1.E.2 48" Dia. Standard Catch Manhole 1 EA 01 Bidde $2,425:00 52,425.00 02 Bidder -----.. . $3,720.00 53,720:00 03 Bidder $3,625.00 53,825.00 Estimate $4,000.00 54,000.00 0602.4.1.H.2 1000 Gallon Sand 8 Grease Trap 2 EA 01 Bidder $2,795.00 55,590.00 02 Bidder $4,200.00 58,400.00 03 Bidder $3,740.00 57,480.00 Estimate $3,000.00 58,000.00 0602.4.1.J.1 Inlet Catch Basin -Type IV 4 EA 01 Bidder $798.00 53,192.00 _ 02 Bidder $770.00 53,080.00 03 Bidder __ $770.00 53,080.00 Estimate $1,200.00 54,800.00 0602.4.1.M.1 Concrete Irrigation Box -Size 4k4' 1 EA 01 Bidder $2,234.00 52,234.00 02 Bidder $3,100.00 53,100.00 03 Bidder $2,475.00 52,475.00 Estimate $1,800.00 51,800.00 0602.4.1.M.1 A Concrete Irrigation Box -Size 3k3' 2 EA 01 Bidder $1.,290.00 52,580.00 02 Bidder $2,850.00 55,700.00 0706.4.1.A.2 03" Rolled Curb 8 Gutter 3247 I LF 038idde Ol Bidder $2,200.00 $9.70 54,400.00 531,495.90 Estimate 02 Bidder $1,500.00 $9.50 53,000.00 530,848.50 038idder ~ $9.35 530.359.45 Estimate $25.00 589,175.00 0706:4.1.8.1 _ Concrete Valley Gutters 312 LF 01 Bidder _ $34.20 510,870:40 _ 02 Bidder _ $33.00 510,298.00 _ 03 Bidder $33.00 510,298.00 Estimate $45.00 514,040.00 0706.4.1.E.2 05' Concrete Sidewalk 1803 SY 018idder $30.80 555,532.40 02 Bidder $30.00 554,090.00 03 Bidder $29.70 553,549.10 Estimate $50.00 590,150.00 0706.4:1.G.2 Concrete Repair 125 SY 01 Bidder $45.60 55,700:00 02 Bidder $44.00 55,500.00 03 Bidder $64.35 58,043.75 Estimate $40.00 55,000.00 0801.4.1.A.1 O6" Minus Uncrushed Aggregate - 2731 CY 018idder $12.30 533,591.30 02 Bidder $20.00 554,820:00 Base 038idder $15.40 542,057.40 Estimate $17.00 548,427.00 0802.4.1.A1 Crushed Aggregate for Base, Type 997 CY Ol Bidder $15.50 :15,453.50 02 Bidder $35.50 S35,393.50 314" 03 Bidder $49.30 549,152.10 Estimate _ $25.00 524,925.00 0810.4.1.A.1 Hot Plant Mix Asphalt Pavement - 974 TN 018idder $78.10 578,089.40 02 Bidder $57.00 555,518.00 11103.4.1.6.1 2.5" Traffic Cohtrol Signs 282 SF 03 Bidder Ol Bidder $51.50 $6.85 550,181.00 51,931.70 Estimate 02 Bidder $72.00 $6.50 570,128.00 51,833:00 03 Bidder $6.60 51,881.20 Estimate $9.00 52,538.00 1103.4.1.C.1 Traffic Control Barricades 3 EA 018idder $85.50 5258.50 02 Bidder $82.00 5248:00 03 Bidder $82.50 5247:50 Estimate $100.00 5300.00 1103.4.1.J.1 Traffic Control Maintenance 80 HR 01 Bidder $27.40 52.192.00 _ 02 Bidder _ _ $26.50 52,120.00 03 Bidder $26.40 52,112.00 Estimate $25.00 52,000.00 3/28/2007 CT207-11 01st Street W, Washington St/ Cheny Lane Page 1 r~ 2010.4.1.A1 Mobilization 1 LS 01 03 2030.4.1.A.1 Manhole, Adjust to Grade 3 EA Ol 03 SP 01020 Gravel Repair 300 SY Ol 03 SP 08120 Asphalt Repair v 275 SY 01 03 SP 09007 08" Slide Gate ~ 1 EA 01 03 SP 1006:4.1.C.1 Inlet Protection 8 EA 01 03 SP 11222 Relocate Roadside Sign 11 EA O1 03 SP 20009 Remove and 12eset Fence 220 LF Ol 03 ~P 25063 Property Owner Meetings 2 EA 01 03 SP 29065 Sod Repair 480 S~ Ol 03 SP 29090 Trim Tree 4 EA 01 03 SP 29093 Remove Existing Tree 1 EA 01 03 SP 29101 Remove 8 Reset Existing Spri nklers 40 LF 01 01 Bidder 5387,030:99 02 Estimate 5545,481.00 Schedule 2 - Clly of Meridian utility Adjustments (W. 1st Street) 03 $22,120.00 522,120.00 $45,866.50 545,888.50 $382.00 51,148.00 $800.00 52.400.00 _ $11..00_ 53,300.00 $12.00 $19.1D $26.80 _ $540.00 53,800.Q0 55,252.50 57,370.00 5540:00 $550.00 5550.00 $1,243.00 59,944.00 _ $150:00 51,200.00 $ii7.oo 51,947.00 $200.00 52.200:00 $16.7o sa,lla.oo $11.00 52,420.00 $171.00 5342.00 _ $300.00 5800.00 $12.50 58.000.00 $342.00 s1,366.00 $55.00 5220.00 $570.00 5570.Q0 $165.00 5185.00 $10.00 _ 5400.00 $10.00 5400.00 5441.015.00 03 Bidder CGSP208-14 808023.001 01st Street W, Washington Ave t Cherry Lane SP M320 Adjust Existing Water Valve Box to 5 EA 01 Bidder $518.70 Grade 03 Bidder $615.00 SP M330 Remove & Relocate Existing Fire 2 EA 01 Bidder $1,619.00 Hydrant 03 Bidder $4,500.00 SP M340 Relocate Existing Water Meter 10 EA 01 Bidder $610.00 03 Bidder $1,010.00 SP M341 Adjust Existing Water Meter to 21 EA 01 Bidder $291.00 Grade 03 Bidde $485.00 01 Bidder 518,042.50 02 Bidder 524,230: Estimate 545,500.00 )2 Bidder $38,800.00 Estimate $23,350.00 )2 Bidder $495.00 Estimate _ $600.00 _ )2 Bidder ___ $15.00 _ Estimate $20.00 72 Bidder $40.00 Estimate $30.00 )2 Bidder $385.00 Estimate $150.0 0 72 Bidder _ _ $175.00 Estimate _ $125.00 )2 Bidder $82.00 Estimate $150.00 72 Bidder $18.00 Estimate $12.00 72 Bidder $175.00 _ Estimate $1,000.00 72 Bidder $11.50 Estimate $12.00 72 Bidder $165.00 Estimate $100.00 72 Bidder $495.00 Estimate _ _ $300.00 72 Bidder $10.00 Estimate $35.00 57,485.00 51,800.00 54,500:00 SB.000.QO 511,000:00 58,250.00 5385.00 5150.00 51,400.00 51,000.00 5902.00 51,850.00 5350.00 52,000.00 55,520.00 55,780.00 5880.00 5400.00 5495:00 5300:00 5400:00 52.583.50 02 Bidder $250.00 51,250.00 53,075.00 Estimate $750.00 53,750.00 53,238.00 59,000.00 02 Bidder $2,315.00 Estimate $3,000.00 54,830.00 58,000.00 58,100.00 028idder $1,100.00 511,000.00 510,100.00 58,111.00 Estimate $2,000.00 028idder $ 35 0.00 520,000.00 57,350.00 510,185.00 _ _ Estimate $750.00 515,750.00 03 Bidder 532,380.00 Contract Totals 01 Bidder 5405,073A9 02 Bidder 