HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-07• •
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Tuesday, March 7, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
1. Roll -call Attendance:
X Shaun Wardle X Joe Borton
X Charlie Rountree 1C Keith Bird
X_ Mayor Tammy de Weerd
"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."
2. Pledge of Allegiance by Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball
Team:
R!rf ni�;w ®� LehierernGw�
3. Pf for Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball Team:
4. Community Invocation by Pastor Russ McCrea, with Living Grace
Community Fellowship:
5. Adoption of the Agenda: a -t -r,%. -vv a &,r
6. Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 City Council Regular
Meeting:
B. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-016
Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development
Agreement for Resolution Subdivision by removing Lot 7, Block 1,
from the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to
operation and construction of an office building by Conger
Management Group — 2045 East Overland Road: a. -1j? rv4c.
C. Contract for Additional Support Services for Existing Model
Update with JUB Engineers, Inc.: A fpro v -c. -
D. Right of Way Agreement for the Ten Mile Division Trunk: a�v�
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda - March 7, 2006 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. Well No. 27 Flush Line Easement with Cherry Lane Christian
Church: Amvv-e—
F. Award of Bid for Well No. 27 Flush Line to Star Construction,
LLC: W^VVVI
G. Blackrock Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding:
H. Approve Bills: ay>vv vw—
7. Department Reports: Aax,-c
8. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: --
9. Discussion of Deeding Messina Meadows Park to City of Meridian by
WestparkDevelopment: fpr -op -c ar a C /9/er'�n�h®�lzo®� Pte./e
10. Tabled from February 21, 2006: FP 06-003 Request for Final Plat
approval for 45 single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on
14.75 acres in a R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 12 by
Paramount Development, Inc. — east of North Linder Road and north of
McMillan Road:
11. Tabled from January 24, 2006: FP 05-073 Request for Final Plat
approval for 11 residential building lots and 4 common area lots on 5.36
acres in a R-3 zone for EI Gato Subdivision by Conger Management
Group — 701 Black Cat Road: 46r"V-4..
12. FP 06-005 Request for Final Plat approval of 24 residential building lots
and 4 common lots on 5.10 acres in a R-8 zone for Windwalker
Subdivision by Beckit Development — 2770 South Locust Grove Road: a-
13. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CPA 05-004
Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the text and
future land use map of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan for the North
Meridian Area and to expand the area of city impact boundary:
jrrcloama- re 8',91g h �
14. Continued Public Hearing from February 21, 2006: VAR 05-027
Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3.H requirements for access to State
Highway 69 for Meridian Gateway by White -Leasure Development
Company —1601 South Meridian Road:
15. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: AZ 05-056 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN -R and 4.07
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 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.
•
acres from RUT to C -C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision by
JBS Enterprises, LLC -1845 West Franklin Road:
16. Continue Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: PP 05-058 Request
for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7
common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN -R and C -C zones for Harks
Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin
Road: ��- %0 ¢-f —&V6
17. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CUP 05-051
Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development within
300' of a residence for Harks Canvon Creek Subdivision JBS
Enterprises, LLC -1845 West Franklin Road: �n �/hgo
18. Public Hearing: AZ 05-062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11
acres from RUT to R-8 for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables,
LLC - 2445 North Wingate Lane: ,, "*-, P1A_
19. Public Hearing: PP 05-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 25
single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in the
proposed R-8 zone for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC -
2445 North Wingate Lane: .0"✓�hk,%AW PIk /V
20. Public Hearing: RZ 05-022 Request for a Rezone of 3.36 acres from R-
8 to L -O for Church of the Holy Nativity by Church of the Holy Nativity -
828 West Cherry Lane: alr,,vv, e_ ro-, e c%e ( ®,
21. Public Hearing: AZ 05-066 Request for Annexation and Zoning of .50
acres from R-12 to C -G zone for Meridian Veterinary Clinic by
Architecture Northwest - 415 vyest Franklin Road:
22. Public Hearing: AZ 05-065 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.50
acres from RUT to C -G zone for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel -
2820 East Ustick Road:,.,,f,.e
23. Public Hearing: MI 05-017 Miscellaneous request to amend the
previously approved Development Agreement for Blue Marlin (AZ 03-025)
for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel - 2820 East Ustick Road:
24. Public Hearing: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zoning Ordinance Text
Amendment with the areas to be amended include: the Definitions of
collector streets, adult entertainment, and net density; the standards for
the Traditional Neighborhood Residential Districts; the fence standards;
the table detailing the Decision -Making Authority by Application; changes
to application requirements; how to measure block length; screening and
chainlink fencing; requirement for certificates of zoning compliance; off -
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 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.
street parking space standards and measurements; off-street loading
space requirements; family day care standards; and sign standards for
family day care by the City of Meridian Planning Department:
r✓/A- 1-o
25. Public Hearing: New fees and modification of existing fee by the Public
Works Department necessary to cover the costs of development plan
review, inspections, site plan and development plan reviews.
74v 3 / �6
26. Ordinance No. ®b —12-16 RZ 05-021 Request for a
Rezone of .94 acres from R-8 to C -G and Rezone of .95 acres from R-8 to
C -N for Champion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation —
north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road: a�,�c.
27. Ordinance No. 4A6 —1 Zl % AZ 05-050 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 5.0 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Reserve
Subdivision by Dave McKinnon with Conger Management Group, Inc. —
west of North Locust Grove Road and south of Chinden Boulevard:
28 - EIce Ccc.-live Jesfi0,.j 67- 234-5(!) (a) (e-) (.t)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 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.
P �ac* * ; Po id (fC- k6 �* =7� 4 e
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Tuesday, March 7, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
1. Roll -call Attendance:
Shaun Wardle Joe Borton
Charlie Rountree Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
`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. "
2. Pledge of Allegiance by Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball
Team:
3. Proclamation for Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball Team:
4. Community Invocation by Pastor Russ McCrea, with Living Grace
Community Fellowship:
5. Adoption of the Agenda:
6. Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 City Council Regular
Meeting:
B. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-016
Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development
Agreement for Resolution Subdivision by removing Lot 7, Block 1,
from the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to
operation and construction of an office building by Conger
Management Group — 2045 East Overland Road:
C. Contract for Additional Support Services for Existing Model
Update with JUB Engineers, Inc.:
D. Right of Way Agreement for the Ten Mile Division Trunk:
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 Page 1 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall become properly 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. Well No. 27 Flush Line Easement with Cherry Lane Christian
Church:
F. Award of Bid for Well No. 27 Flush Line to Star Construction,
LLC:
G. Blackrock Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding:
H. Approve Bills:
7. Department Reports:
8. Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
9. Discussion of Deeding Messina Meadows Park to City of Meridian by
Westpark Development:
10. Tabled from February 21, 2006: FP 06-003 Request for Final Plat
approval for 45 single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on
14.75 acres in a R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 12 by
Paramount Development, Inc. — east of North Linder Road and north of
McMillan Road:
11. Tabled from January 24, 2006: FP 05-073 Request for Final Plat
approval for 11 residential building lots and 4 common area lots on 5.36
acres in a R-3 zone for EI Gato Subdivision by Conger Management
Group — 701 Black Cat Road:
12. FP 06-005 Request for Final Plat approval of 24 residential building lots
and 4 common lots on 5.10 acres in a R-8 zone for Windwalker
Subdivision by Beckit Development — 2770 South Locust Grove Road:
13. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CPA 05-004
Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the text and
future land use map of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan for the North
Meridian Area and to expand the area of city impact boundary:
14. Continued Public Hearing from February 21, 2006: VAR 05-027
Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3.H requirements for access to State
Highway 69 for Meridian Gateway by White -Leasure Development
Company —1601 South Meridian Road:
15. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: AZ 05-056 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN -R and 4.07
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 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.
0 •
acres from RUT to C -C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision by
JBS Enterprises, LLC —1845 West Franklin Road:
16. Continue Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: PP 05-058 Request
for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7
common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN -R and C -C zones for H_
Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC — 1845 West Franklin
Road:
17. Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CUP 05-051
Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development within
300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS
Enterprises, LLC — 1845 West Franklin Road:
18. Public Hearing: AZ 05-062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11
acres from RUT to R-8 for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables,
LLC — 2445 North Wingate Lane:
19. Public Hearing: PP 05-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 25
single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in the
proposed R-8 zone for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC —
2445 North Wingate Lane:
20. Public Hearing: RZ 05-022 Request for a Rezone of 3.36 acres from R-
8 to L -O for Church of the Holy Nativity by Church of the Holy Nativity —
828 West Cherry Lane:
21. Public Hearing: AZ 05-066 Request for Annexation and Zoning of .50
acres from R-12 to C -G zone for Meridian Veterinary Clinic by
Architecture Northwest — 415 West Franklin Road:
22. Public Hearing: AZ 05-065 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.50
acres from RUT to C -G zone for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel —
2820 East Ustick Road:
23. Public Hearing: MI 05-017 Miscellaneous request to amend the
Previously approved Development Agreement for Blue Marlin (AZ 03-025)
for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel — 2820 East Ustick Road:
24. Public Hearing: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zoning Ordinance Text
Amendment with the areas to be amended include: the Definitions of
collector streets, adult entertainment, and net density; the standards for
the Traditional Neighborhood Residential Districts; the fence standards;
the table detailing the Decision -Making Authority by Application; changes
to application requirements; how to measure block length; screening and
chainlink fencing; requirement for certificates of zoning compliance; off -
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 Page 3 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City f Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to docuents and/or hearing
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours mprior to the public meeting.
street parking space standards and measurements; off-street loading
space requirements; family day care standards; and sign standards for
family day care by the City of Meridian Planning Department:
25. Public Hearing: New fees and modification of existing fee by the Public
Works Department necessary to cover the costs of development plan
review, inspections, site plan and development plan reviews.
26. Ordinance No. RZ 05-021 Request for a
Rezone of .94 acres from R-8 to C -G and Rezone of .95 acres from R-8 to
C -N for Champion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation —
north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road:
27. Ordinance No. AZ 05-050 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 5.0 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Reserve
Subdivision by Dave McKinnon with Conger Management Group, Inc. —
west of North Locust Grove Road and south of Chinden Boulevard:
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — March 7, 2006 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.
0 0
Meridian City Council Meetinq March 7 2006
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M.,
Tuesday, March 7, 2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, Charlie
Rountree and Joe Borton.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Gene Trakel, Joe Silva,
Steve Siddoway, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle
X Charlie Rountree
X
X Joe Borton
X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. Sorry we are a few minutes
behind schedule. I'd like to welcome you all here tonight. Thank you so much for
coming. It's always nice to see young faces in our audience. So, girls, we appreciate
your attendance. It is Tuesday, March 7th. It's five minutes after 7:00. We will begin
tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance by Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball
Team:
De Weerd: Thank you. I would also like to recognize a familiar face in our audience,
former Councilwoman Cherie McCandless. Nice to see you again. Item No. 2. Tonight
we will be led in the pledge by the fifth grade girls AAU basketball team. If you would
like to come forward. All rise.
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Proclamation for Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball Team:
De Weerd: Thank you, girls. I will go ahead and ask you to stay here up front. It's
always a pleasure to recognize our champions in our community and so with great
pleasure I will read this recognition of achievement. In recognition of the Meridian fifth
grade girls AAU Ada County basketball champions. Whereas the Amateur Athletic
Union held their inaugural compp-titive basketball season for fifth grade girls in the Valley
this year and whereas Meridian was represented by an outstanding group of girls in this
league in its post -season tournament and whereas this team was made up of Gabriel
Gesswein Geshwright, Mackensie Crane, Chelsie Holly, Madison Harris, Waverly
Starkey, Shelby Lee, Jolie Slider, Mallory Gabbage, Holly Blades, Makaya Roberts and
Coaches Joe Blades, Patrick Stiffler, Phil Stiffler, Junior, and whereas these girls
Meridian City Council r
March 7, 2006
Page 2 of 60
competed as one of the top teams in this league and succeeded in winning the post
season tournament and establishing themselves in history as the inaugural season
champions, therefore, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby
recognize these girls for their extraordinary achievement and honor their drive, hard
work, tenacity, sportsmanship, and most of all heart displayed during this season.
Congratulations. And would the coaches, please, come forward. You know, always
behind a great team are great roll models and -- maybe all but one. You can tell I
probably know one of them; right? But also great motivators and teachers. Certainly
without the coaches -- and I'm a coach's daughter, so I can say this. We would not
have the people out there teaching, showing our girls the basic skills, and there is
nothing better than team sports to learn many of the things that are life long lessons.
So, thank you, coaches, for being the positive roll models for these girls and really
giving them unlimited potential in letting them show exactly what the -- unleashing the
talent and the ability to show everyone that they are going to get it done and you have a
team of champions here. So, congratulations to you as well. The mike is yours.
Rountree: Or not.
Coach: I just want to say we are really proud to have had the privilege to coach this
great bunch of girls and we are really happy that the Mayor would make this effort to
acknowledge and honor the effort that they went through this year. We weren't always
easy on them, but it was great to watch them grow and expand and learn throughout the
year. So, we are really proud of them and thank all of you guys for watching.
De Weerd: Well, thank you for joining us tonight. Girls, do you have a spokesperson
that has anything to say? Okay. Thank you.
Team Member: Go Meridian.
Item 4: Community Invocation by Pastor Russ McCrea, with Living Grace
Community Fellowship:
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 4 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by
Pastor Russ McCrea with Living Grace Community Fellowship. If you will all join us in
the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence.
McCrea: Thank you, Mayor de Weerd. May we bow? Mighty God, we invite your
presence this evening in this meeting. We thank you for our children who are a gift to
us and the future which we so enjoy. We praise you that we have a Council and a
Mayor and government. We invite that you would guide them this evening. Bless our
governor and president and thore in our armed services serving to protect our cquntry
this evening. Give us grace this evening and wisdom in our service to our fellow
countrymen and may we also be graced with the service of you, in Christ's name, amen.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 3 of 60
De Weerd: Well, Pastor McCrea, normally I would be giving you a City of Meridian pin,
but I just handed them all out. Now, this gives you an opportunity and a reason to
return.
McCrea: I will be back.
Item 5: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you for joining us. Okay. Item No. 5, adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the regular agenda we do have Item 13 has been asked by the administrator
to be continued to April 4th, 2006.
Canning: Sir, that's Item No. 24, not 13.
Bird: Oh, I'm song. Thank you, Anna. Disregard that. Oh. Okay. Item No. 16, 17,
and 18 has been asked also to be continued to April 4th, 2006. Item 24 has been asked
to continue to April 4th, 2006. With the permission of the Council President and the
Mayor, we would like to add Item No. 28 to the regular agenda, an Executive Session
as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(a)(c) and (f). And with that --
Canning: Sir?
Bird: I'm sorry. Just a second here. I got -- oh, yeah, 15, 16, 17, and not 18. I'm sorry.
To be continued to April 4th. Thank you. With that I move we approve the revised
agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Can you repeat that?
Bird: I would be glad to, Mayor, now that I have got it straight. Item 15, 16, and 17
would like to be continued to April 4th, 2006. Item 24 has been asked by the
administrator to be continued to April 4th, 2006. And I will add that 26 and 27, the
ordinances, are numbered 06-1216 and 06-1217. And with yours and President
Wardle's permission, we'd like to add Item No. 28, Executive Session as per Idaho
State Code 67-2345(1) (a) (c) and (f). I didn't bumble that one too bad.
De Weerd: Thank you, Councilman Bird. Okay. We have a motion to approve the
adoption of the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion
carried.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 4 of 60
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 City Council Regular
Meeting:
B. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-016
Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development
Agreement for Resolution Subdivision by removing Lot 7, Block 1,
from the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to
operation and construction of an office building by Conger
Management Group — 2045 East Overland Road:
C. Contract for Additional Support Services for Existing Model
Update with JUB Engineers, Inc.:
D. Right of Way Agreement for the Ten Mile Division Trunk:
E. Well No. 27 Flush Line Easement with Cherry Lane Christian
Church:
F. Award of Bid for Well No. 27 Flush Line to Star Construction,
LLC:
G. Blackrock Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding:
H. Approve Bills:
De Weerd: Item 6. Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and
the clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no discussion,
Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 5 of 60
Item 7: Department Reports:
De Weerd: Okay. There are no items under department reports.
Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Nor were there items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 9: Discussion of Deeding Messina Meadows Park to City of Meridian by
Westpark Development:
De Weerd: So, we will move to Item No. 9, discussion of deeding Messina Meadows
Park to the City of Meridian. Is Westpark Development's representative here tonight?
Thank you for coming back. Please state your name and address for the record.
Neiffinger: Trent Neiffinger. 1240 West Barrymore Drive, Meridian. 83642.
De Weerd: Thank you so much.
Neiffinger: All right. Well, we are going to discuss, I guess, the Messina Meadows
Park. Hopefully, we can clear anything up that might be a problem. Anna, is it on there,
the one that I just gave you? Okay. Can we go to the next one? This is just a little
layout of what we will talk about. The action plan is, basically, what I took from the
Comprehensive Plan for the parks system here and, then, we will just talk about these
next few items. Do you want to go to the next one, please? Okay. So, basically, I just
kind of picked apart this action plan and it talks a lot about what the parks -- what kind of
parks you guys are looking for, I guess, and if we go to that first bullet there, it talks
about a park about every one mile for the residents to have access to and, then, I kind
of took that and said, well, that would, basically, put a park in every section of town. A
section being the one mile square. So, then, I went through and it says the proposed
park system for Meridian features facilities like neighborhood parks and community
parks as the centerpiece to this park in every section concept. I think that's key. I think
that this park -- or the park access to every citizen within a mile radius is important and I
agree with your action plan there. The rest just talks mostly about immediate access in
the neighborhood. The string of pearls I think is a really novel concept, how the park
being the pearl and the string being the network of trails that is proposed in your plan.
Hopefully, that is something that will come to pass in the future with this trail system.
The city would look favorably at developers providing public neighborhood parks and
the city could assume liability for maintenance responsibility if the developer chooses to
deed the land or the park to the city. Okay. Next slide, please. The definition of a
neighborhood park. I'm going to just step over here real quick. All right. Okay. So, this
is the Messina Meadows Subdivision here. Eagle Road is right here. This is the main
collector, East Mona Lisa, and, then, here would be the park. So, we have the main
collector frontage and, then, we have this -- these two roads here that are also frontage
to the park. So, with that being said, we will go to the park next. Kind of blown up a
little bit. We picked apart the definition of your neighborhood park. It talks about a
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 6 of 60
playground facility, which is here and here, and I can't hold this thing still, so -- we have
got the playground facility. It asked for a picnic area, which is -- here we have got a
shelter. Basketball courts. Open play area of grass. And, then, I believe it was a multi-
use practice field. So, we have a baseball backstop here and, then, you can't see it on
this print, but there is, actually, enough room to have a soccer field there or a practice
soccer field in this area here. So, if we take that concept and apply it to our
neighborhood park plan, we have pretty much everything -- everything that it is calling
out for and also the total being -- sorry. The total being 8.9 acres, minus a few acres
that we will talk about in a minute. So, if we go -- if we skip two slides to usable space.
One more. All right. So, the Messina Meadows Park has a usable space of seven and
a half acres. We have to subtract out the BOR land, which is a 1.4 acre piece that runs
kind of parallel with this northern boundary here. It would be about -- yeah, 1.4 acres
that the BOR is going to want to maintain -- continue to maintain as part of their -- that
canal that runs through there and, as such, Tuscany Development will go ahead and
fence off the boundary of that -- that canal to keep it safe and to also allow the Bureau
of Reclamation their space that they are asking for. Okay. If we could go to the next
slide. Last time I was here there was an issue with parking. Your -- the parking
requirements that are stated here I took from your Comp Plan as well. Three spaces
per acre of usable space is required. If you take that formula and apply it to ours, that
would give us a need for 23 parking spaces. Right here we have a parking lot that
Tuscany Development will provide. It's a nine slot or parking unit and, then, if we take
this frontage here, we have got a -- basically 1,000 feet there and if -- with your formula
you have one car for every 25 feet of frontage, that adds an additional 40 parking
spaces on this residential street here. So, we would have 49 spaces available for
parking, which I think is ample when our requirement would be 23. Next slide.
Maintenance. There was another issue with maintenance. I talked with your parks
department and got a figure of 2,000 dollars per acre per year to maintain this size of a
park, which I think is in agreement with other parks that are maintained in the -- within
the city limits. One thing that we have really tried to focus on in designing this park is if
we look back here at this picture, it's centralized. Everything that requires a lot of
maintenance, minus the grass, is all right here in this one area. You don't have things
spread out that are hard to maintain. Plus I used to work for a parks department in a
different city and we had a lot these bathroom facilities that had grass that would butt
up, against, you know, two or three sides of it. Very maintenance nightmares. This is
located in a hardscape area. All facilities are, actually, lined with hardscape, so the
maintenance there is really really quite easy. So, that's one thing that we have really
tried to focus on. I think we have got that. Another thing with the -- every structure that
we will be building out there, the bathroom, the playgrounds, the shelter, will be all built
according to the approval of the parks department and they will -- we won't build it until
they accept the structures and the budgets for them as well. I will make one note on the
bathroom there. It is the exact bathroom that is being built I think for Kiwanis Park, ) got
from the architect who designed it for that. So, it will be the exact same -- size same,
same structure and everything. So, there is a good note there. Next page. All right. I
like to call this one the diamond amongst the pearls. Tuscany Development really feels
that we have made a great effort at creating a neighborhood park that fits within the
realm of the comp plan or the action plan that the city put together and it also fits in -- I
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 7 of 60
was just out in the hall here looking at your -- another plan that you have and there is
not a whole lot of parks that are in line for south of the freeway. I think we have Bear
Creek, Kiwanis -- I think there might be one more that I'm not remembering right now,
but there is not a lot of parks there. There is not a lot of land that's tied up for parks.
So, I think this one being -- it fits the need that you have south of the freeway. It's within
a section that's somewhat centralized, something I think would be a very great asset to
the city and the citizens as well, that not only live here, but who live anywhere within a
mile radius. I don't know if we can see this -- this one down here. Let me put it back up.