5485,245.00 03 Bidde 5475,630.00 Estimate S590,981.00 3/28/20.07 CT207-11 01st Street W, .Washington St /Cherry lane Page 2 Page 1 of 1 Sharon Smith From: Kyle Radek Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:29 PM To: Sharon Smith Subject: RE: W 1st Street That's correct. Sorry I left that out. Kyle Radek, P.E. Staff Engineer City of Meridian Public Works Department ph 208-898-5500 ext 21'3 From: Sharon Smith Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 1:48 PM To: Kyle Radek Subject: RE: W 1st Street The way I read that, King Excavation is the low bidder? Correct? Memo doesn't say....... Thanks Kyle. Sharon 3/29/2007 ~J • March 30, 2007 VAC 07-005 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Strada Bellissima, LLC ITEM NO. 5-~ REQUEST Resolution No. -Vacate fhe public utility, drainage 8~ irrigation easements located on a portion of Lots 1, 2, 3 8~ 4, Block 2 of Strada Bellissima No. 1 adjacent to 3015 S. Meridian Road for Strada Bellissima - 3015 S. Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CiERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See Attached Resolution d~~ y~'3 Contacted:~'Yln ~ Date: 3 3a a 7 Phone: ~~? 771vZ~ Emailed: j Q,Q n . ~ it~.Q<s SCt~a~lnitials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • CITY OF MERIDIAN BY THE CITY COUNCIL: - -~ -- ADA COUNTY~RECORDER J. NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 3 BOISE IDAHO 04112101 01:4 DEPUTY Neava Haney RECORDED-REQUEST OF II~~III~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IIIII~~~~~~~~~~III Meridian Ciry 10705100 RESOLUTION NO. G (~ ~~~ BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA A RESOLUTION VACATING THE PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION EASEMENTS LOCATED ON A PORTION OF LOTS 1, 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 2 OF STRADA BELLISSIMA SUBDIVISION NO. 1 ADJACENT TO 3015 S. MERIDIAN ROAD, LOCATED IN THE SE 1/a OF THE SE '/a OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on March 27, 2007 the City Council of the City of Meridian, held a hearing on the vacation of the public utility, drainage and irrigation easements located on a portion of lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, block 2 of Strada Bellissirna Subdivision No. 1 adjacent to 3015 S. Meridian Road, located in the SE '/ of the SE '/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, City of Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, and WHEREAS, after such hearing, the City Council, by formal motion, did approve said described vacation; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: Section 1. That the vacation of the public utility, drainage and irrigation easements located on a portion of lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, block 2 of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1 adjacent to 3015 S. Meridian Road, located in the SE '/ of the SE '/o of Section 24, Township 3 North,.. Range 1 West, City of Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, is hereby vacated. Copies of the necessary relinquishments are attached as Exhibit «A„ VACATION OF PUBLIC U'I'II,ITY, DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION EASEMENTS FOR STRADA BELLISSIMA SUBDIVISION -VAC 07-005 Page 1 of 2 Section 2. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~~~ day of ~/dl 72 , 2007. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ day of /'~~]~rI Z , 2007. ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.; CITY STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss County of Ada ) ~ ~,tlu tttt,~ ~`' ~ Y de WEERD .~` ~~ `~~ ` r~ ~~o ; ~~ v {S b ~~~ o %~o T 1~~. a' i~ ,~ ~~, ego ,~~tttltlll IItNtt`'`\ On this ~~~~` day of ~yJ i'1 ~ , 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. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and dear first above written. ~~~~~~Q~ (SEAL) ~ '"G ; NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO ' 1 i RESIDING AT: JI~.rL2l6~c~ ~~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~: •. ~ ~ ~ • MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ~p -~ ~'- ~/ :y ~~ ~• ..~%p '~ •'•~i~4F m•!-•~Yi•~ VACATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION EASEMENTS FOR STRADA BELLISSIMA SUBDIVISION -VAC 07-005 Page 2 of 2 f Detail of Easement Proposed to be Vacated EXHIBIT g PUBLIC UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION EASEMEN T VACATION // A 101~P 0 FjP08 liiif~~BO{~i! ~~ ]i~ . lQ QR A/ ~Yt. iDr i7Clllil7. ID~~ 80x9 - o - eitrrw ur .r~.~ ea~wa ue sir uw. ---. wip amm we MYD wea-.O~~r - - - - rliBire a~ dme m ~c rnum ~xn~e (Iq[~[rl i in4i0 NuwWr ~ Q m~ W tore e~i~ o Iouq •!Y r0pr ie'aaw r r o ,t ~ e. Jirr~b llMrr f/f ^o e4tr-a-.rn.MOw~r aerr r . a ~.AGT 2 I ~ 1~ '~ ~ ~ 1 I Jb"r~ W ~ w!9'4T10 2t0.lT I Jt.60' j 7 ~ r..w ~` ~ ' wawa ~ r~o.~ 6oa!a3hdtiv N09'36'Of'K M09'S!'06"[ ' I I ~ .~ Qi Od v.a.~. as.si' ~ as.6s' B .._,o,__~'~~' soavs~a ~ ' I ~. w9,erro t rir ao.sY' ~ Nlr~O"t7'[ I Nse'~r't;'~ m-q aa.~r • I ~.w '\ ~ar~:•ta'c ~ s~.~a ~ ~ .~~ ' ~1 `~ .. _.... ~ ... ._ ~ ~`~ .~ _~.