But if you see -- we got this subdivision here, we have a stub out that comes directly to
the park. We have three to the north, the one off Eagle Road, and, then, a stub here for
this subdivision in the future and, then, one off Amity Road. So, it's accessible from all
the subdivisions around and it's very accessible from Eagle Road. Not very far away
from it. So, I just really think that it's a great -- a great asset for you. If we could go
back to the string of pearls concept. Inside your plan is a trail network layout, I guess,
where you're planning to take all of the waterways that run through the city and create
trails there, I guess paved or unpaved. Messina Meadows Park has four -- four trails, I
think it is. Yeah. Four trails that actually touch this area or that are directly accessible
to it via -- this here is -- this is the Ten Mile Creek path here and, then, if you go through
this subdivision here there is an asphalt path that connects to the -- I think it's Rutledge
or the -- and the Ridenbaugh and, then, the Meridian loop also runs through there as
well. So, there is -- that's over 50 miles of pathway that's directly accessible just from
this one park here. So, that -- that's a major thing, I think, that is a major draw to this
park and the people who will live there -- anyone who lives there that is going to be
excited about using this trail system that comes on board in the future will be right there
in the heart of it. It's just like the hub -- the hub of the -- of the trail system. So, with that
being said that's what I have. Hopefully, I have covered the parking issue, the
maintenance issue, kind of just defined what a park is and just how I just really feel like
this is a huge asset to the city, one -- oh, go one more slide. It's kind of hard to see, but
this is that budget that I had with me last time. If you take the -- just the acreage -- 8.9
acres, if you took that -- a going rate today, I think this is what we got from our
appraiser. It's 110,000 dollars an acre. So, you're looking at almost a million dollars
just in acreage there. That's just for an eight acre park. Times are only going to get
harder, I think, to buy land that's not tied up already and so that right there, in and of
itself, is a great benefit to you, because it's not money that you have to come up with.
We are going to go ahead and give that to you. So, if you total up all the things that we
are donating, that's 1.2 million dollars that you don't have to come up with to develop a
park. If you take your -- your total cost that we are asking for reimbursement, I think it
says 228,000 there, if you divide that into the acreage, I think that comes out at like
30,000 an acre to develop and there is no possible way that you could develop a park of
this size for 30,000 an acre, because if you add those two numbers, you're at 1.4 million
just to develop it. So, that in and. of itself is a great attribute I think. That's all I havv. for
my presentation. I can answer any questions that you might have or concerns.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, do you have questions? Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 8 of 60
Wardle: Madam Mayor. Just a clarification. Not having been the first time we have
seen this park at Messina. The water feature is tiled. Last time it was a water amenity.
Now it's fenced?
Neiffinger: Yes.
Wardle: Okay. So, that's the final -- it's going to be --
Neiffinger: It will be fenced.
Wardle: Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Question on this particular display. You show the land at
8.9. In your Powerpoint you show the land usable at 7.5 and 1.4 acres owned by the
Bureau of Recollection. Which is correct?
Neiffinger: The 1.4 acres is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. I should have
changed my figure there.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Doug, do you have anything that you would like to add?
Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a project that we have been
discussing with this developer for well over a year and we spent a lot of time making it fit
our action plan requirement and when you look at the land use map that we currently
have in place, there is an asterisk sitting almost right exactly where this property is, is
the reason that we started this discussion. So, I think Trent's done an excellent job of
presenting what we represented in those discussions and it's certainly a neighborhood
park that has the support from our department for the city to take on as a valuable asset
for the city. So, our recommendation would be that the Council accept the park as a city
park.
De Weerd: Thank you, Doug. Council, any further questions? Any additional
comments?
Neiffinger: I'll just comment one more time on what Doug said. It's a park that the
Parks Department wants. They see as a value as well and, hopefully, that's something
that you, as a Council, can see aS well and can accept.
De Weerd: Thank you for your presentation and information.
Neiffinger: Thank you for your time.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 9 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Last time we heard about Messina Meadows -- the last time I heard about
Messina Meadows -- you have heard it last year as well -- there was a lot of talk about
the neighborhood park, definition in the park's master plan. In light of everything that
was discussed last time and again presented today, I see this park as a net asset to the
city. I think it's a great opportunity to allow the city to provide and continue to provide
recreation opportunities to our citizens south of the freeway at this price -- and they only
go higher. The ability to get control of some acreage and to provide these opportunities
to our citizens on that side of the freeway is growing more and more difficult. I think it
clearly falls within the definition of a neighborhood park and our park's master plan and I
think it qualifies -- satisfies all of those requirements, but it's something that the City of
Meridian should accept and I'd move that we accept the deed of Messina Meadows
Park to the City of Meridian.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to accept the Messina Meadows Park. Is there any
discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I'd just like to make the comment that this has been a work in progress and
express my appreciation to Mr. Neiffinger and prior to him Mr. Brown for working with
the city and working through the issues and creating what you have aptly dubbed a
diamond. So, thank you for your efforts.
De Weerd: Any other comments from the Council? Certainly pass those sentiments
onto Mr. Johnson as well.
Rountree: Yes. The developer.
De Weerd: Will, would you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, ye@; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Tabled from February 21, 2006: FP 06-003 Request for Final Plat
approval for 45 single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 10 of 60
14.75 acres in an R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 12 by
Paramount Development, Inc. — east of North Linder Road and north of
McMillan Road:
Item 11: Tabled from January 24, 2006: FP 05-073 Request for Final Plat
approval for 11 residential building lots and 4 common area lots on 5.36
acres in an R-3 zone for EI Gato Subdivision by Conger Management
Group — 701 Black Cat Road:
Item 12: FP 06-005 Request for Final Plat approval of 24 residential building lots
and 4 common lots on 5.10 acres in an R-8 zone for Windwalker
Subdivision by Beckit Development — 2770 South Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you, Doug. Okay. Item No. 10 was tabled -- Anna, I
guess if you have received letters on Items 10, 11 and 12, 1 believe they are all in
concurrence with staff comments?
Canning: Yes, ma'am, they are.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, Items 10, 11, and 12 are all in agreement with the staff
comments. I would entertain a motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the final plats for Items 10, 11 and 12.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve 10, 11, and 12. Is there any discussion? Mr.
Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CPA 05-004
Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the text and
future land use map of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan for the North
Meridian Area and tp expand the area of city impact boundary:
De Weerd: Okay. On Item No. 13, as Mr. Rountree makes his way out of the
chambers.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, thank you. I need to recuse myself on both 13 and 14.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 11 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and open the Public Hearing that was continued from
February 7th on Item CPA 05-004 and we did continue it for specific items and I will ask
Anna to, please, give an overview.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the North Meridian
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It's located north of Ustick Road and generally south
of the Phyllis Canal and from approximately a half mile west of Eagle Road, continuing
west to the county line. I am going to give a brief overview of what Council has already
made decisions on in past hearings and those key issues of discussion thus far were
the southeast comer of McDermott Road and West Chinden Boulevard. The future
location of and planning for the State Highway 16 corridor. The increased mixed use
area at the future State Highway 16 Ustick interchange to accommodate an off ramp.
The regional cooperation commitments regarding State Highway 16. The Compass
letter addressing interchange areas, travel speeds on Chinden, and signal spacing. The
interest of the property owners north of the Phyllis Canal to be included in the plan and
there were two in favor, one opposed. Noting schools in the area west of McDermott.
You did not adjust the boundaries of the sewer treatment plant area to allow residential
development. You discussed the northwest comer of Chinden and Linder. There was
concerns from a property owner north of the mixed use area. Likewise, the southeast
comer of Chinden and Linder was -- there was a letter in general support of the mixed
use designation. You discussed mixed use community designation adjoining Champion
Park to reflect approved uses. You looked at the text regarding arterial planning in
north Meridian to include discussion of the significance of Eagle Road. Also a text
amendment regarding public transportation. And to update the Comprehensive Plan list
-- again, this is text for arterials, collectors, and road projects. And, then, you did not
change the northwest comer of Ten Mile and Chinden to commercial or mixed use.
And, then, there was continued concern for property owners along McDermott Road.
The outstanding issue for City Council was the question about changing the designation
from residential to mixed use at the comer of -- the north comers of Linder and Ustick.
Because it was a substantial change from the draft approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, we did send it out -- we sent out notices and re -advertised this
hearing. The city has received one letter from the property owners south of Ustick
regarding their desire and a little bit of their confusion as to why they weren't included in
the change of the land use designation. That was Council's motion the other night and
as was noted previously, the project really begins on the north side of Ustick. Staff also
received several telephone inquiries regarding the proposed land use designation
change. Two homeowners in the area were generally opposed to the mixed use
designation. The developer's representative for Windsong inquired about the change in
designation, but didn't really comment on it one way or the other. And, then, we have
also spoken with the site designer for the northeast comer property that's seeking Ahe
land use change. You do have Findings for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
approval. Please note if you do make a motion for approval tonight, it needs to include
direction to legal staff to prepare a resolution adopting the amendment. And with that I
will answer any questions you may have.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 12 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Anna?
Bird: I don't, Mayor, at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary, I guess we did open it -- keep it open for any final
comments. So, what is -- what is the protocol?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't recall -- I didn't pull the minutes
up on whether or not you limited it to only the area that you re -advertised in relation to.
Obviously, you have heard a tremendous amount of testimony. You could certainly ask
if there was anything other than what you have already heard, rather than to re -hear the
same testimony. But I didn't pull up the minutes, I'm song; to see if you limited it at the
outset, but you can limit it to new information regarding the areas that you have re -
advertised for, since that was the intent of why this was set over.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to provide public
testimony on the Comp Plan amendment that is in front of us tonight? Please come
forward, sir. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Whiting: Sure. My name is Ron Whiting. I live at 3097 North Blue Springs in Tumble
Creek Subdivision, kind of diagonally southwest across Ustick Road from the proposed
changes. In particular the southwest comer of the proposed change. I have some
concerns. My first concern is I didn't receive notification. I got a notice from a neighbor
across the street, who received one about ten days ago, I think, and he told me about it,
otherwise, I wouldn't have known anything. So, I was a little bit unhappy that there
weren't more existing single family residents notified in advance of this hearing. But I
have some additional comments that I hope that you are willing to consider. I have a
neighbor diagonally across the street to the northeast -- actually, very -- about the
closest existing single family residence to the south -- the far southwesterly comer of
the proposed change and he already has his home up for sale. He has a beautiful, big
two story home, about 2,600 square feet, and which he and his wife helped to design
themselves and now they are thinking that if this proposed change is approved, that
their life is not going to be the same for them there and, therefore, they are attempting
to sell their home and they are going to -- they want to move to a subdivision farther
removed from this proposed change. And I have some concerns as well. I live
diagonally across the street to the southwest from my neighbor who has his property
already up for sale and I'm thinking what the single family -- existing single family
residences and the residents will -- how that will affect our -- our existing way of life if
those changes are approved. I don't consider it to be a positive thing and possibly
might be quite negative, I don't know. I'm also wondering why the developer of
Windsong Subdivision, which has p1ready been platted, I understand, for some time and
not a single improvement has been made on that -- within that subdivision on the
ground. I mean not a single residence has been built. There are roads and other public
infrastructure, but not a single building has been erected and a neighbor that I know
very well that lives in the southeast comer of the -- I have to think of the name of the
subdivision. It's on the north side of Ustick. It's -- can someone help me? What's
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 13 of 60
across the street from Ustick where the new church is there on the north side of the
street?
De Weerd: Bridgetower.
Whiting: Bridgetower. Thank you. Yeah. He lives in the southeasterly comer, the
most -- probably the most southeasterly corner of that subdivision and he told me that
he had contacted the owner of Windsong -- this is hearsay, but he said he contacted the
owner and tried to buy a lot, most likely adjacent to his lot, and he was told that he
couldn't buy a lot, but he could buy the whole subdivision, but nothing less. So, whether
that is true or not I do not know. So, I have no idea what's going on there. But I do
know that some of my other neighbors that live nearby me -- I don't know if they are
here tonight, I did not see them when I came in and I'm sitting in the front, so I haven't
scanned the group behind me to see if some of them are here, but I know that there are
others that feel much as I feel, that -- first of all, most of us didn't receive notification of
the hearing tonight and -- nor have they in the past, as well as I have not. And I really
need a little more time to evaluate how this might affect the value of my property and
the quality of life for me there and I think others are concerned as well. I happen to
have met the owners of some of the property that's requested this change. I consider
them to be very nice people. I have nothing personal in this -- in my attempt to have
this either disapproved or continued, so we can have more time to consider it. And I
request that you do that for us and for me and those that I know that live nearby me.
And I thank you for your time, Mayor de Weerd and fellow Councilmembers, and fellow
associates in the city government and thank you for your time and consideration.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Whiting: Any questions?
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Thank you. Is there -- sir. If you will, please, state
your name and address for the record.
Gritzmacher: My name is Tom Gritzmacher. G -r -i -t -z -m -a -c -h -e -r. It took me until third
grade to learn how to spell that. I thought I would help you guys along.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Gritzmacher: I live at 2344 West Pebblestone in Meridian. 83642. 1 live in Tumble
Creek Subdivision. I'm here tonight as an official capacity. I'm the vice-president of
Tumble Creek Homeowners Association. We are very concerned about this particular
project going in, basically, on three reasons. First of all, as all of you are probably
aware, that intersection is quite congested already and even though ACHD has
proposed to widen it, hopefully, in 2008, that will alleviate the immediate stopping and
going in the intersection, but, of course, Linder and Ustick will not be widened for the
foreseeable future. We don't have a date on that. And so what we see is a situation
where this has been zoned residential and now we want to have mixed use, which
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 14 of 60
means we are going to have commercial in the area as we understand it. We don't
know exactly what kind of commercial, because one thing can be proposed that
possibly can change at a later date. The second concern we have is already along the
Ustick corridor at the half miles between Meridian and Linder and, then, between Linder
and Ten Mile, there is already commercial development and that goes with the
Comprehensive Plan as we understand it and now the plan is going to be changed and
it's like, well, okay, now we are going to do another commercial development in between
that, which, of course, impacts our subdivision. Another area we are concerned about
is the number of children that frequent the area. We have a situation where we have a
park south of the intersection. We have a middle school north of the intersection. And
we don't have a sidewalk yet to connect it and according to the ACHD plan, which we
were able to look at last week, we still won't have a sidewalk to connect it in 2008.
There will be a temporary sidewalk from the intersection north to the school, but the
sidewalk as currently planned will stop to the south just passed the Palmer property,
which is south of this comer and not pick up again until you have got -- you come into
Tumble Creek. And so the children will be having difficulty there, but you're -- what
you're trying to do is put more traffic into an already congested situation by allowing
commercial development in there. The third thing that I'm concerned about is that we
would like to -- and we have been thinking about some way to buffer the intersection as
it sits now with noise and that by using trees and so on. Landscaping. We do have a
problem because part of our boundary line runs along a gravel path that is -- has
several easements on -- by various people on Five Mile Creek, but if we -- if this
commercial development is allowed, we have to figure out a way to do this to try to
barricade -- or to modify that impact. I'm not sure I can do that. I'm a horticulturist by
trade with 30 years experience and this is something that plants may not be able to do.
So, our subdivision is not terribly excited about this and we'd like you folks to think
deeply about this before you commit to possibly allowing this to occur. Thank you very
much. Any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions, Council? Thank you. Anna, I think before
we have any additional testimony, if you can, please, just talk a few minutes about the
difference between a Comprehensive Plan and annexation and zoning. I think at that
point -- at this point just a little bit further information on what we are here tonight
looking at versus what public noticing and future applications and the differences
between the two.
Canning: Yes, Ma'am, Members of the Council. What we are considering tonight are
land use designations. The Comprehensive Plan -- they are on the Comprehensive
Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is the vision document for the City of Meridian that
guides growth and development. So, it does not specifically entitle anyone to any
additional rights as to what they currently own, but what it would do in this case, it wolald
allow our developer to come in and request a mixed use project. So, it would allow
someone to come in and request either a mix of office or retail or residential. It's not
shown as straight commercial, it is shown as mixed use. So, that would be -- if they
turned in an application, we would notify everyone within 300 feet of that request to
change the zoning on their property and to be annexed into the city. All that -- both
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 15 of 60
these properties are currently not in the city limits, so they would have to request the
annexation and request zoning along with that annexation at some future date. And if I
could take just a second to explain the noticing. When we renoticed this change in this
-- these two areas, what we did do is we notified everyone within 300 feet, similar to
what we would do with a development application, and we also renoticed in the paper,
similar to what we would do for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. So, Tumble Creek,
I believe, is here, so they are a ways away, would not have received direct notice.
De Weerd: Tumble Creek is actually on the southwest comer --
Canning: South -- oh, over here. Okay. So, some of these property owners received
notice, but not -- certainly not everyone within the subdivision.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any additional -- please come forward.
Ewing: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Tuck Ewing, 1500 EI Dorado, Boise. I
just had a quick clarification note with staff. I believe I understood that the boundary of
this annex -- or not annexation, but impact area is going to be somewhere in the vicinity
south of the Pyllis Canal and it was our understanding that that boundary was, actually,
going to be the center line of the Phyllis Canal, so I just needed some clarification on
exactly where that impact area boundary area was going to be and that's probably
directed more at staff.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it is the center line of the Phyllis
Canal. South of the center line of the Phyllis Canal there. South of the center line of
the Phyllis Canal.
Ewing: South of the center line of the --
Canning: It's the center line.
Ewing: It's the center line of the Phyllis Canal. Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony? Yes, ma'am.
Rath: Hi.
De Weerd: Hi.
Rath: My name is Joan Rath, R -a -t -h, and I live at 631 Lawndale Drive in Meridian, but
I'm here representing the northwest comer of Ustick and Linder Road and my interest in
that is I am the personal representative for my parents' estate, who owned that comer.
It's interesting; I can sympathize with the gentleman that talked about no notice. Back
when -- my parents have owned that since 1960 and their discussions with, obviously,
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 16 of 60
much earlier city councils and planners, was that that area would always be
commercial. Those corners would always be that. We are talking about, you know,
sometime back. During the time when you guys came up with your Comprehensive
Plan, unfortunately, my parents were very very ill and we didn't receive any kind of
notice. They didn't receive any notice. We were very surprised to find out after my
mother passed away in '99, my father passed away three and a half years ago; we were
very surprised to find that we were residential in your Comprehensive Plan. That upset
us, obviously, and what my concern is is that in the three and a half years that my father
has been gone, I have made numerous, numerous attempts to rent the property, rent
the house that sits there. I get tons of people that are interested, they love the house,
and, then, they come outside to talk to me about it and, then, they notice the traffic and
the noise and, then, they say, well, is it always like this and, unfortunately, it's usually
worse. And they won't rent it. I've had some pretty bad renters just getting kind of
desperate and, finally, don't rent it at all. I spoke last time and my point at that time was
that to keep that comer residential, it severely limits me to be able to sell that property,
because nobody -- nobody wants to live on that comer. Not as a residential. For that to
be anything other than commercial just does not make sense. I really, I guess, can't
reiterate enough the neighborhood plan -- I kind of live where -- on Cherry Lane. There
is a Jackson's and it's kind of like one of those neighborhood plans, they just simply
don't work. You can go to Jacksons anytime, pull in, and you can get gas, you can go
in, whatever. You go down the street to Maverick at the comer of Cherry Lane and
Linder and it is so busy down there it is just unreal. So, that's what everybody does is
flock to the comers. They are already at the stop sign, they go to the comers, and I
guess it just doesn't make sense for the neighborhood plan. I guess that's about all I
have to say, if you have any questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rath: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any additional public testimony?
Benkin: I'm Gary Benkin. I reside at 3390 East Allingmill Court in Boise. I happen to be
the listing agent for the subject property on the northwest comer. The only comment I
have tonight, after marketing that property for seven months, is that the only inquiries
that I have received were from commercial developers, not residential developers. The
other calls I received were from individuals who wanted to move the house from that
location. And so that's been seven months that I have been experiencing that. That's
my only comment.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Yes, sir. You
can use the pointer. If you will restate your name just for the record.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 17 of 60
Whiting: Okay. I'm -- once again, I'm Ron Whiting. I live at 3097 North Blue Springs in
Tumble Creek Subdivision in Meridian. And I don't know how to use that pointer. Is it
still here?
De Weerd: It should be on the little chain there.
Whiting: This one?
De Weerd: No. It's on the --
Whiting: I live in this home right here. And a few of these on this comer -- I don't know
how many, the planning people can tell you, but I'm guessing there were -- those within
300 feet, there is probably about three to five homes that are -- that fall into that
category that would have been required to have been noticed according to the 300 foot
rule. And I think that the 300 foot rule is just a little bit sparse, in my estimation, in terms
of the impact.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Okay. Council, you do have in front of you a summary of
the number of changes that are in front of you for your consideration.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I certainly appreciate all the public testimony and the opportunity to comment
on the specific item that we addressed last time. In my opinion -- and, Anna, let me just
clarify. We have moved through all of the earlier 16 items. You have resolution on the
record for those?
Canning: Yes, sir, we do. And those issues have all been incorporated into the
Findings already, including the change in this map.
Wardle: Okay. Given that, I stand on my earlier discussion about the validity and the
reasonableness of mixed use development on the comer -- on the north comer of
Linder and Ustick and ask if there are any other comments from the Council?
De Weerd: Council, any further information needed while the Public Hearing is open?
Okay.
Wardle: With that, Madam Mayor, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item 1,3,
CPA 05-004.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council a
March 7, 2006
Page 18 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on this item. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just a quick recollection. This has been my first Comprehensive Plan
amendment. I'd like to thank all of the interested parties that have given us input on the
vision that these see for this community and feel that it has been a worthwhile public
input process, both from those interested in the community and, certainly, those
affected property owners. And so I'd just like to at this time thank everyone for their
input. And if there are no other comments, Madam Mayor, I would move that we
approve Item 13, CPA 05-004 and to approve Findings.
Bird: And have a resolution drawn?
Wardle: And have a resolution brought forward by Council.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve incorporating the changes that have been
discussed. Do we have any discussion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I'd just like to say that with regard to the Comprehensive Plan amendment and
for the record that I think the plan is consistent with the other elements and that this
modification is consistent with the other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, that it
does provide an improved guide for future growth and development of the City of
Meridian. I think this amendment is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the existing Comprehensive Plan. I believe it's consistent with the Unified
Development Code and, most importantly, it's in the best interest of the City of Meridian.