~~_V1GTORY`ROAD as ~ ~9-1 - a..a' n aur8 STRADA_ BEWS5IMA QUT--PARCEL N CLE t~s~ iA~iViNT V~O~ATrON ' q~ eri~~~r rr ^\~Ir ~1~ ~e10r~1ee~ m. ~.~~ Exhibit A March 30, 2007 MI D7-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETItJG Aprii 3, 2007 PP 06-060 APPLICANT Gemstar Development ITEM PVO. 8 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 20, 2007: PP 06-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 30 single-family bldg lots, 3 common lots and 1 other lot on 10.57 acres in a proposed R$ zone for Sundial Subdivision -South of Ustick Road and West of Linder Road ' AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See Previous Item Packet / Minutes 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: Affidavit of Posting Attached / John ~ Tammy Schafer Comments Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 30, 2007 VAC 07-006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Paramount Development Inc REM NO. 9 REQUEST Public Hearing -Vacation of the 20-foot front yard setbacks for Lots 4-7 8~ 1 1-13, Block 34 of Paramount Subdivision No 13 -West of Meridian Road and North of McMillan Road. 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 Comment CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: No Objection NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: No Comment 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. March 30, 2007 M 107-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 FP 06-064 APPLICANT BSC, LLC ITEM NO. ~ O REQUEST Public Hearing: Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16 bldg lots and 4 common lots on 4.0116 acres within the R-4 zone for Cold Creek Subdivision -North of Ustick .Road and East Ten Mile Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See P 8 Z Item Packet / Minu#es See Attached Recommendations OTHER: Affidavit of Posting Attached /John 8~ T®rnmy Schafer Comments Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. .March 30, 2007 AZ 06-061 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT RMR Consulting, Inc ITEM NO. 11 REQUEST Public Hearing: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 95.57 acres from RUT to R-8, R-15 and R-40 zones for Baraya Subdivision - 3935 West Franklin Road and 280 South Black Cat Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See P8Z Item Packet /Minutes See Attached Recommendations OTHER: Affidavit of Posting Attached /Matt Sehultz Response to Rec's Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 P P 06-062 APPLICANT RMR Consulting, Inc ITEM NO. 12 REQUEST Public Hearing: Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 118 single-family bldg lots on 26.41 acre in the proposed R-8 zone; 216 single-family bldg lots on 38.26 acres 8~ 1 school lot on 14.98 acres in the proposed R-15 zone; 2 multi-family lots on 13.01 acres in the proposed R-40 zone & 30 common lots for Baraya Subdlvislon - 3935 West Franklin Road and 280 South Black Cat 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 OFEfCE: COMMENTS See P&Z Item Packet /Minutes See Attached Recommendations OTHER: Affidavit of Posting Attached /Matt Schultz Response to Rec's Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: • • March 30, 2007 AZ 04-027 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Don Weber ITEM NO. 13 REQUEST Amendment to Ordinance No. 07-1 121 A: Request for Annexation 8~ Zoning of 4.5 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Christian Family Maffers, Inc -East of South Linder Road and South of West Overland 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: L: COMMENTS See Staff Comments/Memo See Attached Ordinance -Amended l ti~ ~ 0~~ Contacted: ~ ~-~j,,t ~ . pater ~a~0? Phone: ~D/~- ~ -5337 Emailed: C r ~~ ~ wcs-~. ~ sP~~_ Staff Initials: ~,{~ 'G Materials presented at public meetings shall becomepoperfy of the Cffy of Meridian. C~ G: d.an ~ 4~~2~(oC~'lnt/~Ez'tM-Fn~'S, ~_ 1_ Memo To: Legal Department, Attn: Michelle Albertson From: C. Caleb Hood, Current Planning Manager CC: Bill Nary, Bruce Freckleton, Cle'rk's'Off~e, Project File Date: March 28, 2007 Re: Christian Family Matters Annexation Ordinance (AZ-05-027 -Ordinance # 05-1121) • c~.~ MAR 2 91~1U1 ~it~' of 112ericdi It has come to our attention that the legal description submitted with the annexation application for Christian Family Matters in 2005 was incorrect. This incorrect legal description was recorded with the annexation ordinance (see attached ordinance recorded on 1-13-05). Staff is requesting that a new annexation ordinance be approved by the City Council, and subsequently recorded, that encompasses the property as shown in the attached, Public Works Department approved, legal description. The previous ordinance number for this project/property is 05-1121 (again, I have attached this ordinance). Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance in cleaning up this matter. Thank you for your help. • ~ Page 1 of 1 Sharon Smith From: C. Caleb Hood Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 1:44 PM To: Sharon Smith Cc: Michelle Albertson Subject: RE: Draft Agendas for April 3, 2007 Sharon, Steve O'Brien is reviewing a revised legal description for Christian Family Matters which was originally approved for annexation in 2005. The legal description submitted with the annexation application in 2005 was incorrect. Therefore, anew/revised annexation ordinance should be approved by the Council and subsequently recorded that encompasses the correct boundaries of the property. I will be sending you a memo describing this situation, a new (corrected) legal description and a copy of the original, recorded AZ ordinance OS-1121. I have talked to Michelle Albertson about this too, and she should be preparing the revised/amended ordinance for you. I am hopeful this can also be placed on the 4-3 Council consent agenda. I am trying to get the legal back from Steve today. I will then send the original to you and a copy to Michelle. Caleb Front: Sharon Smith Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:18 AM To: Amanda Hess; Anna Canning; Barbara Shiffer; Bill Musser; Bill Nary; Brad Watson; C. Caleb Hood; Charlie Rountree; David Zaremba; Diane Stewart; Doug Strong; Elroy Huff; Emily Kane; Jaycee Holman; Jennifer Veatch; Joe Borton; Joe Silva; John Shawcroft; Justin Lucas; Karie Glenn; Keith Bird; Keith Watts; Kristy Vigil; Len Grady; Machelle Hill; Michelle Albertson; Nancy Radford; Peggy Gardner; Peter Friedman; Rick Clinton; Ron Anderson; Ronaldo Coulter; Shaun Wardle; Sheree Finch; Sonya Wafters; Stacy Kilchenmann; Tamrny de Weerd; Tara Green; Ted Baird; Will Berg; Mark Niemeyer Subject: Draft Agendas for April 3, 2007 Additions /Comments /Recommendations? Please note the deadline is Thursday at 5:00 p.m. so that we can get. packets done by Friday at 5:00 -Thank you. Please note we have started on Beer, Wine & Liquor license renewals - if you have concerns on a renewal listed on this agenda, please comment to the City Clerks Office as soon as possible. Thank you! Sharon Smith Sr. Deputy City Clerk 1Vleridian City Clerks Office Phone 208.888.4433 3/28/2007 • • ,~~~'r ~~ ~~ ~~~~i- r~` ,~ t, ~.. ?~~- Title: Date: 11-24-2006 Scale: finch = 150 feet I File: Tract 1: 4.570 Acres: 199087 Sq Feet: Closure = s27.5534w 0.01 Feet: Precision =1 /309979: Perimeter = 2415 Feet 001=s00.0000e454.47 006=n01.0913w 314.55 011=s00.1500w 395.81 002=s65.2250e 88.17 007=s89.3334e 41.39 O] 2=n90.0000e 82.84 003=s66.O150e 134.39 ~ 008=n00.0827e 25.16 004=n02.2510w 396.57 009~57.4434w 49.00 005~01.5859w 178.06 010=n89.3334w 254.85 • ~AO ~ COUNTY RECORDER J. DAYID~ARRO AMOUNT .00 5 B01 E IDAHO 01113/06 11:08AM !! `` `` ff RE ORDE6~REQUESTOF IIIIiIIIII~~~~~~~1~~~~~IL~~~~I~~~~~II Me dian City i 0500485 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. a~'" l~~ j BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, DONNELL, ROUNTREE, WARDLE AN ORDINANCE (AZ-04-027 AKA DONALD WEBER C/O CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS, INC.) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" OF THIS ORDINANCE AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY 'THE CITY OF MERIDIAN.; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS AS R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH TIIE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING' FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: ,SECTION X. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated be reference as Exhibit "A" is contiguous and adjacent to the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and zoning by the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-222, Category "B" annexation. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is, and~the same is hereby and annexed and zoned. as R-8 (Medium Density Residential), in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to r the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF AZ-04-027 CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS Page 1 of 3 . SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Cierk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. ,~ SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be~in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, .Idaho, this ~~day of ~~% , 2005. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~~ day of /~ - , 2005. ,. . ~ . ~_.t- .M ~ ~~-^~--T~ ~T~ ern,r'v ~ o ~x~~ ~ n ~ L1i~7~j C~oa ~x c%t° Pr~.li dz•z~ ~c6~'k- /$rr~G ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF AZ-Q4-027 CHRISTIAN FAIVIILY MATTERS Page 2 of 3 t If •_ }I 1 } ATTEST: ~~ t CITY CLERK STATE QF IDAHO, } ss County of Ada } ~ ~~ ~: ..~E~L ~~,,,,~~ •~ . a~__ 1/ u • On this ~ day of ~QK~ a ~ ~ , 20Qt1; before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared d WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respective{y, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the Cry 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) ? ~ t~p~'~r ~ N T Y PUBLIC FOR IDAHO * «~ # S GAT: Pr~'d 1 a p G OMMISSION EXPIRES: o ~ o~ u~jt . ~7 w~~~ ~,T~OP19 ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF AZ-04-027 CHRISTIAN FAMIJLY MATTERS Page 3 of 3 ~~ _ _ • ~ ~--- .~ ~ ~ .