De Weerd: Any further discussion?,
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Council, I guess I would also like to thank staff. This process began a long
time ago. I think Councilwoman McCandless was on this Council when we first started
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 19 of 60
the North Meridian Planning Area. So, we have had hundreds of people provide input,
certainly just to make a comment, and it's a comment I made at our last meeting, in
specific to what we have renoticed for tonight. I, too, am concerned about the retail
nature of these -- this comer, but with the mixed use, as I stated last meeting, I would
hope any applications that would come forward for public noticing and comment, take
into account that congested comer and the interconnectivity that will be necessary to
assure the safety of the kids that will be walking in that area. So, I would hope that the
development community that considers development in that area takes that serious and
works directly with our transportation agencies, with the surrounding property owners, to
make sure that that goal -- because that's one thing that this Council takes very serious
is the public safety element and the safety of the kids that will be in and around that
area. So, with that said, thank you, staff, I know that this has been quite a process and
this is more detailed in our comprehensive planning efforts than the city certainly is
required to be, but you have taken it a step beyond and I appreciate that. So does this
Council. Thank you, Steve. If there is no further discussion --
Bird: Question.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 14: Continued Public Hearing from February 21, 2006: VAR 05-027
Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3.1-1 requirements for access to State
Highway 69 for Meridian Gatewa by White -Leasure Development
Company — 1601 South Meridian Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 14. Continue Public Hearing on VAR 05-027. 1 will open this
Public Hearing with staff comments and also, for the record, note that Councilman
Rountree has recused himself on this item as well.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Meridian Gateway Project.
It's located on the southwest comer of Meridian and Overland. As you can see, it's
already annexed and zoned for C -G. This application is just for a variance. I'm
speaking slowly, since people are moving. The highlights of this are they are requesting
two new -- I will go through the aerial first. Southern Springs is just across the street to
the east. The applicant is requesting two new approaches to Meridian Road, which is
State Highway 69, including one right -in, right -out and one full. Did I get that right?
Yeah. The first one is right -in, right -,out, and the second one is full access. Just to gi\4e
a brief history of future -- or past -- past discussions about this project. In December of
2005 ITD submitted a response to this request for access and the staff did indicate that
the two proposed access points do not meet district policies and also in December of
2005 ITD's executive committee conditionally approved the locations, contingent on
obtaining a variance to our code. There is also a development agreement on this
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 20 of 60
property with the City of Meridian and White -Leasure Development and that was
recorded in August of '05. And that development agreement includes two sections that
specifically address access to Meridian Road or State Highway 69. One of those is
paragraph 1.7 and it specifically says the Idaho Transportation Department, ITD, has a
policy for access to a type four principal arterial, which will be at intersections only and
spaced at one half mile intervals in the urban areas. ITD allows approaches other than
intersections in special cases and on a temporary basis. Staff finds that the proposed
access points to Kuna-Meridian Road, State Highway 69, and Overland Road, shall be
subject to the location requirement of ITD and ACHD respectively. In compliance with
the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, no curb cuts shall be allowed on Kuna-Meridian
Road, State Highway 69. In paragraph 5D.2 of the development agreement it states
that any future uses shall obtain conditional approval subject to the conditions of ACHD
and ITD. It also goes on to say that ITD's policy strongly discourages direct access to
Meridian Road and/or arterials. The applicant was given the ITD policy on December
1 st, 2004, by Mr. Dan Coonce and that stated that the access to the development could
be developed off of Overland Road and not off of State Highway 69. This section of
State Highway 69 has been designated a principal arterial type four. ITD would like the
City of Meridian to help us preserve this corridor. There are several findings required
for a variance and staff, in reading the applicant's justification for this request, does not
feel that any of those findings could be made. The fact that the applicant began the
process of securing access to Meridian Road before the UDC text was adopted is not
relevant. They were not granted with any specific right with their annexation. They did
not have a development plan approved at that time. The applicant also claims that
because of physical constraints on the site, that they will not be able to create a
frontage road as required by the ITD letters. They always talk about a frontage road. In
this case what staff has determined is when we have commercial areas like this, we get
the equivalent of a frontage road by requiring cross -access across all the properties and
we continue to do that, so that there is an interconnected street system, so that folks
don't -- if they are going to a dentist in this property, don't have to cross -- or get onto
the arterial to go pick up a gallon of milk at the Jackson's over in this one. Or the
Maverick, because the gas is cheaper at Maverick. So, that type of frontage road is
really not a concern. We can achieve that through cross -access connections. The
other -- the other thing I'd like to talk about is that we typically hear this argument that to
support retail development of this property we need these access points that traffic
won't flow appropriately to serve that retail use. And I guess I would encourage the
Council to think of this differently and this is perhaps a planner's perspective, but what
planners are trained to do is look at the constraints on the site. One of the constraints is
that you don't have access to this property. Another constraint is that you have severe
topographic considerations here that limit sight distance and given those constraints
and the size and configuration and location of this property, then, perhaps the high retail
use is not appropriate. You just can't safely get people in and out of this property with
those constraints. I mentioned a couple of those. I think both the police department
and the fire department have been talking to me prior to the hearing about their
concerns, again, with this hill and the site distance pulling into this property and being
able to -- there is a barrier here that would prevent access from the fire department to
this property. And the traffic flows along here will make it difficult, but -- access difficult
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 21 of 60
as well. So, staff has some real concerns whether a variance is warranted here, just
based on the parcel itself. And, then, also whether, really, a retail use is appropriate in
this location. There are a number of uses allowed within C -G, retail is just one of them,
and given the site constraints, this may not be an appropriate retail site. With that I'll
ask if the police department or fire department have any -- fire department left. I'm
song.
Trakel: Madam Mayor, Council, I discussed this prior to coming to this meeting with
Chief Musser. His primary concern involves the southwest entrance -exit to this
proposal in reference to the hill that starts right from there and obstructs the vision. Due
to the flow of traffic is already substantial in this area; we do see that as a definite safety
issue for the motoring public and citizens of Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you, Lieutenant.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, to conclude, you do have findings for
denial of the variance. If the Council wishes to deny the project tonight, the motion
should include directing the legal staff to prepare an order for denial.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff?
Bird: Not at this time.
De Weerd: Is the applicant here this evening? If you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Huber: Madam Mayor, my name is Jeff Huber. I'm the vice-president of White -Leasure
Development Company. I represent the applicant. My street address is 416 South 8th
Street, Suite 200, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Huber: Anna, could you, please, put up the — Anna?
Canning: I hear you. It will take me a minute.
Huber: Okay. We are going to put an aerial of here for the Council, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay.
Huber: Again, this is our site here. This is the north -south corridor, Meridian Road, and
the east -west, Overland Road. There is a subdivision that's fully built out to the south
on this side and on the west side is the business and residence and- there is a -- quite a
grade change between these properties on this -- on the property line here. We have
started working with Mr. Howell back in -- oh, year 2000, to see if there was some way
that we could convince him to let us take over his property and develop it, bring it into
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 22 of 60
the city. He was somewhat skeptical of getting annexed into the city, because of the
uses he had on the property he had at that time and wanted to make certain that if we
did start the process and we went forward, that it would be -- that we would go forward
and develop his property, because his retirement depended on it. There was also
another issue on his property of some contamination in this area here where the tanks
had been overfilled over the years and some gasoline had seeped into the ground. We
negotiated with Mr. Howell for almost four years. We finally reached an agreement with
him in 2003 that we would take over -- take on the issue of the contamination and go
forward with the development of his property. We spoke with some tenants and we
came to the city in 2004 -- in October of 2004 with a staff meeting and we applied for an
annexation at that time. At that meeting I was asked to provide a conceptual site plan
and that site plan was part of the application and I will get to that in a moment. Could
you, please, put up the topo, Anna? This currently is the property as it looks today, with
the gas station here, convenience store. There is a farmer's market in this area. There
has been Christmas tree sales in this area here. The black lines indicate all the current
accesses that are existing today. Two of the accesses on Meridian Road are permitted
by ACHD, lawfully permitted today. The other three accesses have been there for
decades. They are grandfathered in. All the accesses on Overland Road have been
used for decades and are grandfathered in. You can notice that these are topo lines
here, the grade change between the properties. Can we put up the figure three, Anna,
please? This was the application -- this was the site plan that accompanied the
application for annexation. We discussed this application -- this particular plan with
staff. We envisioned -- always envisioned this as a grocery store type. It's a rather
small size, not a big -- large shopping center, but what we would call a neighborhood
shopping center. We worked with a tenant and we have formulated this plan based
upon their tenant needs. At the -- at the hearing that I had for annexation, I spoke to the
Council and addressed them and told them that I was working with ITD for these access
points, based upon this particular plan. At no time during that hearing did anyone
inform me that I might need to come back for a variance or there didn't seem to be any
objection to me working with ITD to obtain those accesses. As noted in -- I received a
letter from ITD on July 12th, stating that they would be in favor of these accesses. We
finalized our development agreement with the city in August 2005. Then, I received a
letter from ITD in September stating that -- that ITD had ceased processing the
application, because of the City of Meridian's Article H, but Article H wasn't in effect at
that time, which we had, and, then, I received a letter from ITD stating that they had
approved the accesses and to come down and pick up the permits. Then, I received on
September 21 st another letter stating that those permits had been issued in error and,
again, were directed to me with staff and Mr. Kevin Sablan at ITD, which we did. After
meeting with Mr. Sablan we received another letter from him stating -- on December
15th of 2005, that ITD is agreeable to allowing one full term -- interim access point to be
located toward the south end of your property and one right into the north. We had
we had requested that we have a right -in, right -out, and they were in favor of a right -in
only, because our permits that we held were for a right -in only. So, in order for us to get
a right -in, right -out, they asked us to do a traffic study. We had had Kittleson and
Associates do a traffic study and we presented those findings to ITD and after they
reviewed that traffic study, they wrote us another letter stating that upon approval of a
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 23 of 60
variance from the City of Meridian, ITD would recommend approval to the executive
committee, because the traffic study supports those -- that right -in, right -out, and the full
service access on Meridian Road. Anna, could we put up figure five? There. That's
good. This is the current plan that we have formulated, because we have a tenant for
this corner. It's a Walgreens pharmacy. We are going to be coming in for a conditional
use on this on March 15th. We will be applying for a conditional use. I have already
had a pre -application meeting with the staff. They have -- these two access points are
critical to this project moving forward. All the traffic coming on Overland Road headed
east is going to be accessing the freeway. They may access the center through this full
access here or right -in, right -out. The majority of the traffic going home in the evening is
going to be traveling south on Meridian Road and that's when people shop. This is what
we call the hundred percent location, because it's the going home side of the road.
They will be coming down and we will be able to come in with a right -in and a right -out
back onto the road. Or they will be able to come down here and go into the center and
do business down in this area and continue on. So, it makes a lot of sense not to have
all this traffic being run through this one access point here. There was some talk from
staff about this access being a concern. ACHD is going to be lowering this road when
they do their improvements in 2007. This plan is exactly what they are going to do
there. That's the final plan. The stacking lane for the left turns that are northbound onto
Meridian Road comes all the way back to this point. That leaves very little room for us
to stack a lot of cars here and if all the traffic accessing this particular development had
to go through this one access point, it would back out and block this one lane traveling
through here. So, to alleviate the congestion that might occur at this intersection, it only
makes sense to have these two access points. It helps with the circulation of the site
tremendously. There are a lot of other improvements that are in the pipeline that are
going to -- that ACHD has that are going to also alleviate some of the traffic congestion
at this particular intersection. They have got the Ten Mile interchange, the Locust
Grove overpass and the Linder overpass, as well as the widening of Overland Road.
So, we see that bringing congestion off of this intersection. Also, the -- all the
residential development to the west and to the south, we see this center providing
services that they would otherwise have to cross the highway to get to and that is going
to relieve traffic congestion in the parts -- in other intersections in the city. We think that
there is a strong need for commercial development on this side of the highway. Could
you put up figures 5A, please, Anna. This is the plan that Walgreens has approved for
this comer. Again, their store is right here. They have a road -- access road coming up
this way and also one coming up this way. These -- when we plat this project, there will
be probably five lots in this subdivision and if it -- we are, actually, limiting the access to
those five lots by only having two here and two access points here. So, there is quite a
reduction and we take out -- there are currently five accesses along here. So, we are
reducing that -- we are limiting the access to the road and having feeder roads feed
these other businesses inside here., This is all retail space here and here. These are
two pads that we envision here in future. We will be coming in for conditional uses on
those in the future. Could you put up figure six, Anna? These are two excerpts from
recent letters. One is from Mr. Dan Coonce and I believe Anna referred to a letter of
that he had written and was included in our annexation packet in 2004. And he is now -
- he was the traffic -- district traffic engineer for ITD. He works for the Transpo Group
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 24 of 60
now. And I just wanted to read you these excerpts from his letter. It's says the City of
Meridian requirement's intent is to provide a collector or some type of connectivity to the
half mile on Meridian Road. I would agree with these principals where connectivity can
be accomplished. Connectivity to the south cannot occur due to the development to the
south has already developed without the potential of connectivity. Further, access only
on Overland Road would be a safety hazard as the traffic impact analysis states. My
recommendation would be to allow the accesses on Meridian Road to alleviate
congestion concerns and potential accidents on Overland Road. Now, we have another
excerpt from the district traffic engineer on a letter that I received on February 7th from
Kevin Sablan and he states that we have reviewed your transportation impact study
from Kittleson and Associates. Upon receipt of a variance from the City of Meridian, the
district will recommend approval to the executive committee. That's a recommendation
from ITD. Article H gives you the power to modify -- make modifications to Article H
upon a recommendation from ITD and this is what they are recommending. I would
stand for any questions and following any further public testimony, Mr. Leasure may
want to address the Council also.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none at this point, Mayor.
De Weerd: I guess I would have just a question as -- have you worked with the property
owner to your west to look at connectivity and cross -access and how you can gain a
better traffic flow? That is a very congested comer and it does -- it needs some
extraordinary measures in making sure that you don't add to it.
Huber: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'd like to defer that question Mr.
Leasure when he speaks.
De Weerd: Okay.
Huber: If I may.
De Weerd: Okay.
Huber: But I would be happy to answer any others.
De Weerd: Council, any others?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Huber: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 25 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
testimony on this application? Please state your name and address for the record.
Prather: Of course. James Prather. 707 East United Heritage Parkway, Suite 150,
Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Prather: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmen, City Attorney. To just answer the
question you just asked the applicant -- first of all, let me back up. I am the property
owner, my family and I. The applicant's property -- there is a five acre piece just
abutting it to the east — to the west. Correct. And my family and I own from the red dot
all the way to Stoddard, about 27 and a half acres, roughly. To answer your question,
has White -Leasure come to us and the answer is yes. I cannot speak for Bruce Cool. I
know they had had some dialogue, but I won't represent Bruce Cool here. It is our
belief -- and I don't want to mix issues here, but we have had ongoing dialogue the last
six months -- six to eight months in bringing three property owners together, the
applicant, Bruce Cool, and myself, to entertain -- and we are further along than just
entertaining now. We believe we have entered some ongoing favorable dialogue with a
hard, good user, that would require not only the comer, but substantially more, and in
doing so we believe we are meeting the needs of the neighborhood, because we live in
this neighborhood and I'd love to not have to cross over the freeway for any type of soft
goods and hard good items. And in doing so, if there is no exit -- ingress -egress off
Meridian and with the Council's blessings, if we are able to do something on the majority
of this property in a retail center, we are going to need -- you talk about cross-over, I
would be more than happy to participate in that, but in doing so, we are going to
overburden Overland and it's already overburdened. Even with the widening of
Overland, we are still spacing -- especially when the water park gets that Five after 5:00
program going three months a year, you're correct, Madam Mayor, that is a very busy
intersection, which I believe, along with the applicant, supports the fact that we will
cross over, no doubt about it, but we need a way to get out on Meridian and the ingress -
egress most southerly is paramount, in my opinion. Again, I don't want to mix these,
but, in my opinion, that's paramount that we have that to develop this out. It is
commercial, we do need something there. Anna was correct, I mean there are several
different uses in commercial, but we feel this property cries out that it's the property that
needs to be developed in this manner. So, with that I ask you to approve this item.
Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony on this application? Okay.
Sir, if you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Leasure: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Larry Leasure, chairman
of White -Leasure Development Company and the applicant and -- for this project. We,
obviously, appreciate your consideration in this variance, because I think probably two
things -- that I appreciate the comments made prior to me here, because this particular
site, I think it would be very difficult if you had any planner or others that were in the
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 26 of 60
retail development business, not indicate to you that this is probably one of the
hundredth percent locations, certainly in the City of Meridian, for a retail development.
The other thing I would just hope that I could share with you -- this site is not a small
site. This is approximately eight acres in size. If this were a one or two acre comer
parcel, I can appreciate the concerns and the comments that have been made,
especially by staff, but I think that this -- certainly this particular location and certainly
the potential expansion of that site, and being the going home site, as was indicated
earlier, certainly is a -- what we would call a very prime retail location for retail in this
site. Secondly, it's been mentioned that there is nothing south. There will be something
south. If this is turned down, I assure you that south there will be retail. There will be
retail in other locations, because there is certainly a need and we know what's
happening there in the growth and the growth pattern. We, at the present time, do -- we
have been involved in the property for in excess of six years, but because of
contamination on this site, which is now under control, is that we were not able to move
forward on that comer. As Jeff indicated, we do have a letter of commitment from
Walgreen drug that would like to be on this site, but as I think also you can appreciate,
with them being in this location is that number one the majority of the traffic flow -- and
you know the counts as well as I. The traffic flow is in this direction, not in this direction.
And so for them -- for the person that's coming to shop in this eight acre parcel -- and,
once again, it just isn't on the comer, we are talking eight acres here, there is this -- the
customer would have to come in -- come in -- come into the site here and as Jeff
indicated, ACHD has redesigned this hill and they also are concerned about visibility, as
we are, and traffic flow coming here, but what that would mean, you would come in
here, you would come to the eight acre site, you would come back out -- I'm song, do I
have another minute?
De Weerd: If you will, please, summarize.
Leasure: I will do so.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Leasure: Exit and come here. What, once again, we are requesting is a right -in, right -
out here in this location and full access. What ITD has indicated full access today, but
in the future, if it's needed to be closed, that it, then, becomes a right -in, right -out. And
that is acceptable to us. This access point, which is literally across the street from the
existing project that you have approved, the Mitchner site, those two would line up --
that access point would line up with the project adjacent and across the street. The
traffic study that Kittleson has provided and ITD has agreed, as has ACHD agreed, that
for the development of the property these access points make good sense for the long
term of the site and that we would hppe that you would give consideration to that thisi
evening. Any questions?
De Weerd: Council?
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 27 of 60
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any additional testimony? Okay.
Any final comments by the applicant's representative?
Huber: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I appreciate your time again.
De Weerd: If you will just restate your name.
Huber: Jeff Huber.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Huber: Thank you. Just in answer to your question, Madam Mayor, we didn't mean to
overlook that, but we have had discussions with Mr. Cool about the future use and
future connections. There is an extreme grade change there, but at some point in the
future when that develops, we will see what it develops into and we -- I'm sure that the
condition placed on our plat when we come in for a subdivision, will require that if it's
possible a future connection would be made to the property to the west. But, again, as I
have stated, those -- and Mr. Leasure has emphasized, it makes a lot of sense to have
those two accesses on Meridian Road. When we annexed in, again, I will state that we
had that site plan before this Council and the property was annexed -- or was annexed
into the City of Meridian as commercial and it was always our plan and was our thought
that the city would support commercial on this comer and it's a very good spot for it.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Huber: Any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. No.
Huber: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything additional from staff?
Canning: Madam Mayor, there was a comment made that there is no access to the
residential. I would like to point out that there is a stub street just right about at the half
-- or the quarter mile mark that does give access to the residential neighborhood to the
south. I'd also like to comment on the statement that was made regarding there was no
mention of any concerns about access to Highway 69 when the project was annexed
and we had numerous discussions about the topic and it was brought up at City Council
and that's why those two provisions are in the development agreement that specifically,
talk about that.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Council?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 28 of 60
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I have a question for Mr. Nary. On the variance application it asks for two
different points of access. Are those or can those be taken up separately or decided
upon separately or do you grant or not grant the whole package?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you have been asked for --
Councilmember Borton, you have been asked for a variance for, essentially, two points
of access along Meridian-Kuna Highway. You could certainly -- if the Council's wish is
to consider one separately, you can certainly do it that way. You don't have to do them
as a package, you can certainly do them separately if you would like.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Nary: You still have to make the findings individually if you do it that way.
De Weerd: Council, any other information needed on this application? Okay. Would
you like to close the Public Hearing? Or have discussion first?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just after Councilman Borton's clarification from the attorney, my question is
whether we would like to discuss these separately or just take them up as the
application states?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's your call.
Wardle: I'm not asking you.
Nary: Oh. You said attorney.
Wardle: Okay. That attorney.
Nary: Okay. Sorry.
Wardle: After clarification from --
Nary: Got you. I
De Weerd: Council, any comments? Okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 29 of 60
De Weerd: Your guess is as good as mine, Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I'll kick it off with a comment. After hearing testimony from -- on this
application, I can -- I understand the very difficult nature of needing a variance and the
findings are fairly specific, but I -- it seems to make sense to me that from a commercial
development point of view, which is what we have this zoned, that at least some access
to Highway 69 seems to be appropriate to me. So, whether that's one or two is really
the question in my mind.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: My viewpoint is I have no problem with the two accesses, but I do have a problem
with the second one being a cross -access. I would feel much more comfortable if both
of them were right -in and right -out only at that location. But sometimes when things
come in after the fact, you don't always get what you want. But I would prefer to -- I
think the development goes with either -- I would prefer to judge on both of them, not
one at a time, myself.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Despite my earlier question, I tend to agree with Councilman Bird, that they
should be taken together and discussed and decided together. To the extent there is
any extraordinary hardship or isn't, I don't think that varies if you move a few hundred
feet on this particular parcel. My question was merely to know if we had the option to
do that, so --
Bird: And I appreciate that.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Can I ask a question of the applicant? I should have earlier, but I didn't. I will
bring you back up. You had mentioned your discussions with Mr. Cool to the west. I
don't know if you can answer this, but in the perfect world, if that parcel was involved in
the development, do you think this request would be here and it would be designed with
a different frontage road and this Meridian Road access wouldn't be necessary?
Huber: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Borton, I think we would still be here asking for
these accesses on Meridian Road, even with a connection to Mr. Cool's property.
Because the basic fact that Mr. Leasure pointed out, most of this traffic is headed south
in the evenings when everyone shops and this only adds to the ease of traffic to get in
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 30 of 60
and out of this center. Again, taking everybody through that -- onto Overland Road and
into one access point is just going to cause more problems and, then, put pressure on
the intersection again when they come out. This gets them passed that intersection,
gets them into the center, they can do their shopping and, then, they can get on their
way home without having to go through another intersection. So, I believe we would still
be here asking for this variance.
Borton: Okay.
Huber: Does that answer your question?
Borton: It does.