~`~,,: 1~ Aitdersan Survey Graup.cam ~ ANNEXATION LEGAL ~ESCRIPTiON Land of Donaid Weber {For annexation purposes only) A parcel of land situa#ed in the North '/z of the Northwest Quarter of Section 24, Towrship 3 North, Range i West of the Boise Merirriaan, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at a point marising the northwest comer of Section. 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 Nlfest of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, from which the N. 1118 corner of said Section 24 bears South 89°33'34' East a ~sfance of 1327.72 feet; thence from said.nortirn-est comer of Section 24, South 00°15'00° UVest a distance of 400A0 feet; thence North 90°00'00° East a distance of 628.26 feet to the Real Point of Beginning;~:~.;.~,~;,:;•::;•:,•: ::::: thence' South 00°00'Ot)° East a distance of 454.42 feet to a point;.• thence:: South .~ ~ •~ 65°22'28° East a distance of 88, 20 feet to a point; thence South ~ fi5°01•'28°•, East a•~:• : •:.?.:• . • ~ : • ;. distance of 145.19 feet to a point; thence North 00°08'27' East of 917:138' feet•ta'a:poirtt;~.'°;:•.:.~: ~~~ •".:::~~ tttence North 57°44'34' West a distance of 49.00 feat to a po'iit(+~•4he centerline~Cf YV.;;,~ : ~~;::.,~;~.. •., Overland Road, also the north f"une of said Section 24; thenoe~ along said north: fine, North °• -- ~ .' 89°33'34' West a distance of 229.85 fast to a point; thence leaving said north line, Sou#h ,;: •: • 00°15'00' VYest a distance of 385.fi1 feet to a point; ttienca Nortfi 90°00'00" East a~~ distance of 57.91 feet to th® Poin# of Beginning. ;;~ .• .. Said parcel contains 4.94 acres, more or less. ;:~~-.~:~:•:~ ~- :~ ~ .. . August 27, 2004 ~ :": ~: ~"~~. • .' Project#04-107 •" `' ' 357 E. Katertaurer ln.. Suite F. Mer(dlon. 10 83642 - - ~~~~~ 3 . I ~~ } s • ,- -~ t ~ .. ~r~~ce. ~S~//2( AX~TIQ11~ SK~hI QONAtD W~6~R' PROPERTY .~', , ...._._. , . ~ ..mss' '~ .~....._ ~, at~ERtaN~ ROAO.~ _ ~ _ - ~ . ~?~'~85'~ ~ a ~~;~~ :~ { I I r . 1. .a ~ 1 '~~"- ~ .o ~."~'g ~' o ~- f ?• • i. ~~ vi ~ ' ~ 1. E ~: L--- ----- -- - - _~.-T,.,._ sus,' ~ .~s~ ' •:"'~ ~~° '- i~a~T-nm'a~: • lug ~!~• __~ .: .............~seaR~ • f ~ 1. {NOT 70 scacai I 0 aUC 3 o ina~ w~ ~,; ADA COUNTY RECORDER~'~`4VID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 BOISE IDAHO 04/12/07 0 ~..._ ~M DEPUTY Neava Haney III II~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ RECORDED-REQUEST OF Meridian Ciry 197051803 CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDED ORDINANCE N0.07-1121A BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, IaOUNTREE, ZAREMBA AN AMENDED ORDINANCE (AZ-04-027 AKA DONALD WEBER C/O CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS, INC.) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" OF THIS ORDINANCE AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN.; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS AS R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Christian Family Matters, Inc. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is, and the same is hereby and annexed and zoned as R-8 (Medium Density Residential), in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all, the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. AMENDED ANNEXATION AND ZONING - AZ-04-027 CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS Page I of 3 SECTION 6. All ordinances,, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and. the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~ day of ~ Z , 2007. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this ~ day of 2 , 2007. MAY R AMMY de WEERD ATTEST: `, ~°t~ ~ ~~~ %,~' ~ '~~a _ ~~a~ - WILLIAM G. BERG, ., CITY ~L `~/~,, ~~' ~~ fr ~o /~ eL''T6 - ~\ ~~ ~/ 4 • \~\ FFFF/''`nlln ocsoee~`°4q` AMENDED ANNEXATION AND ZONING - AZ-04-027 CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS Page 2 of 3 ~ ~ STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss County of Ada ) On this ~ da of %~'~,{,.~ Y 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. ~~ .~ .•'K'~" ~ T'~ (SEAL) ~ ~' ~ '~ ~: e i i . ', o ~'l~ ~~%1 rtl'1 ~ ~ ~~,~~~ NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: ~•~ ~ ~~ ~,,, :~ ~~ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: / ). ; ~ '- AMENDED ANNEXATION AND ZONING - AZ-04-027 CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS Page 3 of 3 (~ e <- .~__ ~ndersun Surue~ GrOtlp.c0m -=`'=~ ~~ EXHIBIT "A" Revised Legal Description For Christian Family Ma#ters, Inc. A tract of land lying in the North '/Z of the Northwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning. at a point marking the northwest corner of Section 24, Township 3 North., Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, from which the N. 1/16 corner of said Section 24 bears South 89°33'34" East a distance of 1327.72 feet; thence from said northwest corner of Section 24, South 00°15'00" West a distance of 400..00 feet; thence North 90°00'00" East (formerly East) a distance of 628.26 feet (formerly 653.25 feet) to the Real Point of Beginning.; thence South 00°00'00" East (formerly South OD°00'52" East) a distance of 454.47 feet (formerly 454.43 feet); thence South 65°22'50" East (formerly South 65 X3'58" East) a distance of 88.17 feet; thence