Huber: Thank you.
De Weerd: Anything further?
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: It appears Council is moving toward approving this project and I would just
ask that if the maker of the motion could address how they want the findings for the
UDC addressed, the three findings -- and that's Exhibit C on page one of the staff report
-- staff will need guidance from Council on how to make those findings. And, then, we
will have to bring those back to you, probably.
De Weerd: I guess, Anna, I don't know yet what direction Council is going, but I do
know that we have other requests, the integrity of our state highway system, and our
traffic flows are -- I think we have learned a lot from Eagle Road and I would hope that
we take some of those lessons and make sure that we are cautious about how we
proceed forward, because we certainly will have more requests on Eagle Road. You
will need to be specific in the findings as to how -- how it changes from what you have in
front of you. Also, I think there is a question of cross -access. If there is a variance
granted that will allow access to Highway 69, how these other properties to the west are
going to have access to that through this property. So, there are additional
considerations and questions that are raised by -- I guess in my own mind as to how
that traffic would circulate if you do consider these accesses and maybe before we
close the Public Hearing ask the applicant how -- how that would be realized. Certainly,
if you do allow one or both of these, it would be critical to the other properties to the
west to also have that cross -access tq it as well, so -- and I didn't hear that addressed.
So, it would be a question I would have of the applicant.
Leasure: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Larry Leasure. I would also state a
little bit stronger than Jeffrey. I think that if any of the adjoining properties are added to
this eight acre parcel, it's going to make even more a need and the pressure to be sure
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 31 of 60
there is limited access onto Meridian Road, because what it does -- once, again, this is
not a small parcel, it's eight acres of real estate. But the adjacent property is
approximately five acres in size and, yes, I have been talking with them. I have no
agreement today to share with you to say we do have an arrangement on a plan and, of
course, we have been visiting with James as well to look at a much larger master
planned development, but nothing to present to you tonight. So, we would be --
definitely give strong consideration to coming back with a plan when we would come
before you for the PUD -- or the conditional use as a part of our development
agreement and would so state those access points to the adjacent properties, because
it's definitely needed. But, once again, where the majority of the population that will be
shopping at this location, definitely on this site and property the adjacent property, is
going to be going south on Meridian Road and that's why it's so critical that we have the
opportunity for access to get traffic through, instead of coming off of Overland into the
project and, then, back through the light again. And that's, basically, what the traffic
study says, that ITD has signed off on and Ada County Highway District. So, as you
add land and add more retail to it, it just puts that much more pressure back onto
Overland Road and this would help the right -in, right -out. If both were right -in, right -out
-- and, one again, the traffic study that staff has and that you have a copy of, basically
speaks to only a left turn into the site, not full access at that lower access point. Very
similar to what we have done with Home Depot on State Street. So, in other words,
there is only a left into the site, there is not a left out of the site, if you follow what I'm
saying here, at the lower access point. And that's where the problem is is when people
attempt to come out to the left, coming out of the -- that lower level. So, all we are
saying here would be a -- from a -- it would be a partially full access in that there is a left
tum into the site only, not a left -out, just a right -out coming out of the site. Am I making
sense? Your traffic study speaks to only a left turn into this location. So, if you're
coming, in essence, north from Meridian, what the traffic study states is that by tying
these two together across the street from each other, the site that was approved here,
we would only have left into the site. If you're coming out of this location, you have a
right only. So, you're only doing a right and can only go to the south. This one is only a
right -in, right -out, which, then, does not cause the problem of traffic flow. So, that's
what is proposed.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Leasure, you stated that this was going to be a left in only, like the Home
Depot at State Street?
Leasure: Yes, sir.
Bird: Between old and new 55?
Leasure: Exactly.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 32 of 60
Bird: Are you going to put lights there, then?
Leasure: Well, we believe that that will be necessary. And, again, a percent of that --
Bird: And you as a developer would be willing to help out in the cost of traffic lights at
that point?
Leasure: Yes, we would.
Bird: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
Leasure: Any other questions?
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Okay.
Leasure: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Okay. Any additional information needed by the Council?
If not, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Tonight.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I move we close the Public Hearing, Item 14, 05-027.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 14. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, discussion? Or do I have a motion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: In light of the comments of the applicant and sensitivity to the commercial
impact of granting or denying this valiance and the topography at issue and what's ,
proposed at this site, it's clear to me that these access roads aren't allowed, unless a
variance is granted, which, in my mind, is a pretty high hurdle to clear. From what I
have heard, I'm not convinced that these access points are necessary and without the
granting of the property -- or access, I don't -- I don't find that the situation rises to the
level of an extraordinary hardship upon the property, both of which are required to grant
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 33 of 60
a variance for these access points, so I would move that we deny variance 05-027, Item
No. 14.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to deny Item 14, request for variance. Do I have a
second? Okay. Hearing none, motion dies. Council, do I have another motion to
consider?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'll try one. Probably won't get a second. I'm just the opposite of Councilman
Borton. I feel that it's a well thought out development on that comer. I think that comer
is for that. And I believe the access with the right -in, right -out only at the first access
and left -in, right -out at the second access, with the developer putting signal lights, tum
lane and everything in there, from going north on Meridian Road -- while it's not the
ideal situation, when you come back and retro fit, it's kind of like remodeling a house, it's
not always -- or a building, it's not always the ideal fit. You do the best you can. I think
it's eight acres. I think it will be a definite improvement to what's out there. The traffic is
not great out there, but it's not great anyplace. So, with that, I would move that we
approve VAR 05-027, with the conditions as stated, that the -- one on Highway 69, the
most north entrance to be right -in, right -out only. The south entrance will be left -in,
right -out only and that we redo the Findings to show approval.
Wardle: Second. And, Madam Mayor, if I may, for clarification, on the conditions that
need to be met, just offer a suggestion for the maker of the motion to incorporate three
things. Number one, the inclusion of the traffic study by the applicant, reviewed by the
transportation department. In addition to that, the inability of the applicant or any future
foreseeable applicant to acquire property to the south of this development to include
any commercial development, because it is currently residential and occupied as such
and, then, third, the willingness and the ability for these accesses to create a cross -
access agreement with neighboring property owners that could, in effect, create a type
of frontage or backage or whichever type of road we want to call that, an additional
thoroughfare off the main arterials for consideration for the maker.
Bird: Second, I would agree with that, but the frontage road, I think, is out of the
question on Meridian. Are you talking about on Overland Road?
Wardle: Yes.
Bird: If they go all the way to Stoddard?
Wardle: The ability at some point in the future in the discussion we have that that could
become a possibility, but only if we are able to grant these accesses.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 34 of 60
Bird: And I would agree with that. And I'd also like to add to my motion that -- that it is
ITD that is the traffic -- transportation department that the study goes to.
Wardle: Yes.
Bird: Okay. And I'd also like to add that it is looked into by ITD and the developer on
traffic lights there. I forgot that. Does the second agree?
Wardle: Second agrees.
Bird: Okay. Now you got the motion.
Nary: Council?
Bird: Yes.
Nary: Before you vote on your motion, you have a development agreement in front of
you that will now be inconsistent with your variance. Do you want the applicant to apply
to amend their development agreement? Because the development agreement already
says they have no access to Highway 69. And that will be consistent if this property
were to change or redevelop; you will have that inconsistency that you will have to deal
with.
Bird: And I -- the motion maker would agree, Mr. Counselor that they will have to
amend their development agreement to make this motion -- this variance legal.
De Weerd: Does second agree?
Wardle: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Just for clarity, you are suggesting that cross -access be available, then, to
any points of access on Highway 69 from the properties to the west?
Wardle: Madam Mayor, that's a comment on the record that the applicant has made in
the affirmative.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Anna.
Canning: Also, for clarification, I'm sorry, Councilmember Bird, you stated that the
southern access would left -in and right -out only? Did you also mean to include right -in?
Bird: I'm song. Yeah. Right -in and right -out and left -in only going north.
Canning: Okay.
Meridian City Council • S
March 7, 2006
Page 35 of 60
De Weerd: Councilman Bird, is it the impression you have, then, that this would be the
most southerly access would eligible for a traffic light?
Bird: Madam Mayor, yes, it would be eligible, if they put -- and it's -- it's farther away
from the intersection than what -- and, by the way, that does work very good over on
State Street at Lowe's there, between Old Highway 55 and new Highway 55, right in the
middle of that, which isn't a mile by a long shot. They have put that in so you can get
access from going east off State Street into Lowe's and that development there. I travel
it quite a bit. It is successful and I haven't seen that many accidents around there. So, I
would like to -- it's either get traffic lights in there, in my view, or it's only right -in and
right -out and when the developer agrees to put in traffic lights and I think ITD will go
along with it, then, I think that's what we should do.
De Weerd: So, it's your intent, if that traffic light is not approved, that it would be a right -
in, right -out only?
Bird: That is my intent and I think in the motion and the way it will be drawn up for the
applicant to look at, it will so state that. If those traffic lights don't come in, you don't
have cross -access, in my opinion. Now, whether the second agrees with that, I don't
know.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, certainly, you know, for discussion purposes the second will
agree with that. Again, the transportation department is really the authority in this.
Bird: That's right.
Wardle: It appears to me that what we are talking about is something similar to their --
to their plan for additional medians in the Highway 55 area and feel that it's similar in
nature.
De Weerd: I guess, Council, just for additional discussion purposes, I would like Steve
Siddoway, who is our transportation planner, to make comment on any of his knowledge
in regard to Highway 69. There has been a strong statement from this Council, as well
as the councils -- or the council to the south on preservation of this corridor, certainly, at
one mile -- half mile, if not only at the mile points and I thought there was a light being
suggested there at Elk Run and Calderwood, that would not make this an eligible
location for a traffic light. So, Steve, can you comment?
Siddoway: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As currently planned,
the -- Highway 69 is intended primarily more for mobility than for access, two primary
functions that roads serve are mobility, moving traffic, or access to commercial
developments or residential developments. Certainly, the more accesses you add the
more the mobility is impaired. One of the reasons why the traffic is very congested in
that area of the interchange is the number of existing signals. Right there you have -- if
you include the north side of the freeway, you have the signal at Main Meridian, then,
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 36 of 60
the off ramp, then, the southern off ramp and, then, Overland. This proposed signal
location would be just one-eighth of a mile further south, which makes it very difficult to
time that many lights for two-way traffic. There is a proposal for a signal down at the
half mile that will be coming before you with the Nazarene church application where
they are proposing an access at the half mile. There is also -- there has been
discussion of Calderwood, which is at a quarter mile, which there are concerns that
even that one may be too close to Overland. So, certainly, there would be some
challenges with putting that just based on the spacing and trying to maintain some traffic
progression, but I would -- I would leave some of those final decisions open to the traffic
engineers themselves.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And, I'm sorry, I should have done that during the Public
Hearing process, but I didn't know you were talking about a traffic light there,
Councilman Bird, so I just want to comment on that in discussion. Any further
information needed by Council? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll on this item.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
Item 15: Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: AZ 05-056 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN -R and 4.07
acres from RUT to C -C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision by
JBS Enterprises, LLC —1845 West Franklin Road:
Item 16: Continue Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: PP 05-058 Request
for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7
common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN -R and C -C zones for Harks
Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC — 1845 West Franklin
Road:
Item 17: Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006: CUP 05-051
Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development within
300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS
Enterprises, LLC —1845 West Franklin Road:
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. Mr. Nary, can you, please, go ask Mr. Rountree to
join us. Thank you. Okay. Items 15, 16, and 17 have been requested to be continued.
Council, I would entertain a motion to do so.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we continue the Public Hearing for AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-
051 to April 4th, 2006.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 37 of 60
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to continue Items 15, 16, and 17 to April 4th, 2006. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 18: Public Hearing: AZ 05-062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11
acres from RUT to R-8 for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables,
LLC — 2445 North Wingate Lane:
Item 19: Public Hearing: PP 05-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 25
single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in the
proposed R-8 zone for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC —
2445 North Wingate Lane:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 18 and 19 are public hearings AZ 05-062 and PP 05-062. 1
will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Sharp Estates Project and
it is located south of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 on the west side of Wingate
Lane, approximately a half mile south of Ustick Road. We have shown the lot pattern in
here. It's currently a five acre parcel. It is an in -fill piece in the classic sense. This is an
application for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat approval. The gross
residential density is 4.9 units per acre. The applicant is requesting to zone the property
R-8, which is medium density residential, and this parcel is 5.11 acres in size. The
preliminary plat approval would be for 25 single family buildable lots and two common
lots. The property was dealing with two stub streets that are offset from one another, so
you see the road kind of comes to a T to provide some variation that the applicant has
put a little curve in the road before the cul-de-sac. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended approval at their February 2nd hearing. Ron Sargent spoke
in favor of the project and no one spoke in opposition or commented. The key issues of
discussion by the Commission were the pathway on the south part of the project and —
to the west and east and, then, Wingate Lane and vacating an interest in that easement.
The pathway issue -- there is not a pathway shown on the Comprehensive Plan in this
area. However, there is a pathway constructed on the adjoining properties, so the
developer felt that he could continue that on this property on the southern boundary and
there is an opportunity to extend it to the west as well. Regarding Wingate Lane -- let
me go back up to the larger one. As you all know, Wingate Lane goes straight up to
Ustick and there are a number of property owners toward the north end of the lane.
This was the southern most terminal of Wingate Lane. And what the Planning and
Zoning Commission asked was that the applicant vacate any easement that they had
going all the way up -- any rights they had to accessing that easement at any portion
along Wingate Lane and they have agreed to do that. What this effectively means is
that Wingate Lane will end before it gets in the City of Meridian now, so -- oops. Went
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 38 of 60
too far. Sorry. To our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council. You
do have findings today before you for approval. I would note that the applicant did
submit a revised plat, but there are still some issues for that one. So, the plat notes that
are referenced -- the plat date that is noted in your findings is the correct one to note.
And with that I'll answer any questions that Council may have.
Bird: I have none, Mr. President.
Wardle: Thank you, Anna. Would the applicant, please, come forward. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record, please.
Sargent: Councilmembers, Ron Sargent, 1771 North Wildwood, Boise, Idaho. I guess,
first of all, is we are in agreement with the comments by staff. I guess -- Anna, could
you put the vicinity map up. And just as a clarification, at both ends of the property,
both the west end and this east end, there is a locked gate that's located there, but
there is an irrigation canal that runs along the back of each of these properties and it
runs all the way to the school up here and we would, you know, construct a pathway on
the south side of our property and we would hope that with the cooperation of the
neighbors and Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District, that this pathway, which, basically, is
in existence today, but is full of weeds and trash and, basically, just needs to be cleaned
up. Likewise, on the east end there is a cinder path that's located here, as well as a
cinder path that goes all the way up to this R-2. So, we are -- by constructing our
pathway on the south part of our property, over the top of the irrigation canal, we hope
that that pathway would continue the whole length on either side of our property.
Likewise, as staff has mentioned, we are willing to give up our rights on Wingate Lane
all way from the property to Ustick Road. So, with that I'd stand for any questions.
Wardle: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor -- or President.
Borton: Mr. President?
Wardle: Councilman Borton.
Borton: The pathway on the south, Mr. Sargent, is that maintained by the
homeowners?
Sargent: It will be maintained. There is -- we would propose building a ten foot wide
paved pathway that would be maintained by the homeowners in our subdivision. But
the pathway on either side of us -- on tlae east side it's maintained by the homeowners
association in that location, but I don't think to the east of us there is -- or, excuse me, to
the west of us is there anybody that is responsible for the maintenance of that section.
So, that's something the other subdivision would have to address.
Borton: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 39 of 60
De Weerd: Any additional questions for the applicant? I do want to note for the record
that we do have in front of you, Council, for -- that was received today, a letter, and it
was respectfully submitted by a number of the neighbors. It is available on the record.
Did the applicant get a copy of this?
Sargent: No, I did not.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: Madam Mayor, staff did not get a copy either. Or at least planning staff didn't.
De Weerd: It's dated March 2nd and we received it, I believe, on the 6th. Okay. It is in
the packet.
Canning: Yes, ma'am. I'm song.
De Weerd: Okay.
Sargent: This is it? Yeah, I got this one. Okay.
De Weerd: I'll give you a chance to review that and comment upon your closing
comments.
Sargent: Okay. Great.
De Weerd: Does that work for you?
Sargent: That works fine.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Sargent: Any additional questions?
De Weerd: Not at this time. Thank you. We do have two people that have signed up in
favor of. William Smith and Kathy Smith. Would either of you like to provide testimony?
Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony
on this application? Please come forward. If you will state your name and address for
the record.
Jenkins: Okay. Madam Mayor and City,Council, my name is Ed Jenkins. I live at 2584
Bullock in Meridian. We wrote a letter on March 2nd and we e-mailed it to the city clerk
on March 3rd. And it was -- it identified 12 of us.
De Weerd: Yes, sir. That is the letter I just referred to.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 40 of 60
Jenkins: That's the letter you're talking about?
De Weerd: Yes.
Jenkins: Okay. One of the issues in that letter was the Wingate Lane, which it sounds
like that issue has been addressed. We also wrote in there in regards to density, that
we are in objection to this plat of 50 foot lots. And the other item was lack of common
area. Sense that time we have talked to people in the area who weren't aware, in
particular Packard Acres No. 3, a lot of those were recorded in December, so I don't
think anybody in that section received notice. I own three lots that touch the Sharp
property there and I know there is other people that we also had a sign-up sheet that
are in agreement with this letter and we'd like to submit that to you. There is 64 people
that are on board with us saying that we don't prefer that type of density and 16 of the
people are within 300 feet of the Sharp's property. So, we'd just like to submit that.
And, then, make one other point to you. If you -- if you look at the big picture up there,
you can see pretty plainly that the density of that particular parcel is a lot more dense
than a lot of the residential around it and it kind of -- it kind of shows that there is going
to be traffic issues, there is going to be parking on the street issues, we believe. The
possibility of row houses, the row house look, if they building two story buildings, with 40
foot buildings -- 40 foot wide buildings. And another concern off of Devlin as it comes
into Packard Acres there, there is a playground right there and a considerable space for
a common area and we just don't feel like the Sharp property has the space that they
are accommodating for common area for the residents of this new development. So,
with that I'd answer any questions you have.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Jenkins: Can I submit these signatures to you?
De Weerd: Yes. Please submit those to the city clerk. Thank you very much.
Jenkins: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there additional testimony on this application? Okay. Would the
applicant like the final word?
Sargent: Ron Sargent. Madam Mayor, Qouncilmembers. I guess the first thing I guess
I'd like to address is the density and I have some photographs of another project that we
have completed and our intent is to not only create this subdivision, but also to build the
homes that are going to go in there. And we took a lot of look at the type of home that
could go in there and these are the -- very similar to what we would be proposing to go
in there. So, I guess --
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 41 of 60
De Weerd: Mr. Sargent, could you give that to Anna and she can put it up on the
screen.
Sargent: I guess it kind of blurs it a little bit on the overhead, but these are some of the
homes that we proposing, different methodologies of entering the garages, so that we
don't have all the garages facing the street and I guess the appropriate terminology is
called a shared driveway. So, it would come in from the side and, then, tum into the --
into the garage area. Okay. This is another, I guess, photograph of the type of home
that we would be proposing to build in there and these homes are, actually, on smaller
lots than the 50 foot wide lots that we are proposing. And one of the things, I guess,
when we looked at this property, if we did larger lots, we were concerned that we would
end up with a 400,000 dollar home on the bigger lots that we would -- could possibly be
put in there. So, by being at this size, we were looking to be somewhere between about
325,000 and 350,000 as the overall price for the homes, which we think is
complimentary to this neighborhood in here. This is another type of design that we are
looking at for this area. I guess, Anna, if we could go to the subdivision map. In our
application for the subdivision, the city requires that we have five percent of our area
that is common area and these lots here -- or this area here represents the five percent
required for the subdivision application. This pathway here is 30 feet wide and it's not --
when the staff looked at it, they didn't consider this pathway part of the common area.
Likewise, this path area from here down to the end is not counted as towards that five
percent of the common area. So, I did not do the calculations, but just looking at it, we
are probably getting -- pushing close to ten percent of the subdivision as being common
area, which would be close to double what the requirement of the code would be for a
subdivision application. And I guess the -- and we -- the location -- there is a
playground sort of located up in this area, but we really didn't have any choice, because
this road was stubbed into the edge of our property on the north. This road was
stubbed to the south end of the property and we have -- this is really where we had to
connect the roads. We really didn't have any flexibility in a different type of design for
that. And, then, I guess, the third item we have already discussed is the vacation of
Wingate Lane. So, we -- as we have already mentioned, we propose to do that as part
of the approval process.
De Weerd: Okay.
Sargent: Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Seeing none -- thank
you.
Sargent: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any additional information needed from staff?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 42 of 60
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just a reminder or refresher from Anna about the requirements of the UDC
as it relates to lot sizes and frontages in an R-8.
Canning: The minimum lot frontage in the R-8 is 50 feet. You can go down to 40 feet if
you have a shared driveway. I believe they indicated they were doing the shared
driveways, but they do have 50 feet of frontage, I believe. I'm looking quickly, but -- I
don't see any shared driveways actually designated, so they all meet at least the
minimum 50 -foot frontage and the 5,000 square foot lot size.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Anything further, Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Is there any indication from either the city clerk or Anna that the adjacent
residents were not notified?
De Weerd: Was the property posted?
Canning: Will, maybe if you could look for the posting, I will look for the noticing list.
Berg: Anna, I found the radius report.
Canning: Okay.
Berg: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, it seems to be a
fairly lengthy list on the radius report, but I do want to say that sometimes the Ada
County records aren't to the minute up to date. We go off, you know, records of
ownership at the time that we request it. So, I can't tell you when sales are made and
when they are put on those records.
Canning: And the property was posted, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council.
De Weerd: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor. Mr. Clerk, if you can -- I have got a neighborhood meeting -- it
looks like a sign-up sheet dated November 9th, 2005, with 13 names on it.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 43 of 60
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: In the letter we got, they evidently had been notified. I think the way I read that
first paragraph is they were not notified of the March 7th. Well, we don't repost when
we continue something, unless it is -- do we? We don't renotice, do we? I mean this
was something that we continued.
Berg: Madam Mayor, it hasn't been our policy to renotice in the paper or renotice the
homeowners when you continue a Public Hearing. We hope that people come to that
original Public Hearing and understand that it's renoticed. There are situations that if
you instructed us on special circumstances to do that we have. But that's -- a matter of
requirement of renoticing or reposting, that is not in our policy.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. Okay. Anything further from Council?
Rountree: I have nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. Yes, sir. If you will, please, state your name and address.
Decouto: My name is Edward Decouto. I'm at 2393 East Meadow Grass Street.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Decouto: In Meridian in Packard Estates No. 3, which is that lot right there is my
personal residence. Madam Mayor, City Council, I did attend that meeting that you
referenced on -- what was the date of that again? The neighborhood meeting. The only
way I found out about that was by word of mouth and several of us spread the word and
we all did attend that. It was proposed to us at that time that there was going to be a
subdivision behind my residence and at that time we voiced our opinions about the
density and things of that nature that we have listed in that letter, which I co-authored,
and it appears that none of our recommendations were taken and put into this plat. As
you can see, basically, all the residents that surround this are affected by this. I have,
basically, two and a piece of another backyard to my one backyard. My concerns there
are that -- which is stated in the letter, about drainage, what are they going to do about
keeping water from getting onto my property off of basically three roofs. There is a
known clay issue in that area. I am a builder. I actually own the lot next door. That lot
there. And I own this lot right here with my business partner Ed Jenkins. And, also, we
are opposed -- I'm opposed to this personally, because of the -- the lack of really
consideration for any of the surrounding properties in regards to that issue with larger
lots surrounding this -- this proposed subdivision and also the lack of consideration for
any common area for the children that ale going to reside in this area and they will,
naturally -- the kids that were -- are going to live in this subdivision will naturally migrate
to that play area that we have that we paid for through our homeowners association and
built ourselves, they will go to that area and use it. We are not opposed to development
being back there, we are just opposed to the density of it. Any questions for me?
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 44 of 60
De Weerd: No. Thank you, sir.
Decouto: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Sargent, do you want to respond? Well, before I ask for a
response, is there any other public testimony? Thank you.
Sargent: I guess the first thing is -- we'd like to address is the common areas that -- I
guess we see this pathway as something that could be used by the kids in the
neighborhood on their way to school, because it may, eventually, end up connecting all
the way through to the school on the east end. The other thing is the playground to the
north. I guess we are not opposed to supporting the maintenance and upkeep of that
playground, if -- so we wouldn't be opposed to sharing some of the expenses in there
with the neighbors. In our meeting we did show this exact plat. We did -- there was
some discussions about the density that took place, but I guess we still feel that -- we
think that this is the -- the right type of product to put in this location, because this is
quite a transition from very expensive homes up in this area, to some that have been in
this area for some time to the south. So, we feel that this transition that we don't want to
be trying to put, you know, really expensive, high-end homes and we see this as the
transition between the more expensive homes to the north and the less expensive
homes to the south and the west. So, I'd stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, what would you like to do? If there is no
additional public testimony, would you like to close these two items?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move we close the public hearings on Items 18 and 19.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close 18 and 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 45 of 60
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item 18, AZ 05-062.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve Item 18. Is there any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: With respect to the issue of density, certainly, that's something that we have
been struggling with for the last two years and something that we have made some
significant strides with. But it seems to me in this particular location, since this is the
last in -fill and it's surrounded by R-4, and somewhat inconsistent with all of the lot sizes
and density that surround the immediate area and the far reaching area, that I probably
would not vote to support the motion.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I would echo Councilman Rountree's thoughts and expressions and I, too,
cannot, at this density, support this project.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: For discussion purposes, the original -- I believe that this is an R-8 zone. If I
could get clarification from staff.
Canning: Yes, sir, it's actually R-8 to the north, to the west, and to the south. It's only
R-4 to the east.
Rountree: I stand corrected.
Bird: But I still don't support it.
Rountree: Then, I'll remove my comments from the record as it relates to surrounded.
Still not necessarily in support of the density. There has been a change in our R-8
definition, has there not, from previous R-8 approval?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 46 of 60
Rountree: 6,500 square foot minimum?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Rountree: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, also, before we changed, those existing R -8s around there, are 65 -foot
wide, am I not right?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, particularly Councilmember Bird and
Rountree, I don't know exactly what their frontage requirement was. So many of the
subdivisions were done as planned developments for the sole purpose of reducing lot
frontage, but I would venture a guess that they don't have 65 feet of lot frontage.
Bird: But that was an R-8 requirement --
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: -- was a 65 -foot width, unless you got a variance or you did a PUD?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: Okay. I still stand on my comments.
De Weerd: Okay. Any additional discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: Well, thank you, Council. I feel important tonight.
Rountree: First time in a long time.
De Weerd: No, it's not. You keep doing this. I guess, Council, I would vote nay as well.
And I guess for a little bit different reason. I believe that there needs to be a little bit
better transition. I feel that this is a good project for in -fill, but there could be a little bit of
a variation and a little bit more sensitivity to some of the larger sized lots that can -- can
ease a little bit more into it and so I guess to a certain degree I concur with Councilman
Rountree and Bird. I just think there could be a little bit better transition.
MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR NAY.
De Weerd: So, I do need a motion that can pass.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 47 of 60
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we deny AZ 05-062, based on the grounds as stated.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: There is a motion to deny Item 18. 1 guess, Council, before you look at this,
I guess I would like to see if there is an opportunity to look at the plat and maybe work
with the neighbors to bring something back, rather than reapply.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would have no problem with that. I just really have a problem with narrowness
and we have always tried to go on the outside and at least try to be halfway the same
size of lots around us and when we are two and a half to one outside of us, I have a
problem with that. I don't know, though. What we did was we turned it down, so now a
question for legal counsel is how -- you know, if you -- you need a motion. We have
turned it down, we have denied it, so you need a motion of denial.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, we haven't denied it yet. Your motion is on the floor right now.
Bird: We turned it down. Yeah. So you need --
De Weerd: No, we did not pass the motion to approve. We still need a motion.
Bird: To deny.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary, would you like to explain it?
Nary: As you stated, Madam Mayor, Council, all you have done is not approve the
motion to approve. You can -- you can reopen your Public Hearing. You can ask for
more information. You can set this matter over for a period of time, if the application is
desirous to do that. You can remand it with more specific direction, although, again,
you might want to ask the applicant if theyowant to do that. Or you can move to deny.
So, you have a number of options still available to you. I think what Madam Mayor -- if
I'm maybe reading her mind, rather than in two or three weeks readdressing a motion to
reconsider, which is -- happens a lot, if you think there is something that might be
adjusted to this or an opportunity for another neighborhood meeting and Mr. Sargent is
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 48 of 60
willing to do that; you can certainly reopen the Public Hearing to ask him that question.
If he isn't willing to do that, then, you can take action as you please.
De Weerd: Would the maker of the motion --
Bird: Yeah, I have no problem with that. Whatever you guys want to do.
De Weerd: Does second agree?
Rountree: Sure.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion to reopen the Public Hearing for applicant's
response?
Wardle: So moved.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second?
Bird: Well, I'll second that.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Mr. Sargent.
Sargent: I would propose to the Council that we meet with the neighbors that are here
tonight and discuss the lot width on the north side of the property and see if we can
come to some sort of an agreement with them on that and come back to you with a
proposal.
De Weerd: Council?
Bird: That's agreeable to me.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would move that we continue the Public Hearing until --
Canning: Madam Mayor, isn't there a motion out there. No, there is not?
De Weerd: They were withdrawn.
Canning: Oh. Okay. I'm song.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 49 of 60
De Weerd: We are way ahead of you, Anna.
Rountree: What does the 21 st look like, Will? Jam packed?
Wardle: No.
De Weerd: I guess, Council, if we continue it to the 21st, you will at least know how
substantial the change might be if you need to remand it back to Planning and Zoning.
Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, two suggestions. Yeah, may -- at least
in two weeks, if they have another meeting, you may -- we may find we need to renotice
or remand, depending on what the change may be, because there may be more
property owners affected that we aren't aware of today. My other suggestion to you is
Mr. Sargent had offered to meet with the property owners on the north. If you're going
to remand this or you're going to set this over for a neighborhood meeting of some sort,
you may suggest strongly that he meet with all the neighbors. Otherwise, your southern
neighbors will come to the next meeting and may claim that they didn't get an
opportunity to have another participation. There, obviously, has been maybe some
changes to the radius notice and if they are going to hold a public meeting, you may
want to resolve all those issues or at least get them heard before you hear it again.
Rountree: So, with all the help, I'm still looking for a date.
De Weerd: April 4.
Rountree: April 4th? Okay. Continuing my motion that we continue the Public Hearing
until April 4th and request that the applicant have a neighborhood workshop and
meeting with the surrounding neighbors of the proposed development.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue the Public Hearing to April 4th, 2006. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. And that was on Items 18 and 19.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: 18 and 19.
Item 20: Public Hearing: RZ 05-022 Request for a Rezone of 3.36 acres from R-
8 to L -O for Church of the Holy Nativity by Church of the Holy Nativity —
828 West Cherry Lane:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 20 is Public Hearing on RZ 05-022. 1 will open this Public
Hearing with staff comments.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 50 of 60
Canning: Just a moment, Madam Mayor. I'm sorry, Madam Mayor, Members of the
Council, I was just suggesting that the applicant get a new list from our department, so
that we can make sure any property -- recent property purchasers are notified.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: The next project is the Church of the Holy Nativity. It is located on the north
side of Cherry Lane, east of Linder Road. And there is the site right there. And this is
an application for a rezone of 3.36 acres from R-8 to L -O. The site currently contains
three structures, all associated with the Church of the Holy Nativity, and the primary
purpose of this rezone is to change the zoning to allow them to install a sign for the
church. The residential zoning did not allow a sign and when the previous occupant of
the church left, they took the sign with them and created a problem in approving a new
sign for the use. So, we asked the church to come in and rezone the property. This
does help them in the future, when they are ready to do expansions or remodels, they
will be able to do that as a principal permitted use in the L -O zone, rather than a
conditional use in the R-8 zone. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval at their February 2nd hearing. Clayton Lyle spoke in favor of the application.
No one spoke in opposition or commented. There was no issues of discussion by the
Commission and there was no changes to the staffs initial recommendation. And to our
knowledge there are no outstanding issues before City Council. And you do have
Findings for approval before you tonight. And with that I'll answer any question you may
have.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for Anna?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: This particular property throughout the years has had multiple different signs
on the same properly advertising the church and the day care and whatever else they
had going on in that vicinity. Do the Findings specifically identify that there will be one
and only one monument sign located to identify the church?
Canning: The Findings do not address the sign provisions, all it does is allow them to
whatever is entitled by the L -O zone and the sign code is a little bit iffy ground for me,
but my general understanding is that only qne monument sign would be allowed and I
believe that's all they are seeking at this time.
Rountree: Great.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 51 of 60
De Weerd: Anything further for staff? Would the representative like to comment? Mrs.
McCandless. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
McCandless: I'm Cherie McCandless, 1882 Northwest 13th Avenue, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McCandless: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. What Anna said is primarily
what I would say. We did want to put up a sign, which we have done, and to my
knowledge that's the only sign that will be on the property. I'm not sure, but I really think
that's all we are going to put up. And we have -- in the foreseeable future we have no
plans for any additions or any development -- anymore development. So, that's why we
would ask for the rezone to L -O.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Cherie?
Rountree: Thank you for your comments.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Signs are my favorite topic.
De Weerd: Okay. No comment. Is there any additional public testimony on this
application?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: If there is no further discussion, I move that we close the Public Hearing on
Item 20.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 20. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carnes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the request for a rezone for Item 20, RZ 05-022 and
approve the Findings.
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 52 of 60
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve Item 20. If there is no discussion, Mr.
Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 21: Public Hearing: AZ 05-066 Request for Annexation and Zoning of .50
acres from R-12 to C -G zone for Meridian Veterinary Clinic by
Architecture Northwest — 415 West Franklin Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you. Item 21 is Public Hearing AZ 05-066. 1 will open
this Public Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is another rezone request. It's
for the Meridian Veterinary Clinic. The site is located on the south side of Franklin
Road, just west of Meridian Road, and it is another in -fill project. As you will see,
everything around it is zoned C -G already. This one is currently zoned R-12 in Ada
County. The purpose of the rezone is to facilitate the construction of -- or expansion of
the use on the site by constructing a new building on the southern portion of the site.
Staff is recommending a development agreement. This property happens to be in two
lots, so staff is recommending a development agreement for the sole purpose of
requiring a cross -access -- or recording a cross -access and parking easement between
the two parcels, since it's not likely to go through a subdivision process or any other
discretionary approvals, that is the purpose of the development agreement. Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their February 2nd hearing. Joe
Thompson spoke in favor of the application. No one opposed it. Larry Rackham
commented on the application. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were
the need for alternative compliance along the west property line and the desire to see
landscaping along Franklin Road. There were no key changes to staffs initial
recommendation and to our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before City
Council. And you do have Findings for approval before you tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff? Okay. Is there any comments
by the representative?
Haverfield: Madam Mayor, and City Council, my name is Randy Haverfield, I'm the
project architect. I reside at 224 16th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho. I'm here just to
answer any questions you might have. Staf& did a great job of preparing you for this, so
I'm here to answer any questions you might have. And I'm also representing Scott
Higer, who is the owner of the Meridian Veterinary Hospital or clinic there.
De Weerd: Well, thank you. Thank you for being here tonight. Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 53 of 60
Bird: I have none.
Haverfield: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Hearing no further comment, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item
21.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 21. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item 21, AZ 05-066.
Borton: Second.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: You can at least give them more for their money on waiting all this time. Is
there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: Thank you. Motion carred.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 22: Public Hearing: AZ 05-065 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.50
acres from RUT to C -G zone for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel —
2820 East Ustick Road:
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 54 of 60
Item 23: Public Hearing: MI 05-017 Miscellaneous request to amend the
previously approved Development Agreement for Blue Marlin (AZ 03-025)
for Nesmith Annexation by Jonathan Seel — 2820 East Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Items 22 and 23 are public hearings on AZ 05-065 and MI 05-017. 1 will
open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Nesmith Annexation
project and -- you can't see the roads. There is Ustick. There is Ustick. Sony. There
is Eagle. And this property is located on the north side just adjoining Champion Park
Subdivision and next to the -- what was known as Blue Marlin and I forget -- annexation
just to the east. The applications before you tonight are an annexation and zoning to
C -G, general commercial. And also a miscellaneous application to amend the
development agreement for Blue Marlin to include this piece of property. The applicant
is not proposing any land use development or subdivision at this time. As I said before,
they are just asking to add this to the Blue Marlin property, basically. The Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval at their February 2nd hearing. Jonathan
Seel spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition and no one commented. The key
issues of discussion by the Commission were the setbacks and land use buffers
between the subject and the property to the west. So, just along here. And what those
revolved around is that the UDC required a 20 -foot wide landscape buffer between C -G
zoned property and residential uses or zones and even though some non-residential
uses are allowed here through a planned development, they are currently zoned
residential, so that 25 -foot wide landscape buffer would apply. The applicant, since the
Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, has submitted an alternative compliance to
reduce that landscape buffer width to ten feet and to -- in exchange for limiting that to
ten feet, they are willing to limit the trash compactors and loading dock along the west
elevations of the buildings that, basically, face that west property line. Staff is
recommending approval of the applicant's request for alternative compliance. With
regard to outstanding issues before City Council, the applicant is in agreement with the
conditions, but has recommended a clarification to the fifth bulleted item in the DA
provisions and I believe you have a letter in your packet regarding that, but, basically, it
just clarifies that that restriction regarding the trash compactors and loading docks only
applies to those properties where the building faces this residential -- this west
boundary line. I think that they just want to leave a clear record, so that eight years now
when we have all gone our merry way, that there is not some -- that that restriction isn't
applied to a property that's more interior to the project. And maybe not all of us will be
gone in eight years. I shouldn't have said that. Twenty-eight years. How is that? You
do have Findings for approval before you tonight. If the Council desires to include the
applicant's clarification, which, again, staff is fine with, the Findings are still good; you
just need to direct that his request be incorporated into the modification to the
development agreement. So, the findings for the annexation and zoning are still
suitable for tonight. And with that I'll answer any questions.
Wardle: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions for staff?
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 55 of 60
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Wardle: Would the applicant like to step forward. Please state your name and address
for the record.
Seel: Good evening. Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Company. 1940 Bonito, Meridian.
As Anna said, we have gone through the staff report, we are in agreement with the
requested modification and I think unless there is any questions, I would be glad to sit
down. I think we are all in agreement. So, I think it's been a long night and I don't think
you need anymore long discussions, so --
Rountree: We agree.
Wardle: Council, if there is no further discussion -- thank you, Mr. Seel.
Seel: Already lost somebody. Okay. Thank you.
Wardle: Is there anyone else that would like to testify on this application?
Rountree: Frank or Gary.
Wardle: Okay. Gary doesn't. Additional staff comments?
Canning: No, sir.
Wardle: Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: With no further discussion, Mr. President, I most that we close the Public
Hearing for Item No. 24 -- 22 and 23. Excuse me.
Bird: Second.
Wardle: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 22 and 23.
All in favor?
1
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
March 7, 2006
Page 56 of 60
Rountree: I move that we approve the annexation request for Item 22, AZ 05-065.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve this item. Is there any discussion? No
discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 23.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 23, MI 05-017, and incorporate the suggested
modification of the language in the DA by staff and approve the Findings.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to approve Item 23 with the noted changes. Mr. Berg, will
you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 24: Public Hearing: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zoning Ordinance Text
Amendment with the areas to be amended include: the Definitions of
collector streets, adult entertainment, and net density; the standards for
the Traditional Neighborhood Residential Districts; the fence standards;
the table detailing the Decision -Making Authority by Application; changes
to application requirements; how to measure block length; screening and
chain link fencing; requirement for certificates of zoning compliance; off-
street parking space standards and measurements; off-street loading
space requirements; family day care standards; and sign standards for
family day care by the City of Meridian Planning Department:
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Item 24 has been requested to be continued to April 4th.
Bird: Are you going to open the Public Hearing first, Madam Mayor, and, then, continue
the Public Hearing?
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 57 of 60
De Weerd: Oh, yes. I'm song. I will go ahead an open the Public Hearing ZOA 05-002
and ask for a motion to continue.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Before I make the motion, I want to just compliment publicly Anna for doing -- for
realizing that this needed to be looked at more before we brought it forward and I thank
you very much, Anna. It will save a lot of heartache down the road, I believe. And with
that I'd move that we continue ZOA 05-002 until April 4th, 2006.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to continue Item 24 to April 4th. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 25: Public Hearing: New fees and modification of existing fee by the Public
Works Department necessary to cover the costs of development plan
review, inspections, site plan and development plan reviews.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 25 --
Rountree: Continue that?
De Weerd: -- is a Public Hearing.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Due to noticing issues, irregularities, Public Works has indicated that they
want to continue the Public Hearing on that until --
Grady: Next week.
Rountree: March 14th.
I Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to continue the Public Hearing on Item 25 until next week,
March 14th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council • •
March 7, 2006
Page 58 of 60
Item 26: Ordinance No. 06-1216 : RZ 05-021 Request for a Rezone of
.94 acres from R-8 to C -G and Rezone of .95 acres from R-8 to C -N for
Champion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation — north of
Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road:
Item 27: Ordinance No. 06-1217 : AZ 05-050 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 5.0 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Reserve Subdivision
by Dave McKinnon with Conger Management Group, Inc. — west of North
Locust Grove Road and south of Chinden Boulevard:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 26 is ordinance number 06-1216 and Item 27 is ordinance
number 06-1217. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read these two ordinances by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 06-1216, an
ordinance finding that Hillview Development Corporation, the owner of certain real
property, has made a written request for rezone of their zoning classification of their real
property located in the southeast quarter of Section 32, Township 4 North, Range 1
East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A of this
ordinance and rezoning certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and
within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, and rezoning the land use zoning
classification of said lands from R-8 to C -G and C -N 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 06-1217, an ordinance for annexation of property located in the
southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 30, Township 4 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.
De Weerd: Okay. Frank, you have heard these two ordinances read by title only.
Would you like to hear either of them read in their entirety? Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 06-1216 and 06-1217, with suspension of rules.
I
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 59 of 60
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Items 26 and 27 with suspension of rules.
Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 28: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1) (a) (c) and (f):
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 28 is an Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-
2345(1) (a) (c) and (f). Do I have a motion?
Bird: So moved.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Berg, will
you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Rountree: Mr. President, I move that we come out of Executive Session.
Bird: Second.
Wardle: Okay, it has been moved and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All
those in favor.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
Bird: Let me note that no decisions were made during Executive Session.
Wardle: Thank you.
Borton: Move to adjourn.
Bird: Second.
0
0
Meridian City Council •
March 7, 2006
Page 60 of 60
Wardle: All in favor of adjournment.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:02 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR T DE WEERD
ATTESTED
C�
f 4\y
DATE APPR®
IAM G. BERG JIt, e Ef,l(`'
/1//BBppa"79ne,04.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3
REQUEST Proclamation for Meridian 5th Grade Girls AAU Basketball Team
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.
N
0
crrY OF
�i IDAHO
?fie Office of the Mayor
Recognition of Achievement
In Recognition of The Neri Ian Stet Grade Or&
AAV .sada County Sasketdaf chainpi&m
Nfiereas, the Amateur Athletic Union held their inaugural competitive basketball
season for 5th grade girls in the Valley this year; and
Vhereas, Meridian was represented by an outstanding group of girls in this league
and its post season tournament; and
-Whereas, this team was made up of Gabrielle Giesbricht, Makenzee Crane, Chelsea
Hayley, Madison Harris, Waverly Starke, Shelby Lee, JoeIIe Slyter, Mallory
Cabbage, Holly Blades and Mykaeta Richards with coaches Joe Blades, Patrick
Stner and Phil Stiffler, Jr.; and
^Wkwreas, these girls competed as one of the top teams in this league and succeeded
in winning the post season tournament and establishing themselves in history as
the -inaugural season champions;
?herefore, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian do hereby recognize
these girls for this extraordinary achievement and honor their drive, hard work,
tenacity, sportsmanship, and most of all, heart displayed during this season.
Dated this 7th day of March, 2006.
Tammy ""rd, Mayor
Shaun dle, City Council
Joe Borton, City Council
Keith Bird, City Council
Charlie Rountree, City Council
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-A
REQUEST Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 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 3, 2006 MI 05-016
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO. 6-B
REQUEST Addendum to Development Agreement — Miscellaneous request to modify the
recorded Development Agreement for Resolution Subdivision by removing Lot 7, Block 1 from the
requirement to obtain a CUP prior to operation & construction of an office building - 2045 Overland
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY See attached
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
Materials presented at
ate: Phone:
fL)Otaff Initials:T..g�
6
become property of the City of Meridian.
s
ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID *RRO AMOUNT .00 21
BOISE IDAHO 03123106 02:29 PM
RECORDED -REQUEST OF �I I I I II'I I'I I I� I I'I I I� II I I III I I' I'll
Meridian Clly Public Works 106044348
This sheet has been added to the document to
accommodate recording information.