South 66°01'50" East (formerly South 66a72'S8" East) a distance of 134.39 feet; thence North 02°25'10" West (formerly North 02 X6'18" Wesf) a distance of 396.57 feet; thence North 01°'58'59" West (formerly North 02°00'07" West) a distance of 178.06 feet; thence North 01°09'13" West (formerly 01°10'21" West) a distance of 314.55 feet to a point on the Southerly Right-of-Way of Overland Road; thence South 89°33'34" East a distance of 41.39 feet (formerly South 89°34'42" East a distance of 41.38 feet); thence North 00°08'27" East a distance of 25.16 feet (formerly North 00°07'35" East a distance of 25..11 feet); thence North 57°44'34" West (formerly North 57°46'04" West) a distance of 49.00 feet (formerly 49.12 feet) to a point in the centerline of W. Overland Road, also the North line of said Section 24; thence along said North line, North 89°33'34" West (formerly North 894'42" West) a distance of 254.85 feet; thence leaving said North line, South 00°15'00' West (formerly South 01°13'52" West). a distance of 395.81 feet (formerly 395.85 feet); thence North 90°00'00" East (formerly North 89°59'08".East) a distance of 82.84 feet (formerly 82.99 .feet) to the Point of Beginning. Said parcel contains 199,079 square feet or 4.57 acres more or less. Subject to all rights-of-way and easements of record. Project #04-107 October 24, 2006 REV1E AP OVAL gY ra t~ MAR ~ ~ 29Q M WORKS OEPTIC _l L.!~. ,fu tl~ j~w3 ,~ ~,;~,~. ~`~ ~y .i I ~ L ice' n; `~ . `~~~/ Y-,t,~: ~, ~ . ,, ~ . P~ , ¢ 357 E.'Watertower Ln.. - Suite F. Meridian. ID 83642 j. P.Z08.888.7345 F _s~;.il~iii :'~j y-- g .a ~~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ J ~, V ~ ~~~ ~ @ N $ < ~ y ~ Jr: e ~ ~ g g ~ ~ a s~~ _ 3 a~~ ~ p3ap3a $ ~ ~ ~ ~ °- r~ o a ~ ;`_.~ $. ' ~ ~ p b ~ ~-~ (~ v ~S blr 8 ~ ~ ~'« ff ~ U.1 ~ w 7 W m e I i B. o o e ~ I ., R ~8I ~><: G a61 r ~ U W O a ~. ti Q U P ~ 8~ I3 C~+~ r' b...~_________.____.____ a , Iry ~-- ~- .. _ °°~, Y,fO.fLpJS ~~ _ _ _ _ _ ovoa a3oi I Y i'!' ~ x ~a N G Vg ~m ~~ ~~o ~ jU~ ~: pSh~~O Y` C'aooH O Z R W M ¢ `u ~~ y ryO Q ~ ~ 2 o e _ ~ 8 o~ t 3 S ~-. NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF AMENDED ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 07-1121 A PROVIDING FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE An Amended Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting annexation and zoning for land located in the North'h of the Northwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Attachment "A". This parcel contains 4.65 acres more or less. Also, this parcel is SUBJECT TO all easements and rights-of-way of record or implied. As surveyed in attached exhibit "B" and is not based on an actual field survey. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho' 2 07 ordinance shall become effective on the ~`dax~q~~~~~~`~~'/ ' ,°` '% a° ~.F~ /i ayor and City Council the City~f e dian o = By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Cle~c ~~~ First Reading: ~f ~ ~Q ~ Adopted after first reading by suspei~.sic~ `~p ~ ~ 1~= Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES~_ NO~~ ~~ +,'~°°°` Second Reading: Third Reading: r- ~'%,,~~~'-~°Qe~~a~,.°°'° STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 07-1121A The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached Amended Ordinance No. 07-1121A of the City of Meridian; Idaho, and has found the same to be true and complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-901A (3). DATED this ~ %~ day of /~~'J~ , 2007. G- c,J~.~ illiam. L.M. Nary, City Atto AMENDED ORDINANCE SUMMARY-A~07-1121A CHRISTIAN FAMILY MATTERS Page 1 of 1 i • ,March 30, 2007 AZ 06-046 'M'ERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT Great Sky, Inc ITEM NO. 14 REQUEST Ordinance No. :Request for Annexation and Zoning of 21.7 acres ;from RUT to an R-4 zone for Harcourt Subdivision - 3465 & 3595 E. Victory Road and 3432 & 3467 E. Falcon Drive AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BU'fLD}NG DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGWWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Attached Ordinance Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 ~" BOISE IDAHO 04/12/07 ~, PM DEPUTY Neava Haney ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~'~'~ ~~;~ ~ ~~I~ ~ ~~~ RECORDED-REQUEST OF 107051804 Meridian Ciry CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~ X30 7 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA AN ORDINANCE (AZ-06-046 HARCOURT SUBDIVISION) FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY BEING ALL OF LOTS 1, 2, 4, AND 6, AND ROADWAYS WITHIN GOLDEN EAGLE ESTATES, BOOK 33, PAGE 2017, ADA COUNTY RECORDS, AND A PORTION OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM RUT (ADA COUNTY) TO R-4 (MEDIUM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: Great Sky, Inc. SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re- zoned from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low Density Residential), in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. ANNEXATION OF HARCOiJRT SUBDIVISION - AZ-06-046 Page 1 of 3 SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~r~ day of ___~C~~~ `t! , 2007. AP~ROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ day of /.