Addendum to Development Agreement initially
recorded under Instrument No. 106036647 -
Hereby recorded a second time with the addition
of a new first page to reflect correct original
development agreement recording number
(Instrument No. 100056509) for a total of 21 pages.
Addendum to Development Agreement with Edge,
LLC.
Approved by the Meridian City Council on March 7, 2006
ADDENDUM TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian
2. Edge, LLC, Owner/Developer
The following is an addendum to that certain DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, entered into on the 19th day of July, 2000. This addendum is made and
entered into this 2,q+h day of �e.fr� �,�, r , 2006, by and between CITY OF
MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the kate of Idaho, hereafter called "CITY', and
Edge, LLC, whose address is PO Box 369, Meridian, Idaho, 83642, hereinafter called
"OWNER/DEVELOPER".
OWNER / DEVELOPER agrees to be bound by the terms of the original
Development Agreement (instrument # 100056509), approved on July 19, 2000 on the land
described in Exhibit "A", except as specifically regarding item 4.1.
1. The parties hereto agree that the development of the property described in Exhibit
"A" shall be in accordance with the terms of the above described Development
Agreement, exhibit `B", or those City ordinances in effect at that time any
subsequent conditional use application is fled, whichever are more restrictive.
2. That item 4.1 of the original Development Agreement, Instrument # 100056509,
approved on July 19, 2000, be amended by modifying the sentence to read:
"With the further restriction that all uses and development of the subject real
property shall be governed under the conditional use permit process as a
planned development, except for Lot 7, Block 1. All uses and buildings on Lot
7, Block 1, shall be governed under the City's Unified Development Code and
shall be subject to administrative design review as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19. ".
3. That "Owner/Developer" agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of
Meridian and the "Property" shall be subject to de -annexation of the
"Owner/Developer", or their assigns, heirs, or successor shall not meet the
conditions of this addendum to the Development Agreement, and any new
Ordinances of the City of Meridian as herein provided.
4. This addendum shall be binding upon and insure to the benefit of the parties'
respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives, including
"City's" corporate authorities and their successors in office. This second
addendum shall be binding on the "Owner/Developer" of the "Property", each
subsequent owner and any other person(s) acquiring an interest in the "Property".
Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the "Property", or
portions thereof, except that any sale or alienation shall be subject to the
provisions hereon and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefited and
ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI -05-016 RESOLUTION SUBDIVISION)
ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. VID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 19
BOISE IDAHO 03/09/06 02:f�1
DEPUTY Neave Haney
RECORDED -REQUEST OF INE
Meridian City 106036647
ADDENDUM TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian
2. Edge, LLC, Owner/Developer
The following is an addendum to that certain DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
entered into on the 19* day of July, 2000. This addendum is made and entered into this
day of 2006, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal
corporation of the St9te of Idaho, hereafter called "CITY', and Edge, LLC, whose address is PO
Box 369, Meridian, Idaho, 83642, hereinafter called "OWNER/DEVELOPER".
OWNER / DEVELOPER agrees to be bound by the terms of the original
Development Agreement (instrument # 10056508), approved on July 19, 2000 on the land
described in Exhibit "A", except as specifically regarding item 4.1.
1. The parties hereto agree that the development of the property described in Exhibit "A"
shall be in accordance with the terms of the above described Development Agreement,
exhibit "B", or those City ordinances in effect at that time any subsequent conditional
use application is filed, whichever are more restrictive.
2. That item 4.1 of the original Development Agreement, Instrument # 10056508,
approved on July 19, 2000, be amended, by modifying the sentence to read: "filth the
further restriction that ail uses and development of the subject real property shall
be governed under the conditional use permit process as a planned developmen4
except for Lot 7, Block 1. All uses and buildings on Lot 7, Block 1, shall be
governed under the City's Unified Deyelopment Code and shall be subject to
administrative design review as set forth in UDC 113A-19.'
3. That "Owner/Developer" agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian and
the "Property" shall be subject to de -annexation of the "Owner/Developer", or their
assigns, heirs, or successor shall not meet the conditions of this addendum to the
Development Agreement, and any new Ordinances of the City of Meridian as herein
provided.
4. This addendum shall be binding upon and insure to the benefit of the parties'
respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives, including "City's"
corporate authorities and their successors in office. This second addendum shall be
binding on the "Owner/Developer" of the "Property', each subsequent owner and any
other person(s) acquiring an interest in the "Property". Nothing herein shalll in any
way prevent sale or alienation of the "Property", or portions thereof except that any
sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereon and any successor owner or
owners shall be both benefited and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein
ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OaO5-016 RESOLUTION SUBDIVLSION)
PAGE 1 OF 4
expressed. "City" agrees, upon written request of "OwnerMeveloper", to execute
appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this addendum if "City", in its
sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that "Owner/Developer" has fully
performed its obligations under this Addendum.
5. If any provision of this addendum is held not valid by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this addendum and the
invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein.
6. This addendum sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition, and
understandings between "Owner/Developer" and "City" relative to the subject matter
hereon, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either
oral or written, express or implied, between "Owner/Developer" and "City", other
than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent
alteration, amendment, change or addition to this second addendum shall be binding
upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their
successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to "City", to a duly
adopted ordinance or resolution of "City".
a. Except as herein provided, no condition governing the uses and/or conditions
governing development of the subject "Property" herein provided for can be
modified or amended within the approval of the City Council after the "City"
has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions
provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the
proposed amendment.
7. This addendum shall be effective as of the date herein above written.
ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 0MI-05-016 RESOLUTION SUBDIVISION)
PAGE 2 OF 4
•
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and Made
it effective as hereinabove provided.
�G.-. ty i Zra�mr
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss:
County of Ada,
OWNERIDEVELOPER:
EDGE,LLC
Y:
Corey D. Bluton
CITY OF MERIDIAN
BY:
Mayor T e Weerd
On this �2q'�'day of -E Y . 2006, before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Corey D. Barton, on behalf of Edge, LLC,
known or identified to me to be theof said corporation, who executed
the instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day
and year in this cgjje first above written.
dw
(SEAL) q EDTA OF I'vV.
Notary Public for Idaho
Residing at: t!!
My Commission Expires: 5' ZZ71 b
ADDENDUM TO DFVPF0PAMqT AGREEMENT 0"5-016 RESOLUTION SUBDIVISION
PAGE 3 OF 4
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss
County of Ada
On this --J"' day of V 1.QY0Y-' , 2006, before me, a Notary Public,
personally appeared Tammy de Weerd and William G. Berg, Jr., know or identified to me to be the
Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person
that executed the instrument of behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed
the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the
day and year in this certificate first above written.
Notary Public for Idaho
Residing at: OaA III I j - IIS
Commission expires: 10-11-11
ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI -05-016 RESOLUTION SUBDIVISION)
PAGE 4 OF 4
EXHIBIT A
LaMl Description Of Property
A parcel of land including a portion of the right-of-way of Locust Grove
and Overland Road, lying in the NW 1/4 of Section 20, Township 3
North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the northwest comer of Section 20, T. 3N., R. 1E., B.M.,
the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description;
Thence'S 00°34'14" W 970.53 feet along the west line of the NW 1/4 to a
point;
Thence N 89°5 9' 19" E 849.95 feet to a point on the centerline of the
Hunter Lateral;
Thence N 0502917" W 140.30 feet along said centerline to a point;
Thence N 16014'08" W 216.98 feet along said centerline to a point;
Thence N 18°27'39" W 470.81 feet along said centerline to point;
Thence N 07°06'04" W 175.77 feet along said centerline to a point on the
centerline of Overland Road, which is also the north line of said NW 1/4;
Thence N 89°52'19" W 595.39 feet along said north line to the REAL
POINT OF BEGINNING of this description,
Said parcel of land contains 1.6.119 acres more or less.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00.004) - 15
phi LAL '15'
� .
RECORDED -'REQUEST"OFF -
ADA LINTY RjCORDER
J. P,a SF..PPlI AH0RD FEE_. ...DEPUTY
2000A20 PM 1:34 1000565509
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
PARTIES: 1. City of Meridian
2. Overland 16, L.L.C., Owner/Developer
THIS DEVELOP NT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), is
made and entered into this day of^7AZY, 2000, by and
between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corpo tion of the State of Idaho,
hereafter called "CITY", and OVERLAND 16, L.L.C., hereinafter called
"OWNER/DEVELOPER", whose address is 6223 N. Discovery Way, Boise,
Idaho 83713.
1. RECITALS:
1.1 WHEREAS, "Owner/Developer" is the sole owner, in law
and/or equity, of certain tract of land in the County of
Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit A, which is
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein
as if set forth in full, herein after referred to as the
"Property"; and
1.2 WHEREAS, I.C. §67-651 IA, Idaho Code, provides that
cities may, by ordinance, require or permit as a condition
of re -zoning that the owner or "Owner/Developer" make a
written commitment concerning the use or development of
the subject "Property"; and
1.3 WHEREAS, "City" has exercised its statutory authority by
the enactment of Ordinance 11-15-12 and 11-16-4 A,
which authorizes development agreements upon the
annexation and/or re -zoning of land; and
1.4 - WHEREAS, "Owner/Developer" has s"witted an
application for annexation and zoning of the "Property"s
described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of
Neighborhood Business District (C -N), (Meridian City
Code H 11-7-2 H); and
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) -I
1.5 WHEREAS, "Owner/Developer" made representations at
the public hearings both before the Meridian Planning &.
Zoning Commission and before the Meridian City Council,
as to how the subject "Property" will be developed and
what improvements will be made; and
1.6 WHEREAS, record of the proceedings for the requested
annexation and zoning designation of the subject
"Property" held before the Planning &. Zoning
Commission, and subsequently before the City Council,
include responses of government subdivisions providing
services within the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction,
and received further testimony and continent; and
1.7 WHEREAS, City Council, the 20 y of V'(A&I- , 2000,
has approved certain Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law and Decision and Order, set forth in Exhibit B, which
are attached hereto and by this reference incorporated
herein as if set forth in full, hereinafter referred to as (the
"Findings"); and
1.8 WHEREAS, both the "Findings" require the
"Owner/Developer" to enter into a development agreement
before the City Council takes final action on annexation
and zoning designation; and
1.9 "DEVELOPER" deems it to be in its best interest to be
able to enter into this Agreement and acknowledges that
this Agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its
urging and requests; and
1.10 WHEREAS, "City" requires the "Owner/Developer" to
enter into a development agreement for the purpose of
ensuring that the "Property" is developed and the
subsequent use of the "Property" is in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this development agreement,
herein being established as a result of evidence received by
the "City" in the proceedings for annexation and zoning
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) 2
• .r
0 0
designation from government subdivisions providing
services within the planning jurisdiction and from affected
property owners and to ensure annexation and zoning
designation is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan
of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993,
Ordinance #629, January 4, 1994, and the Zoning and
Development Ordinances codified in Meridian City Code
Title 11 and Title 12. -
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and
conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:
2. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals
are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
3. DEFINITIONS: For all purposes of this Agreement the
following words, terms, and phrases herein contained in this section shall be
defined and interpreted as herein provided for, unless the clear context of the
presentation of the same requires otherwise:
3.1 "CITY": means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party
to this Agreement, which is a municipal Corporation and
government subdivision of the state of Idaho, organized
and existing by virtue of law of the State of Idaho, whose
address is 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642.
3.2 "DEVELOPER"/"OWNER": means and refers to
Overland 16, L.L.C., whose address is 6223 N. Discovery
Way, Boise, Idaho 83713, the party developing said
"Property" and shall include any subsequent
owner(s)/developer(s) of the "Property".
3.3 "PROPERTY": means and refers to that certain parcel(s)
of "Property" located in the County of Ada, City of
Meridian as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at
length.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 3
4. USES PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT:
4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only
those uses allowed under "City"'s Zoning 'Ordinance
codified at Meridian City Code Sections 11-7-2 H which
are herein specified as follows:
(C -N) Neighborhood Business District: The purpose of
the C -N District is to permit the establishment of small
scale convenience business uses which are intended to meet
the dialy needs of the residents of an immediate
neighborhood (as defined by the policies of the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan); to encourage clustering and strategic
siting of such businesses to provide service to the
neighborhood and avoid intrusion of such uses into the
adjoining residential districts. All such districts shall give
direct access to transportation arterial or collectors, be
connected to the Municipal water and sewer systems of the
City, and shall not constitute all or any part of a strip
development concept.
With the further restriction that all uses and development
of the subject real property shall be governed under the
conditional use permit process as a planned development.
For the construction and development of a planned
commercial development.
4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be
allowed without modification of this Agreement.
5. DEVELOPMENT IN CONDITIONAL. USE:
"Developer"/"Owner" have submitted to "City" an application for conditional
use permit, and shall be required to obtain the "City"'s approval thereof, in
accordance to the City's Zoning & Development Ordinance criteria, therein,
provided, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of
any buildings or improvements on the "Property" that require a conditional
use permit.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (A7,00-004) - 4
6. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
6.A "Developer"/"Owner" shall enter into a Development
Agreement, that provides in the event the conditions
therein are not met by the Developer that the property
shall be subject to de -annexation, with the City of
Meridian which provides for the following conditions of
development to -wit:
6.1 The zoning shall be a lower intensity commercial zone,
Neighborhood Commercial (C -N), rather than C -G, for the
property described in the application subject to signing a
development agreement.
6.2 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the
property to be included in this project shall be titled per
City Ordinance. The ditches to be piped shall be shown on
the site plans. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate
irrigation/drainage district, with written confirmation of
said approval submitted to the Public Works Department.
No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches
crossing this project.
6.3 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within
this project shall have to be removed from their domestic
service per City Ordinance. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
6.4 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with
City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance
and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements.
6.5 Paving and striping.shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance and in accordance with
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 5
6.6. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed
architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to
the City Engineer for all off-street parking areas. All site
drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site.
6.7 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to
direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in
accordance with City Ordinance Section.
6.8 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set
forth in the City of Meridian Zoning and Development
Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or
flashing signs will be permitted.
6.9 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City
Ordinance.
6.10 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
6.11 Developer shall, in any future development, in that
emergency vehicular access through this property from
Locust Grove Road to the parcel lying to the east (RZ-00-
003) shall be designed and built..
7.. COMPLIANCE PERIOD/ CONSENT TO REZONE:.
This Agreement and the commitments contained herein shall be terminated,
and the zoning designation reversed, upon a default of the
"Developer"/"Owner" or "Developer"'s/"Owner's" heirs, successors, assigns, to
comply with Section 6 entitled "Conditions Governing Development of subject
"Property" of this agreement within two years of the date this Agreement is
effective; and after the "City" has complied with the notice and hearing
procedures as outlined in I.C. § 67-6509, or any- subsequent amendments or
recodifications thereof.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 6
8. CONSENT TO DE -ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL
OF ZONING DESIGNATION
"Developer"/"Owner" consents upon default to the de -annexation and/or a
reversal of the zoning designation of the "Property" subject to and conditioned
upon the following conditions precedent to -wit: .
8.1 That the "City" provide written notice of any failure
to comply with this Agreement to
"Developer"/"Owner" and if the
"Developer"/"Owner" .fails to cure such failure
within six (b)months;of such notice.
9. INSPECTION: "Developer"/"Owner` shall, immediately
upon completion of any portion or the entirety of said development of the
"Property" as required by this agreement or by City ordinance or policy, notify
the City Engineer and request the City Engineer -'s inspections and written
approval of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance
with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement and all other
ordinances of the "City" that apply to said Development.
10. DEFAULT:
10.1 In the event "Developer"/"Owner",
"Developer"'s/"Owner's" heirs, successors, assigns, or
subsequent owners of the "Property" or any other
person acquiring an interest in the "Property", fail to
faithfully comply with all of the terms and
conditions included in this Agreement in connection
with the "Property", this Agreement may be
modified or terminated by the "City" upon
compliance with the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.
10.2 A waiver by "City" of any default by
"Developer"/"Owner", of any one or more of the
covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to
the breach and breaches waived and shall not bar
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 7
e
any other rights or remedies of "City" or apply to
any subsequent breach of any such or other
covenants and conditions.
11. REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: "City" shall
record either a memorandum of this Agreement or this Agreement, including
all of the Exhibits, at "Developer"'s/"Owner's" cost, and submit proof of such
recording to "Developer"/"Owner", prior to the third* reading of the Meridian
Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the
"Property" by the City Council. If for any reason after such recordation, the
City Council fails to adopt the ordinance in connection with the annexation
and zoning of the "Property" contemplated hereby, the "City" shall execute
and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Agreement.
12. ZONING: "City" shall, following recordation of the duly
approved Agreement, enact a valid and binding ordinance zoning the
"Property" as specified herein.
13. REMEDIES: This Agreement shall be enforceable in any
court of competent jurisdiction by either "City" or "Developer"/"Owner", or by
any successor or successors in title or by the assigns of the parties hereto. -
Enforcement may be sought by an appropriate action at law or in equity to
secure the specific performance of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and
obligations contained herein.
13.1 In the event of a material breach of this Agreement,
the parties agree that "City" and
"Developer"/"Owner" shall have thirty (30) days
after delivery'of notice of said breach to correct the
same prior to the non breaching party's seeking of
any remedy provided for herein; provided, however,
that in the case of any such default which cannot
with diligence be cured within such thirty (30) day
period, if the defaulting party shall commence to
cure the same within such thirty (30) day period
and thereafter shall prosecute the curing of same
with diligence and continuity, then the time allowed
to cure such failure may be extended for such period
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 8
0
as may be necessary to complete the curing of the
same with diligence and continuity.
13.2 In the event the performance of any covenant to be
performed hereunder by either "Developer"/"Owner"
or "City" is delayed for causes which are beyond the
reasonable control of the party responsible for such
performance, which shall include, without
limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or
similar causes, the time for such performance shall
be extended by the amount of time of such delay.
14. SURETY OF PERFORMANCE: The "City" may also
require surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check
or negotiable bonds, as allowed under Meridian City Code §12-5-3, to insure
that installation of the improvements, which the "Developer" agrees to
provide, if required by the "City".
15. 6CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The
"Developer"/"Owner" agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued
until all improvements are completed, unless the "City" and
"Developer"/"Owner" have entered into an addendum agreement stating when
the improvements will be completed in a phased developed; and in any event,
no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the
improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the "City".
16. ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES: That
"Developer"/"Owner" agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian
and the "Property" shall be subject to de -annexation if the owner or his
assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Development Agreement, and
the Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
17. NOTICES: Any notice desired by the parties and/or
required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally
delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail, registered
or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as
follows..
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 9
CITY:
c/o City Engineer
City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho Ave.
Meridian, ID 83642
with copy to:
City Clerk
City of Meridian
33 E. Idaho Ave.
Meridian, ID 83642
19
OWNER/DEVELOPER.
Overland 16, L.L.C.
6223 N. Discovery Way
Boise, Idaho 83713
17.1 A party shall have the right to change its address by
delivering to the other party a written notification
thereof in accordance with the requirements of this
section.
18. ATTORNEY FEES: . Should any litigation be commenced
between, the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party
shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court
costs and reasonable attorney's fees as determined by a Court of competent
jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between
the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this
Agreement.
19. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto
acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each
and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely
perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a
default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform.
20. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: This Agreement shall
be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs,
successors, assigns and -personal representatives, including "City"'s corporate
authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding on
the owner of the "Property", each subsequent owner and any other person
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) - 10
acquiring an interest in the "Property". Nothing herein shall in any way
prevent sale or alienation of the "Property", or portions thereof, except that
any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any
successor owner or owners shall be both benefitted and bound by the
conditions and restrictions herein expressed. "City" agrees, upon written
request of "Developer", to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of
termination of this Agreement if "City", in its sole and reasonable discretion,
had determined that "Developer" has fully performed its obligations under this
Agreement.
21. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision of this
Agreement is held not valid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Agreement and the invalidity
thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein.
22. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all
promises, inducements, agreements, condition and understandings between
"Owner/Developer" and "City" relative to the subject matter hereof, and there
are no ptomises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or
written, express or implied, between "Owner/Developer" and "City", other
than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent
alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding
upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their
successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to "City", to
a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of "City".
22.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions
governing development of the subject "Property"
herein provided for can be modified or amended
without the approval of the City Council after the
""City" has conducted public hearing(s) in
accordance with the notice provisions provided for a
zoning designation and/or amendment in force at
the time of the proposed amendment.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-o04) - 11
C�
J
23. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement
shall be effective on the date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the
amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the
annexation and zoning of the "Property" and execution of the Mayor and City
Clerk -
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) -12
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein
executed this agreement and Made it effective as hereinabove provided.
1
A
,J pill
C i p
Attes `
City Clerk
BY RESOLUTION NO.�
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) -13
OVERLAND lb, L.L.C.
BY:
Manffmg Member
CITY OF MERIDIAN
B.
a or Robert D. Corrie
w
SM
STATE OF IDAHO
:ss
COUN'T'Y OF ADA
lk
On this K day of , in the year
2000, before me, e Cit- L. & j4Vja2 a tart' Public, Pers y appeared
P', Gr 4- Af 6- � and_ 9Ag-.1 �
known or identified to me to be the Managing Membe of Overland 1.6, L.L.C.,
who executed the instrument on behalf of said Limited Liability Corporation and
acknoMedg „A.; .having executed the same.
(SEAL)
STATE OF
County of Ada
"Itt
S Lary Public for Idaho
Commission expires: -'/'- aG "Q(,
:ss
}
On thish ' day of , in the year
2000, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Robert D. Corrie and
William. G. Berg, know or identified to me to be the Mayor and Cleric,
respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person
that executed the instrument of behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that
such City executed the same.
o "•Ser._ � �• � ' �„_
(SEAL) r Notary Pdbfic fkAaho
y
Commission expires: Z�-0b
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-004) -14
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-C
REQUEST Contract for Additional Support Services for Existing Model Update with
JUB Engineers, Inc.
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER: See attached
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL 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.
To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green
From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer
CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer
Date: 03/02/2006
Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 7, 2006 City Council Meeting
City Of Merid_aa-u
City Clerk Office
The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the
March 7 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration:
Additional Support Services for Existing Model Update JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a
task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to
complete the work for $17,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater
services agreement approved by City Council on the 3`d of January, 2006 for the Engineering
Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects.
This project consists of a contract amount increase to accommodate additional modeling
support services which includes training, on call, and construction assistance services.
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the contract for the Support Services for Existing
Model Update with JUB Engineers, Inc. for an additional $17,000 and authorize
the Mayor to sign it.
Riaht of Wav Aareement for the Ten Mile Diversion Trunk A request for a right-of-way
agreement with the Union Pack Railroad to construct an 18 -inch sewer line and 10" water
lines across the railroad has been received by the Public Works Department. This right-of-
way agreement is necessary in order to construct the Ten Mile Diversion Trunk:
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the Right -of --Way Agreement to construct sewer and
water lines across the railroad with a permit fee of $13,300 and authorize the
Mayor to sign it.
0 Page 1
C (� J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc,
250 S. Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 • Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 • Telephone (208) 376-7330 • FAX (208) 323-9336
AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES — No.4
CLIENT: City of Meridian
PROJECT NAME: Misc. Wastewater Proiects
J -U -B Project Number: 10-05-025
The following additional items of work on the project referenced above have been or will be
provided by J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. These additional services are a supplement to the scope of
services contained in J -U -B's existing Agreement for Engineering Services for this project, dated
Feb. 15. 2005 —
J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc. was verbally authorized to provide these services by:
n/a
Name
n/a
Date
Unless otherwise noted below, J -U -B ENGINEERS, .Inc. will provide these additional services on a
time and materials basis, using the Firm's standard billing rates, or if applicable, the billing rates
established in the initial Agreement for Engineering Services.
Other Basis for Payment: Time and materials basis per existing agreement
Dated this day of , 2006
City of Meridian
Print or Type Client Name
IN
Client or Representative Signature
Tammy de Weerd Mayor
Print or Type Name and Title
J -U -B ENGINEERS, Inc.
By:
4rojiledRepresentative Signature
Phillip H. Krichbaum, P.E. Project Mgr.
Print or Type Name and Title
•
•
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-D
REQUEST Right of Way Agreement for the Ten Mile Division Trunk
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER: See altached
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
u
ity Of Meridian
City Clerk Office
Memo
To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green
From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer
CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer
Date: 03/02/2006
Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 7, 2006 City Council Meeting
The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the
March 7 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration:
Additional Support Services for Existing Model Update. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a
task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to
complete the work for $17,000. This is an extension of the miscellaneous wastewater
services agreement approved by City Council on the 3'd of January, 2006 for the Engineering
Services for Miscellaneous Wastewater Projects.
This project consists of a contract amount increase to accommodate additional modeling
support services which includes training, on call, and construction assistance services.
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the contract for the Support Services for Existing
Model Update with JUB Engineers, Inc. for an additional $17,000 and authorize
the Mayor to sign it.
It" Right of Way Agreement for the Ten Mile Diversion Trunk. A request for a right-of-way
agreement with the Union Pacific Railroad to construct an 18 -inch sewer line and 10" water
lines across the railroad has been received by the Public Works Department. This right-of-
way agreement is necessary in order to construct the Ten Mile Diversion Trunk:
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the Right -of -Way Agreement to construct sewer and
water lines across the railroad with a permit fee of $13,300 and authorize the
Mayor to sign it.
0 Page 1
0
•
Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding
any of these items.
0 Page 2
February 23, 2006
Folder: 02365-42
PHIL KRICHBAUM
JUB ENGINEERS, INC.
250 SO BEECHWOOD
BOISE ID 83709
0 0
UNION
PACIFIC
k nALL a L:ers
i
2 -1 2006
f
sF. 1®Ai-iC)
Re: Proposed 22.047 Inch Sewer Pipeline Crossing of Railroad Property at Mile Post 459.95 on the
Boise Subdivision/Branch at or near Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
Phil,
Attached are duplicate originals of an agreement covering your use of the Railroad Company's right of
way. Please execute or arrange for execution of the attached document and have the signatures witnessed
or attested, as indicated. Please RETURN ALL COPIES of the document for execution on behalf of the
Railroad Company in the enclosed self-addressed envelope. Your copy of the fully -executed document
will be returned to you, if approved by the Railroad Company. Also, please provide a resolution or other
authorization for the party executing the documents, and Insurance Certificates, as required by the
agreement.
Also attached is Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement which must be executed and returned in
accordance with the attached agreement, if work is to be performed by a contractor.
Payment in the amount of Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($13,300.00) is due and payable
upon your execution of the agreement. Please include your check, with Folder No. 02365-42 written on
the front, made payable to Union Pacific Railroad Company, with the return of the documents. This
agreement will not be accepted by the Railroad Company until the initial payment is received and all
Insurance Certificates are in proper form. If you require formal billing, you may consider this letter as a
formal bill. In compliance with the Internal Revenue Service's policy regarding Form 1099, I certify that
94-6001323 is the Railroad Company's correct Federal Taxpayer Identification Number and that Union
Pacific Railroad Company is doing business as a corporation.
Real Estate
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
1400 Douglas Street, Stop 1690
Omaha, Nebraska 68179-1690
fx. (402) 501-0340
0
If we have not received the executed documents within six months from the date of this letter, this
proposed offer of an agreement is withdrawn and becomes null and void.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (402) 544-8563.
Yours truly,
Jon E. Devish
Manager - Contracts
PL X 940206
Form Approved, AVP -Law
E
PIPELINE CROSSING
AGREEMENT
r7�
Mile Post: 459.95, Boise Subdivision/Branch
Location: Meridian, Ada County, Idaho
Folder No. 02365-42
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of January 16, 2006, by and between UNION
PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, (hereinafter the "Licensor") and CITY
OF MERIDIAN, an Idaho municipal corporation to be addressed at C/o Jub Engineers, Inc., 250 So
Beechwood , Boise, Idaho 83709 (hereinafter the "Licensee").
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS:
Article I. LICENSE FEE.
Upon execution of this Agreement, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor a one-time License Fee
of Thirteen Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($13,300.00)
Article II. LICENSOR GRANTS RIGHT.
In consideration of the License Fee to be paid by the Licensee and in further consideration of the
covenants and agreements herein contained to be by the Licensee kept, observed and performed, the
Licensor hereby grants to the Licensee the right to construct and thereafter, during the term hereof, to
maintain and operate only a
One 22.047 inch sewer pipeline crossing and one 11.1 inch water pipeline (hereinafter the "Pipeline")
in the location shown and in conformity with the dimensions and specifications indicated on the attached
prints dated January 16, 2006, marked Exhibit A and Exhibit A-1. Under no circumstances shall Licensee
modify the use of the Pipeline for a purpose other than the above-mentioned, and said Pipeline shall not
be used for any other use, whether such use is currently technologically possible, or whether such use
may come into existence during the life of this Agreement.
Article III. CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION.
The grant of right herein made to the Licensee is subject to each and all of the terms, provisions,
conditions, limitations and covenants set forth herein and in Exhibit B, hereto attached. -
Article IV. IF WORK IS TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR
If a contractor is to do any of the work performed on the Pipeline (including initial construction
and subsequent relocation or substantial maintenance and repair work), then the Licensee shall require its.
contractor to execute the Railroad's form Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement. Licensee acknowledges
receipt of a copy of the Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement and understanding of its terms, provisions,
0
and requirements, and will inform its contractor of the need to execute the Agreement. Under no
circumstances will Licensee's contractor be allowed onto Licensor's premises without first executing the
Contractor's Right of Entry Agreement.
Article V. INSURANCE.
A. The Licensee, at its expense, shall obtain the insurance described in Exhibit B-1, hereto
attached. The Licensee will also provide to the Licensor a Certificate of Insurance, identifying Folder
No. 0236542, issued by its insurance carrier confirming the existence of such insurance and that the
policy or policies contain the following endorsement:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY is named as an additional insured with respect
to all liabilities arising out of the existence, use or any work performed on or associated
with the Pipeline' located on Railroad right-of-way at Mile Post 459.95, on the Boise
Subdivision/Branch, at or near Meridian, Ada County, Idaho.
B. If the Licensee named in this Agreement is a public entity subject to any applicable statutory
tort laws, the limits of insurance described in Exhibit B-1 shall be the limits the Licensee then has in
effect or which is required by applicable current or subsequent, law, whichever is greater, a portion of
which may be self-insured with the consent and approval of the Licensor
C. All insurance correspondence shall be directed to:
Jon E. Devish
Folder No. 02365-42
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Real Estate Department
1400 Douglas Street STOP 1690
Omaha, NE 68179-1690
Article VI. TERM.
This Agreement shall take effect as of the date first herein written and shall continue in full force
and effect until terminated as herein provided.
Article VII SPECIAL PROVISONS
1. Union Pacific will allow the casing to be installed as shown on the exhibit A print.
2. A railroad inspector is required to monitor the ground and track for movement during the jacking
process. The installation process and all train movement must be immediately stopped if any movement is
detected. The damaged area must be immediately repaired. The installation process must be reviewed and
modified as required before the installation may proceed. Applicant must pay inspector's expense and the
cost of any required repairs.
3. The manholes must be design for HS -20 loading. Installation of the manhole cannot create a tripping or
stumbling hazard.
4. Idaho Northern and Pacific Railroad must approve the installation.
0 •
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of
the date first herein written.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY CITY OF MERIDIAN
I�
Director - Contracts Title:
PLACE ARROW INDICATING NORTH
DIRECTION RELATIVE TO CROSSING
70
y4moA
ItIEAREST R.R. TOWNI M1
NO SCALE
FORM DR -0404-8
REV. 5- 15- 98
ENCASED NON-FLAMMABLE
Vvi`FT. Y'
(SEE NOTE 3 S 5)
MAIN TRACK
(DESCRIBE FIXED OBJECT
(SEE NOTE B)
I DISTANCE ALONG TRACK FROM SEC ION LINE CROSSINGI
(NOTE: THIS DIMENSION 14EQUIREO IN ALL CASES.
AT LOCATIONS NOT USING SECTIONS. O1S1
TO A LEM SURVEY LINE IS REOUIRED)
MIN. DIST
�I1 See tote
14.5 FT rMIN.)
(20 ft. 1 M=X. )
.1� CASING
I I
—-------------
0 /
I
2 IS D Fi.—►�
I5 Fr. fA7O FT,
PIPELINE CROSSING
NOTE: ALL AVAILABLE.DIMENSIONS MUST BE
FILLED IN TO PROCESS THIS APPLICATION.
YO _ SIR'S R -W
FT.
FT.
( SEE NOTE 3 8 5) 1� JQ9 FT.
3j1 .4; • �j s I C
(ANG •
LE OF CROSSING) alai TO 0_4414
1
(NEAREST R. R. TOWNS
EDESCR;SEEFIXED OBJECT
/YTD FT.
9
GROUWND • 1°`
SURFACE
SWC 4AGE
I4�
FT. 5 L AS
Note 4) (3 FTy MN;)
CARRIER PIPE \
�Q FT.
J FT. I
124 FT.
NOTES i
IS ALL HORIZONTAL DISTANCES TO BE MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES EFFROM 4 OF TRAMED ALONG PIPELINE.)
ZI CASING TO EXTEND BEYOND THE f OF TRACK AT RIGHT "SOLES THE GREATER OF 20 • 20 FT., OR 30 FT.,
AND BEYOND LIMIT OF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY IF NECESSARY TO PROVIDE PROPER LENGTH OUTSIDE OF TRACK.
31MINIMUM OF 50' FROM THE END OF ANY RAILROAD BRIDGE, 9 OF ANY CULVERT, OR FROM ANY SWITCHING Al"
41 SIGNAL REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT DURING INSTALLATION IF RAILROAD SIGNALS ARE IN THE VICINITY OF CROSSING.
S1 ALLOWABLE FIXED OBJECTS INCLUDES BACKWALLS OF BRIDGES; R OF ROAD CROSSINGS B OVERHEAD VIADUCTS (GIVE ROAD NAMES, OR CULVERTS.
BI `... AE.1111 108 PIIPE'MUST BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET BELOW THE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC CABLE. ANY EXCAVATION REQUIRED WITHIN
ISTEEL CASING WALL
THICKNESS CHART
MINIMUM DIAMETER OF
THICKNESS CASING PIPE
.3125" 511611 OVER12"-IB"
.3750' 3/8" OVER 18"-22"
.4375' 7/16' OVER 22--28"
.5000" I/2" OVER 28"-34"
5625' 9/16' OVER 34"-42"
6250" 5/8" OVER 42" -48 -
OVER 48" MUST BE
APPROVED BY R.R. CO.
NOTES THIS CHART IS ONLY
FOR SMOOTH STEEL CASING
PIPES WITH MINIMUM YIELD
STRENGTH OF 35,000 PSI.
FORMULA TO FIGURE CASING
LENGTH WITH ANGLE OF
CROSSING OTHER THAN 90-
I& SIN
B
`14 M1N.OIST.
( NOTE 2)
TIIACK
A)
15 PIPELINE CROSSING WITHIN DEDICATED STREET ?--YES; X NO;
IT "A"EXHIB
IBILAW
B)
IF YES, NAME OF STREET
D)
DISTRIBUTION LINE OR TRANSMISSION LINE X
Na UM OgYI
C)
CARRIER PIPE :
COMMODITY TO BE CONVEYED 5E)AJr4&a
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO.
OPERATING PRESSURE d PSIa
WALL THICKNESS -105.4" ;DIAMETER�2 'L�IJ< ;MATERIAL PVC.
0 IS -` L.s,t.A 1 o d /VPIe J
IsuwIv,slcNl
E)
l
CASING PIPE :m.
WALL THICKNESS �� ;DIAMETER 3104' ;MATERIAL GAOL ;
P 14sg.c15. E. S. 389 +99 t
NOTE :CASING MUST HAVE 2" CLEARANCE BETWEEN GREATEST
ENCASED Sew— CROSSING AT
OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF CARRIER PIPE AND INTERIOR DIAMETER OF
CASING PIPE. WHEN FURNISHING DIMENSIONS, GIVE OUTSIDE OF
0
CARRIER PIPE AND INSIDE OF CASING PIPE.E:*
cN**• cmA+m sr.rX
F)
METHOD_pF INSTALLING CASING PIPE UNDER TRACK(S):
1C
�'t f /n.
DRY BORE AND JACK (WET BORE NOT PERMITTED) ;
a 'e`I^
G)
TUNNEL ;OTHER
WILL CONSTRUCTION BE BY AN OUTSIDE CONTRACTOR? _�_YES; ti0;
�ev�.a
RR FILE N0. !3 - 512. DATE 1-16-06
H)
DISTANCE FROM CENTER LINE OF TRACK TO NEAR FACE OFBORT G AND
JACKING PITS WHEN MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO TRACK
W A R N 1 N G
I)
APPLICANT HAS CONTACTED 1-800-336-9193, (30• MIN.)
IN ALL OCCASIONS, U. P. COMIAlNICATIONS
U.. P. COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT, AND HAS DETERMINED FIBER
DEPARTMENT MUST BE CONTACTED IN ADVANCE
OPTIC CABLE DOES ;—DOES NOT ; EXIST IN VICINITY OF
WORK TO BE PERFORMED TfCKET NO. 71Y3 i/C1f5
of ANY WQRK TO DETERMINE EXISTENCE ANO
LOCATION OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE.
.
PHOS 1 I-800-339193
•
PLACE ARROW INDICATING NORTH
DIRECTION RELATIVE TO CROSSING
3�V4.
.ry�2v v
---J Q'/
„ 32
6P O
n' tl� oe
i0
INEAPEST R.R. fOMN) Vh
r
NO SCALE
•
FORM DR- 0404- B
REV. 5-15-98
ENCASED ED N®N-FLAMMA BLE
—FT.
—1-. FT.—
(SEE NOTE 3 8 5)
�G MAIN TRACK
PIPELINIE CROSSING
NOTE: ALL AVAILABLE DIMENSIONS MUST BE
FILLED IN TO PROCESS THIS APPLICATION.
lb=
W•5tAmapa LLP.'
(DESCRIBE FIXED OBJECT
( SEE NOTE 6) a
(DISTANCE ALONG TRACK FROM SECTION LINE CROSSING)
~ *FT.
.y
$� (NOTE: AT I LOCATIONS NOT TIIONSNOTUSING SECTIONS, DISTANCE
TO A LEGAL SURVEY LINE 15 REOUIR_EO)
kR' S RIW
IDv FT.
MIN to 2)2)
I (See Note
I
RDA DBED
(4.5 FT MIN.)
L_//%_9FT. (20 FT. MAX. )
e—SEAL CASING I lr CASING 1,1 11588 Note 4)
_ FT.
FT.
(SEE NOTE 3 8 5) . )Qi3 FT.
- q2 " o
TO
f
`.S&_TIOWJ LLN2
(DESCR( SBE EEFNOTE 5)D OBJECT)
RR' = R/W
.3125" 5/ i6" OVER �I2 =�18'
.3750" 3/8" OVER IB" -22-
.4315:17'.1"12
2"
.4375" 7/16" OVER 22"-28"
SEAL CASING •5000" I/2" OVER 28"-34"
(3 FT.
FT. .50
.5625"19/ 16" OVER 34"-42"
.6250' 5/8" OVER 42"-48"
OVER 48" MUST BE
IE \ APPROVED BY R. R. CO.
I / 2 D 15 FT.—' I
5 FT.
I H2 FT. ,J/ HZ FT. I
Y4 FT.
FT.
NOTES
NOTES - (CASING LENGTH WHEN MEASURED ALONG PIPELINE.)
11 ALL HORIZONTAL DISTANCES TO BE MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROMCE OF TRACK.
21 CASINGTO EXTEND BEYOND THE £ OF TRACK AT RIGHT ANGLES THE GREATER OF 20 • 20 FT., OR 30 FT.,
AND BEYOND LIMIT OF RAILROAD RIGHT -OF -MAT IF NECESSARY TO PROVIDE PROPER LENGTH OUTSIDE OF TRACK.
3)MI NIMUM
OF 50• FROM THE END OF ANY RAILROAD BRIDGE, G. OF ANY CULVERT, OR FROM ANY SWITCHING AREA.
01 SIGNAL OF
MUST BE PRESENT DURING INSTALLATION IF RAILROAD SIGNALS ARE IN THE VICINITY OF CROSSING.
5) ALLOWABLE FIXED OBJECTS INCLUDE: BACKWALLS OF BRIDGES; 4. OF ROAD CROSSINGS 8 OVERHEAD VIADUCTS (GIVE ROAD NAME), OR CULVERTS
6) CASING AND CARRIER PIPE MUST BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET BELOW THE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC CARLE. ANY EXCAVATION REOUIREO WITHIN
S. FEET OF THE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC CABLE MUST BE HAND DUG.
NOTE: THIS CHART 15 ONLY
FOR SMOOTH STEEL CASING
PIPES WITH MINIMUM YIELD
STRENGTH OF 35.000 P51.
FORMULA TO FIGURE CASING
LENGTH WITH ANGLE OF
CROSSING OTHER THAN 90R
B 4?`l!
!A SIN
y` B
`Itis MIN.OIST.
(NOTE 2)
TRACK
A)
1W FT.
EXHIBIT "A"T'
B)
s
GROUND
SURFACE
g
DISTRIBUTION LINE X_ OR TRANSMISSION LINE
STEEL CASING WALL
THICKNESS CHART
(
CARRIER PIPE :
MINIMUM
DIAMETER
SIRIGIIAOE
IIY� +� J
a
THICKNESS
I CASING PI
.3125" 5/ i6" OVER �I2 =�18'
.3750" 3/8" OVER IB" -22-
.4315:17'.1"12
2"
.4375" 7/16" OVER 22"-28"
SEAL CASING •5000" I/2" OVER 28"-34"
(3 FT.
FT. .50
.5625"19/ 16" OVER 34"-42"
.6250' 5/8" OVER 42"-48"
OVER 48" MUST BE
IE \ APPROVED BY R. R. CO.
I / 2 D 15 FT.—' I
5 FT.
I H2 FT. ,J/ HZ FT. I
Y4 FT.
FT.
NOTES
NOTES - (CASING LENGTH WHEN MEASURED ALONG PIPELINE.)
11 ALL HORIZONTAL DISTANCES TO BE MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROMCE OF TRACK.
21 CASINGTO EXTEND BEYOND THE £ OF TRACK AT RIGHT ANGLES THE GREATER OF 20 • 20 FT., OR 30 FT.,
AND BEYOND LIMIT OF RAILROAD RIGHT -OF -MAT IF NECESSARY TO PROVIDE PROPER LENGTH OUTSIDE OF TRACK.
3)MI NIMUM
OF 50• FROM THE END OF ANY RAILROAD BRIDGE, G. OF ANY CULVERT, OR FROM ANY SWITCHING AREA.
01 SIGNAL OF
MUST BE PRESENT DURING INSTALLATION IF RAILROAD SIGNALS ARE IN THE VICINITY OF CROSSING.
5) ALLOWABLE FIXED OBJECTS INCLUDE: BACKWALLS OF BRIDGES; 4. OF ROAD CROSSINGS 8 OVERHEAD VIADUCTS (GIVE ROAD NAME), OR CULVERTS
6) CASING AND CARRIER PIPE MUST BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET BELOW THE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC CARLE. ANY EXCAVATION REOUIREO WITHIN
S. FEET OF THE EXISTING FIBER OPTIC CABLE MUST BE HAND DUG.
NOTE: THIS CHART 15 ONLY
FOR SMOOTH STEEL CASING
PIPES WITH MINIMUM YIELD
STRENGTH OF 35.000 P51.
FORMULA TO FIGURE CASING
LENGTH WITH ANGLE OF
CROSSING OTHER THAN 90R
B 4?`l!
!A SIN
y` B
`Itis MIN.OIST.
(NOTE 2)
TRACK
A)
IS PIPELINE CROSSING WITHIN DEDICATED STREET T YES; R NO;
EXHIBIT "A"T'
B)
IF YES, NAME OF STREET
(FOR RAILROAD USE ONLY(
D)
DISTRIBUTION LINE X_ OR TRANSMISSION LINE
-
C)
CARRIER PIPE :
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO.
COMMODITY TO BE CONVEYED WtAUR.