~~~-j 2 , 2007. MAYOR T de WEERD ANNEXATION OF HARCOURT SUBDIVISION - AZ-06-046 Page 2 of 3 (~ ~\• ~_. .off`. Vic,- a / ATTEST: ;~~ C~ ~i-:~~~~``°~. •~~> ~.~ ~~ ~~ .,,. WILLIAM G. BERG, ., CITY CITE ~~ ~ ~- i~ .dat 9,sY 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 TAMMI' 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. I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. •~~~wBSeae• (SEAL) ..e~ ® A~~.l~ . ~ '1 ~`~''.® e i ~ ~ • `~ i ~~ ~`_ ~cf~ ~: • • •~~~ ~ c~ ~~1 a/t n2 ~i~~ ~ NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING A'T: ~~'L.~,.(~j ~~ ~v~~ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: / -<.,~ -~7 ~ ANNEXATION OF HARCOURT SUBDIVISION - A~-06-046 Page 3 of 3 i C EXHIBIT A Project: 1.0-05-379 Date: August. l5, 2006 PARCEL pESCRIPTION ANNEXATION BOUNDARY All of Lots 1, 2,. 4; and 6, and Roadways'within Golden Eagle Estates; Book 33; page 2017, Ada County. ~ records, and a portion of Section 28, Township 3 North,~Range ~ East,. Boise Meridian,. Ada County, Idaho; and more i particularly descrlDed as follows; Commencing at the Northwest comer of said Section 28; thence atang the Northerly boundary; of said Northwest of Section 28, South 89'3b'14'' East„ 529.93 leaf to the POINT OF BEGININNG;; thence continuing along said boundary; South 89°3b'14' East, 907.04:feet; thence along the Easterly boundary ofaaid: Lot 2, Squth 00.30'38" West;-849:67 feet to. the Southeasterly comer of"said Lot 2; thence along the Southerly boundary, of said'tot 2 North 88'29'23" West, 219:98 fee[; thence the_ along, Southerly boundary of lot 4 of Golden Eagle Estates the. following. three courses: 1. South 41'35'28' West, 100:00 feet; 2 South•84"35'28' West; 9§O,QO feet;, 3: South 87' SD'02 West, 56.47 feet to the Falcon Road right-of=way .thence along. said right of•way on anon-tangent curve to the right 92:77 feet, having a radius gf.45:00 feet, a delta of 1 i_8 0509", and aaong chord which bears South 10`55`.33"East,, 77,20 feet to.the Northeast corner of Lotb..of Golden Eagle Fscafes thence along the. boundarie5.of said Lot 6 the fol~owing..three courses: 1'• South 01'° 17`23' West, 308.59 feet to a point on.the; Southerly boundary qF North .,~ of the Northwest Y.'of Section 28 2• Nortfi 89°30'17" West, 501 45 feet along said Southerly bounds 3: North 00°32'16 East; 467 14. feet io the Southerly right-of way of Falcon Road; thence confinuing •along said Une, North 00.'32'16' East, 52::36 feetto a poinf on the Northerly right.of;way of Falcon Road;. thence along the Northerly right•of-way of Falcon Road the following- 3 cqucses: 9. North 73° b'39" East,:27.45 feet;. 2• along a rton-tangent curve to the right:64;2b feet, having a radius.of 100;00 feet, a delta of 3b"4.9.'01', and a.lang chord which bears South•.8.8'18'Sb"East, 63.1E feet; 3• South.b9'S8'45 East, 109 OS feet; thehce.along the Westerly boundary ling of Lot 9 of`Golden Eagle. Estates, North 09`° Zq'Ob- 4yest,.411.65 feet to the Northwest cornerof said Lot A; thence alon ih b g e oundaries of loll of Golden Eagle Estates-the following three-courses 1. North 56'0975` West,. 1.17:70 feet; 2• thence North 18' 19'37 East,. 170:01 feet; 3. thence North 00"30'39" East, 167.00 feet; thence North 00'23'9b' East, 33.00 feet; to the. PO,1NT OF BEGINNING. Gontairiing 23.054 acres; moreror-less. END'~OF DESCRiPT1QN i Prepared by: i J=U;-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 1 Ronald M. Hodge, P:L.S. REVIEW .APPROVAL BY ` AUfi 18 ZD46 WORK&~EP~IC GEH%!hc itiBoiserileslPubliclProjeciManag~~JEC1T0.05-079•suUiegand Farts:56uth110:o5.079-/1iLri1n1t0:05.079-AnnexpeK,d6c ~., EXHIBIT B Y '"7 C~` o x lf_f U e~: ~:~ p. _ c p ~; ^_ 2N < Y t ~^ _~ ;;r 3 ~} ~ m O x .a ;o .> a 0 Q O -r QQ ~ .. Z 2 Q til ~ t i~ I~ g ~~~' 3 ~ I ~ S 3I R L9'Af9 A1.sC.00005 Q ~ Q C J V7 ~ O (] tp ~ ~ ~ ~ _ !Y W ~ Q in i7 N Ny ~ ~ ~ r ~ o ~ O N N U s'ax ..war ~ co 0 ~~ _ ~~ /'' 3.DkLLOQa1 ~~ z~ _ woa ~v3 s ~ t~ L11 '_' N ~ ' J M t~ DJU ~Dn Fa- .. 1 WH N p' ~ ~ S M f'~ ' V Q ~7i ~ ~ O ~ O ~ Q a ~` ~ ~ ~ N ^ $j ~ La1 ~ ~ 3 `~ (V U U ~ U, • March 30, 2007 AZ 06-064 'MERfDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT RMR Consuifing, Inc ITEM NO. 15 .REQUEST Ordinance No. :Request for Annexation and Zoning of 27.05 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Normandy Subdivision - 4145 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 SEWfR DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: 1 US WEST: INTERMOUNTAfN GAS: MERIDJAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ' Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Ordinance Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ADA COUNTY RECORDER J.~~UID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 BOISE IDAHO 04/12107 01:4 DEPUTY Neava Haney ~ ~~~ ~'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~'~~~~'~~~~ ~ ~~~ RECORDED-REQUEST OF Meridian Ciry 107051805 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~^ ~~OS BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, ZAREMBA AN ORDINANCE (AZ-06-064 NORMANDY SUBDIVISION) FOR ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY BEING A PORTION OF THE SE '/ OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" AND ANNEXING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY, SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING THE LAND USE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM RUT (ADA COUNTY) TO R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) IN THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR A SUMMARY OF THE ORDINANCE; AND PROVIDING FOR A WAIVER OF THE READING RULES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the following described land as evidenced by attached Legal Description herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit "A" is within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian. has received a written request for annexation and re-zoning by the owner of said property, to-wit: James Patterson. SECTION 2. That the above-.described real property is hereby annexed and re- zoned from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential), in the Meridian City Code. SECTION 3. That the City has authority pursuant to the laws of the State of Idaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and zone said property. SECTION 4. That the City has complied with all the noticing requirements pursuant to the laws of the State ofIdaho, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian to annex and re-zone said property. ANNEXATION OF NORMANDY SUBDIVISION - AZ-06-064 Page 1 of 3 l- ~- SECTION 5. That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 6. All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8. The Clerk of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner, including the lands herein rezoned, with the following officials of the County of Ada, State of Idaho, to-wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. SECTION 9. That pursuant to the affirmative vote of one-half (1/2) plus one (1) of the Members of the full Council, the rule requiring two (2) separate readings by title and one (1) reading in full be, and the same is hereby, dispensed with, and accordingly, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO this ra ~' day of _ /~~y-lZ , 2007. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ ~ day of j~~7 ~ , 2007. MAYOR T de WEERD ANNEXATION OF NORMANDY SUBDIVISION - AZ-06-064 Page 2 of 3 ~r- ATTEST: i~.~. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR~ CITY STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada ) \~ e `~ vi5n ~`"~~i 'ji bi v~~ ~~^ ~, `G _ ~~a~ ~ ~~ s ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~'~ //l ~Ff i1 1111 94i5'.+5~+9'~~ ~~ On this t 1 day of (=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. .• Q~ ~ •. (SEAL) ~ ,~®~,~ •~ . Gj/ tl ~' o o i i ~ ~ ; ~ • `. ~ • ~~,~ i ••~ O. . NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT: `?/V~, , ~Cz ~n(` MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: lG}-1S =(~ ANNEXATION OF NORMANDY SUBDIVISION - AZ-06-064 Page 3 of 3 ~.._ EXHIBIT A .., . DESCRIPTION F.~ft_ NO'hMANdY SUBDMSION~ A Pf\R~~E1 TOWNSNI _CO.UNTY,, ~~ ALONG THE CENTER~IhIE OF THE R,IDEN$AU~H CANAL THE FOLLOWING: .. .. _ TMENCE~ S;:59°53'9" W'-208.5:1 FEET TO,A`POINT QF`CURVATURE; ~. ... :LEAVi'NG THE CENTERLINE OF THE::RIDI=NBAUGH ~CAl~AL; THENCE N _89°43'55° E X1720.,: REAL~POINT OF~BEGINNING: :ACRES MQRE.ORLESS;: i.95'S:0-SLJB' JNE TO TFIE .RISING 2, 05 . REU{ , P R0 hR BX 'DES ~ ~~ ~~~ ,t~pFtttB bE£~j :OCTOBER.23, 2006' THENCE 500°30'25°_E 8r~~ ,50. FEET.A,LONG THE EAST L1NE~O~ SAID` SECTION;30 TO~;A POINT ON THE CENTERUNE.OF THE RIDENBAUGW T.HE~1:CE_N:~65°5':55° W `_405.8'9 FEET TO.APOINT OF.CURVA~:fURE___ ___ ~_ THENCE N-'45°3'.43' W'`'9S7 92 FEET~TO~,A~POINT ON THE IdORTH~~LINE~~4 THE ~SE'~4 OF SAil3 SECTION~:30; ~ (~ EXHIBIT B ,. , ~~:, ~ ,I ~~w~~~ - r~~r~y 1:7.20 18. I NORTHEAST CORNER i ~, ,,i SE::~ (1/4 CORNER)~~I~j: ,~. ~; _ ' ~,; i I. 9 ~ I ~ ~9~ ` •,: 27;:05 ACRES ~ " ~~ I ~<;. .~ .o::. I ' ~ '-, o~ ~~~ i ` , ~. ~ ~~, o: I ;± "~. I '`~ I J ~,.. MERiIJfAtd PUBl;lG - ~• ' ~ I WORKSDEpT,~ -' -- -- ; I',cl ~, IQfDENBAUGH CANAI ; L;i ,, i CURVE '[A'6C£ Cl1RVE FENGTFJ :RADIUS. DEiTA :..TANGENT; piOR6.'BEARING :.CHORD" : i 1. i --- _ _ _ t - i 1 SW . SE I >> _ i H: ANNEXATION 'EXHIBIT FOR .~ 0 NORMANDY SUBD1ViSi0iJ= StanlegCar>SUltantsn~; " IN THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 3Q, T3~1, R1E, BM i~ ls4o s sOr~iro watr ApA. COUNfiY, iQAKQ sulr~ iao ~' - 'M~RI01A(d, IDAl10 8364.2:- , :4 l _ ~ ~ 208=288-Q573~. <. :. _ $ _ :.. -. _.. WN MEllt ". DATE i t /3J06' ~jy{„ 1 .'-a app"' „ ~ ,..:..... . _- JOSS MO 19650- . March 30, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 3, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 1.6 REQUEST Executive Session Per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1) (c) - to conduct deliber- ations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is, not owned by a public agency: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: C1TY 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.