�o
IIY� +� J
a
OPERATING PRESSUREPSI r
o� S c L e 4ir
WALL THICKNESS .101}" ;DIAMETER 11.16 -MATERIAL' ;
(sueDiYlslaw
E)
CASING PIPE : . "
_
M. P E. Se 3g0t10+
WALL THICKNESS 1 ;DIAMETER Itp ;MATERIAL lEBL ;
NOTE :CASING MUST HAVE 2" CLEARANCE BETWEEN GREATEST
ENCASED e. CROSSING AT
OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF CARRIER PIPE AND INTERIOR DIAMETER OF
CASING PIPE. WHEN FURNISHING DIMENSIONS, GIVE OUTSIDE OF
20
CARRIER PIPE AND INSIDE OF CASING PIPE.
(NEAREST CITY( I COLRRYI I STATE(
F)
METHOD OF INSTALLING CASING PIPE UNDER TRACK(S):T
�~
C ��
C DRY BORE AND JACK ( WET BORE NOT PERMITTED) ;
t,
D LIAL
I CANT,
TUNNEL ; OTHER
RR FILE NO.1.V- _*J_L DATE I-#6-oL
G)
WILL CONSTRUCTION BE BY AN OUTSIDE CONTRACTOR? X YES; ti0;
H)
DISTANCE FROM CENTER LINE OF TRACK TO NEAR FACE OF BORING AND
W A R N I N G
JACKING PITS WHEN MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO TRACK 441'
I)
APPLICANT HAS CONTACTED 1-800-336-9193 130 MIN.)
IN ALL OCC4510N5, Il P. COMMUNICATIONS
U. P. COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT AND HAS DETERMINED FIBER
DEPARTMENT MUST BE CONTACTED IN ADVANCE
OF ANY TO DETERMINE EXISTENCE AND
OPTIC CABLE DOES
1E— ;—DOES NOT ; EXIST IN VICINITY OF
ATI
LOCATION OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE.
WORK TO BE PERFORMED . TICKET NO. Zoos SI OT 53.
PHONE : I-800-336-9193
PL X 980112
Form Approved, AVP -Law
EXHIBIT B
Section 1. LIMITATION AND SUBORDINATION OF RIGHTS GRANTED.
(a) The foregoing grant of right is subject and subordinate to the prior and continuing right and
obligation of the Licensor to use and maintain its entire property including the right and power of the
Licensor to construct, maintain, repair, renew, use, operate, change, modify or relocate railroad tracks,
signal, communication, fiber optics, or other wirelines, pipelines and other facilities upon, along or across
any or all parts of its property, all or any of which may be freely done at any time or times by the Licensor
without liability to the Licensee or to any other party for compensation or damages.
(b) The foregoing grant is also subject to all outstanding superior rights (including those in favor of
licensees and lessees of the Licensor's property, and others) and the right of the Licensor to renew and
extend the same, and is made wi4ut covenant of title or for quiet enjoyment.
Section 2. CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION.
(a) The Pipeline shall be constructed, operated, maintained, repaired, renewed, modified and/or
reconstructed by the Licensee in strict conformity with Union Pacific Railroad Co. Common Standard
Specification 1029 adopted November 1949, and all amendments thereof and supplements thereto, which
by this reference is hereby made a part hereof, except as may be modified and approved by the Licensor's
Vice President -Engineering Services. In the event such Specification conflicts in any respect with the
requirements of any federal, state or municipal law or regulation, such requirements shall govern on all
points of conflict, but in all other respects the Specification shall apply.
(b) All work performed on property of the Licensor in connection with the construction,
maintenance, repair, renewal, modification or reconstruction of the Pipeline shall be done to the
satisfaction of the Licensor.
(c) Prior to the commencement of any work in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair,
renewal, modification, relocation, reconstruction or removal of the Pipeline where it passes underneath
the roadbed and track or tracks of the Licensor, the Licensee shall submit to the Licensor plans setting out
the method and manner of handling the work, including the shoring and cribbing, if any, required to
protect the Licensor's operations, and shall not proceed with the work until such plans have been
approved by the Vice President -Engineering Services of the Licensor and then the work shall be done to
the satisfaction of the Vice President -Engineering Services or his authorized representative. The Licensor
shall have the right, if it so elects, to provide such support as it may deem necessary for the safety of its
track or tracks during the time of construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, relocation,
reconstruction or removal of the Pipeline, and, in the event the Licensor provides such support, the
Licensee shall pay to the Licensor, within fifteen 05) days after bills shall have been rendered therefor, all
expense incurred by the Licensor in connection therewith, which expense shall include all assignable
costs.
(d) The Licensee shall keep and maintain the soil over the Pipeline thoroughly compacted and the
grade even with the adjacent surface of the ground.
plx.exb
Exhibit B
0 0
PL X 980112
Form Approved, AVP -Law
Section 3. NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
If an emergency should arise requiring immediate attention, the Licensee shall provide as much notice as
practicable to Licensor before commencing any work. In all other situations, the Licensee shall notify the
Licensor at least ten (10) days (or such other time as the Licensor may allow) in advance of the
commencement of any work upon property of the Licensor in connection with the construction;
maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation or removal of the Pipeline. All
such work shall be prosecuted diligently to completion.
Section 4. LICENSEE TO BEAR EN'T'IRE EXPENSE.
The Licensee shall bear the entire cost and expense incurred in connection with the construction,
maintenance, repair and renewal and any and all modification, revision, relocation, removal or
reconstruction of the Pipeline, including any and all expense which may be incurred by the Licensor in
connection therewith for supervision, inspection, flagging, or otherwise.
Section 5. REINFORCEMENT, RELOCATION OR REMOVAL OF PIPELINE.
(a) The license herein granted is subject to the needs and requirements of the Licensor in the
operation of its railroad and in the improvement and use of its property, and the Licensee shall, at the sole
expense of the Licensee, reinforce the Pipeline, or move all or any portion of the Pipeline to such new
location as the Licensor may designate, whenever, in the furtherance of its needs and requirements, the
Licensor shall find such action necessary or desirable.
(b) All the terms, conditions and stipulations herein expressed with reference to the Pipeline on
property of the Licensor in the location hereinbefore described shall, so far as the Pipeline remains on the
property, apply to the Pipeline as modified, changed or relocated within the contemplation of this section.
Section 6. NO INTERFERENCE WITH LICENSOR'S OPERATION.
The Pipeline and all parts thereof within and outside of the limits of the property of the Licensor shall be
constructed and, at all times, maintained, repaired, renewed and operated in such manner as to cause no
interference whatsoever with the constant, continuous and uninterrupted use of the tracks, property and
facilities of the Licensor, and nothing shall be done or suffered to be done by the Licensee at any time that
would in any manner impair the safety thereof.
Section 7. PROTECTION OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE SYSTEMS.
(a) Fiber optic cable systems may be buried on the Licensor's property. Protection of the fiber optic
cable systems is of extreme importance since any break could disrupt service to users resulting in business
interruption and loss of revenue and profits. Licensee shall telephone the Licensor at 1-800-336-9193 (a
24-hour number) to determine if fiber optic cable is buried anywhere on the Licensor's premises to be
used by the Licensee. If it is, Licensee will telephone the telecommunications company(ies) involved,
arrange for a cable locator, make arrangements for relocation or other protection of the fiber optic cable,
all at Licensees expense, and will commence no work on the right of way until all such protection or
relocation has been accomplished. Licensee shall indemnify and hold the Licensor harmless from and
against all costs, liability and expense whatsoever (including, without limitation, attorneys'. fees, court
costs and expenses) arising out of or caused in any way by Licensee's failure to comply with the
provisions of this paragraph.
plx.exb
Exhibit B
PL X 980112
Forth Approved, AVP -law
(b) In addition to other indemnity provisions in this Agreement, the Licensee shall indemnify and
hold the Licensor harmless from and against all costs, liability and expense whatsoever (including,
without limitation, attorneys' fees, court costs and expenses) caused by the negligence of the Licensee, its
contractor, agents and/or employees, resulting in (1) any damage to or destruction of any
telecommunications system on Licensor's property, and/or (2) any injury to or death of any person
employed, by or on behalf of any telecommunications company, and/or its contractor, agents and/or
employees, on Licensor's property, except if such costs, liability or expenses are caused solely by the
direct active negligence of the Licensor. Licensee further agrees that it shall not have or seek recourse
against Licensor for any claim or cause of action for alleged loss of profits or revenue or loss of service or
other consequential damage to a telecommunication company using Licensor's property or a customer or
user of services of the fiber optic cable on Licensor's property.
Section S. CLAIMS AND LIENS FOR LABOR AND MATEERUL; TAXES.
(a) The Licensee shall fully pay for all materials joined or affixed to and labor performed upon
property of the Licensor in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification
or reconstruction of the Pipeline,. and shall not permit or suffer any mechanic's or materiahnan's lien of
any kind or nature to be enforced against the property for any work done or materials furnished thereon at
the instance or request or on behalf of the Licensee. The Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless the
Licensor against and from any and all liens, claims, demands, costs and expenses of whatsoever nature in
any way connected with or growing out of such work done, labor performed, or materials furnished.
(b) The Licensee shall promptly pay or discharge all taxes, charges and assessments levied upon, in
respect to, or on account of the Pipeline, to prevent the same from becoming a charge or lien upon
property of the Licensor, and so that the taxes, charges and assessments levied upon or in respect to such
property shall not be increased because of the location, construction or maintenance of the Pipeline or any
improvement, appliance or fixture connected therewith placed upon such property, or on account of the
Licensee's interest therein. Where such tax, charge or assessment may not be separately made or assessed
to the Licensee but shall be included in the assessment of the property of the Licensor, then the Licensee
shall pay to the Licensor an equitable proportion of such taxes, determined by the value of the Licensee's
property upon property of the Licensor as compared with the entire value of such property.
Section 9. RESTORATION OF LICENSOR'S PROPERTY.
In the event the Licensor authorizes the Licensee to take down any fence of the Licensor or in any manner
move or disturb any of the other property of the Licensor in connection with the construction,
maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation orremovaI of the Pipeline, then in
that event the Licensee shall, as soon as possible and at Licensee's sole expense, restore such fence and
other property to the same condition as the same were in before such fence was taken down or such other
property was moved or disturbed, and the Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor, its
officers, agents and employees, against and from any and all liability, loss, damages, claims, demands,
costs and expenses of whatsoever nature, including court costs and attorneys' fees, which may result from
injury to or death of persons whomsoever, or damage to or loss or destruction of property whatsoever,
when such injury, death, damage, loss or destruction grows out of or arises from the taking down of any
fence or the moving or disturbance of any other property of the Licensor.
plx.exb
Exhibit B
PL X 980112
Form Approved, AVP -Law
Section 10. INDEMNITY.
(a) As used in this Section, "Licensor" includes other railroad companies using the Licensor's
property at or near the location of the Licensee's installation and their officers, agents, and employees;
"Loss" includes loss, damage, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, penalties, costs, and expenses of
whatsoever nature, including court costs and attorneys' fees, which may result from: (a) injury to or death
of persons whomsoever (including the Licensor's officers, agents, and employees, the Licensee's officers,
agents, and employees, as well as any other person); and/or (b) damage to or loss or destruction of
property whatsoever (including Licensee's property, damage to the roadbed, tracks, equipment, or other
property of the Licensor, or property in its care or custody).
(b) As a major inducement and in consideration of the license and permission herein granted, the
Licensee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Licensor from any Loss which is due to or arises
from:
The prosecution of any work contemplated by this Agreement including the installation,
construction, maintenance, repair, renewal, modification, reconstruction, relocation, or removal of
the Pipeline or any part thereof; or
2. The presence, operation, or use of the Pipeline or contents escaping therefrom,
except to the extent that the Loss is caused by the sole and direct negligence of the Licensor.
Section 11. REMOVAL OF PIPE LINE UPON TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT.
Prior to the termination of this Agreement howsoever, the Licensee shall, at Licensee's sole expense,
remove the Pipeline from those portions of the property not occupied by the roadbed and track or tracks
of the Licensor and shall restore, to the satisfaction of the Licensor, such portions of such property to as
good a condition as they were in at the time of the construction of the Pipeline. If the Licensee fails to do
the foregoing, the Licensor may do such work of removal and restoration at the cost and expense of the
Licensee. The Licensor may, at its option, upon such termination, at the entire cost and expense of the
Licensee, remove the portions of the Pipeline located underneath its roadbed and track or tracks and
restore such roadbed to as good a condition as it was in at the time of the construction of the Pipeline, or it
may permit the Licensee to do such work of removal and restoration to the satisfaction of the Licensor. In
the event of the removal by the Licensor of the property of the Licensee and of the restoration of the
roadbed and property as herein provided, the Licensor shall in no manner be liable to the Licensee for any
damage sustained by the Licensee for or on account thereof, and such removal and restoration shall in no
manner prejudice or impair any right of action for damages, or otherwise, that the Licensor may have
against the Licensee.
Section 12. WAIVER OF BREACH.
The waiver by the Licensor of the breach of any condition, covenant or agreement herein contained to be
kept, observed and performed by the Licensee shall in no way impair the right of the Licensor to avail
itself of any remedy for any subsequent breach thereof.
plx.exb
Exhibit B
PL X 980112
Form Approved, AVP -Law
Section 13. MAIINATION.
(a) If the Licensee does not use the right herein granted or the Pipeline for one (1) year, or if the
Licensee continues in default in the performance of any covenant or agreement herein contained for a
period of thirty (30) days after written notice from the Licensor to the Licensee specifying such default,
the Licensor may, at its option, forthwith immediately terminate this Agreement by written notice.
(b) In addition to the provisions of subparagraph (a) above, this Agreement may be terminated by
written notice given by either party hereto to the other on any date in such notice stated, not less,
however, than thirty (30) days subsequent to the date upon which such notice shall be given.
(c) Notice of default and notice of termination may be served personally upon the Licensee or by
mailing to the last known address of the Licensee. Termination of this Agreement for any reason shall
not affect any of the rights or obligations of the parties hereto which may have accrued, or liabilities,
accrued or otherwise, which may have arisen prior thereto.
g
Section 14. AGREEMENT'NOT TO BE ASSIGNED.
The Licensee shall not assign this Agreement, in whole or in part, or any rights herein granted, without
the written consent of the Licensor, and it is agreed that any transfer or assignment or attempted transfer
or assignment of this Agreement or any of the rights herein granted, whether voluntary, by operation of
law, or otherwise, without such consent in writing, shall be absolutely void and, at the option of the
Licensor, shall terminate this Agreement.
Section 15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS.
Subject to the provisions of Section 14 hereof, this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the
benefit of the parties hereto, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
plx.exb
Exhibit B
PUWUDRAINAGE INS.
Form Approved, AVP -Law Updated 03/01/2003
EXHIBIT B-1
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Insurance Provisions For
Pipeline / Wireline / Drainage License Agreements
Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the life of this Agreement the
following insurance coverage:
A. Commercial General Liability insurance. This insurance shall contain broad form contractual
liability with a single limit of at least $2,000,000 each occurrence or claim and an aggregate limit of
at least $4,000,000. Coverage must be purchased on a post 1998 ISO or equivalent form, including
but not limited to coverage for the following:
• Bodily injury including death and personal injury
• Property damage
• Fire legal liability (Not less than the replacement value of the portion of the premises occupied)
• Products and completed operations
The policy shall also contain the following endorsements which shall be indicated on the certificate
of insurance:
• The employee and worker's compensation related exclusions in the above policy apply only to
Licensee's employees
• The exclusions for railroads (except where the Job site is more than fifty feet (50) from any railroad
including but not limited to tracks, bridges, trestles, roadbeds, terminals, underpasses or crossings),
and explosion, collapse and underground hazard shall be removed
• Waiver of subrogation
B. Business Automobile Coverage insurance. This insurance shall contain a combined single limit of
at least $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, including but not limited to coverage for the following:
• Bodily injury and property damage
• Any and all motor vehicles including owned, hired and non -owned
The policy shall also contain the following endorsements which shall be indicated on the certificate
of insurance:
• The employee and worker's compensation related exclusions in the above policy apply only to
Licensee's employees
• The exclusions for railroads (except where the Job site is more than fifty feet (50) from any railroad
including but not limited to tracks, bridges, trestles, roadbeds, terminals, underpasses or crossings),
and explosion, collapse and underground hazard shall be removed
0 Motor Carrier Act Endorsement- Hazardous materials clean up (MCS -90) if required by law.
PLIWL/DRAINAGE INS.
Form Approved, AVP -Law Updated 03/01/2003
C. Workers Compensation and Employers Liability insurance including but not limited to:
• Licensee's statutory liability under the workers' compensation laws of the state(s) affected by this
Agreement
• Employers' Liability (Part B) with limits of at least
$500,000 each accident, $500,000 disease policy limit
$500,000 each employee
If Workers Compensation insurance will not cover "the liability of Licensee in states that require
participation in state workers' compensation fund, Licensee shall comply with the laws of such states. If
Licensee is self-insured, evidence of state approval must be provided along with evidence of excess
workers compensation coverage. Coverage shall include liability arising out of the U. S. Longshoremen's
and Harbor Workers' Act, the Jones Act, and the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act, if applicable.
The policy shall also contain the following endorsement which shall be indicated on the certificate of
insurance:
Alternate Employer Endorsement
D. Umbrella or. Excess Policies In the event Licensee utilizes Umbrella or excess policies, these
policies shall "follow form" and afford no less coverage than the primary policy.
Other Requirements
E. Punitive damage exclusion must be deleted, which deletion shall be indicated on the certificate of
insurance.
F. Licensee agrees to waive its right of recovery, and its insurers, through policy endorsement, agree to
waive their right of subrogation against Licensor. Licensee fiirther waives its right of recovery, and
its insurers also waive their right of subrogation against Licensor for loss of its owned or leased
property or property under its care, custody and control. Licensee's insurance shall be primary with
respect to any insurance carried by. Licensor. All waivers of subrogation shall be indicated on the
certificate of insurance.
G. All policy(ies) required above (excluding Workers Compensation) shall provide severability of
interests and shall name Licensor as an additional insured. Severability of interest and naming
Licensor as additional insured shall be indicated on the certificate of insurance.
H. Prior to commencing the Work, Licensee shall furnish to Licensor original certificate(s) of insurance
evidencing the required coverage, endorsements, and amendments. The certificate(s) shall contain a
provision that obligates the insurance company(ies) issuing such policy(ies) to notify Licensor in
writing of any cancellation or material alteration. Upon request from Licensor, a certified
duplicate original of any required policy shall be furnished.
I. Any insurance policy shall be written by a reputable insurance company acceptable to Licensor or
with a current Best's Insurance Guide Rating of A- and Class VII or better, and authorized .to do
business in the state(s) in which the service is to be provided.
PIJWUDRAINAGE INS.
Form Approved, AVP -Law Updated 03/01/2003
I Licensee WARRANTS that this Agreement has been thoroughly reviewed by Licensee's insurance
agent(s)/broker(s), who have been instructed by Licensee to procure the insurance coverage required
by this Agreement and acknowledges that Licensee's insurance coverage will be primary.
K. The fact that insurance is obtained by Licensee or Licensor on behalf of Licensee shall not be deemed
to release or diminish the liability of Licensee, including, without limitation, liability under the
indemnity provisions of this Agreement. Damages recoverable by Licensor shall not be limited by
the amount of the required insurance coverage.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-E
REQUEST Well No. 27 Flush Line Easement with Cherry Lane Christian Church
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER: See attached
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
'RECEIVEI-)
MAR ® 2 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN
"I r,` CI F P K r!=I=1(`F
Memo
To: Will Berg; Tara Green
From: Jon Mills, Staff Engineer
CC: Len Grady, City Engineer
Date: 03/02/06
Re: Proposed Agenda Item for March 7, 2006 City Council Meeting
The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following three (3) items be placed on
the March 7 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration:
Well No. 27 Flush Line Easement with Cheny Lane Christian Church. This easement, as
shown in the attached copy, will grant a 20' permanent easement and larger temporary
construction easement across the north edge -of Cherry Lane Christian Church's property
near Franklin and Ten Mile Roads. The easement is necessary to accommodate the flush
line from the site of future City of Meridian Well 27 to its eventual outlet into Ten Mile Creek.
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the Easement with Chert' Lane Christian Church
for the Well No. 27 Flush Line and authorize the Mayor to sign it.
(Continued on attached)
0 Page 1
WATER FLUSH LINE EASEMENT
THIS INDENTURE, effective this day of , 2006, by the undersigned Cheny
Lane Christian Church, who maintains a mailing address of P.O. Box 671, Meridian, ID
83680, hereafter referred to as "GRANTOR" for the benefit of the City of Meridian, a
municipal corporation of the State of Idaho that maintains a mailing address of 33 East
Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642, hereafter referred to as "CITY'.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to have a flush line for WELL #27 from the well to Ten
Mile Creek as shown on the attached Exhibit A, and further described within this
instrument, and
WHEREAS, the GRANTOR is preparing to construct a lawn and recreation area
encompassing the proposed Flush Line during the early Spring months of 2006, and
WHEREAS, the GRANTOR and the CITY will mutually benefit from timely
installation of the flush line before landscaping and lawn installation occur;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of ONE HUNDRED ($100.00) dollars, and
other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and
convey unto the CITY the right-of-way and permanent easement for the
construction, operation and maintenance of a water flush line over and across the
following described property:
A parcel of land located in the Southeast'/ of Section 10, Township 3
North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho more
particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 5/8" iron pin
marking the section comer common to Sections 10, 11, 14 and 15;
thence North 0052'05" East along the centerline of Ten Mile Road a
distance of 1096.83 feet to a point; thence leaving said centerline
North 88026'51" West a distance of 48.00 feet to a 5/8" iron pin
located on the westerly right-of-way of Ten Mile Road, marking the
Point of Beginning; thence continuing North 88026'51" West a
distance of 495.21 feet to a point; thence South 45°32'44" West 48.37
feet to a point on the centerline of Ten Mile Creek; thence South
44°27'16" East along said centerline a distance of 20.00 feet to a
point; thence leaving said centerline North 45032'44" East a distance
of 39.88 feet to a point; thence South 88026'51" East a distance of
486.72 feet to a point; thence South 0045'46" West a distance of
130.01 feet to a point; thence South 88026'51" East a distance of
101.01 feet to a point on the westerly right-of-way of Ten Mile Road;
thence North 0052'05" East along said westerly right-of-way a distance
of 150.01 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Said easement contains 25,860 square feet (0.59 acres) and is
subject to any easements of record or in use.
WATER EASEMENT, Page 1 of 3
• 0
A temporary construction easement for the purpose of constructing the water line
and related incidental work, thirty feet in width lying adjacent to and south of the
above described permanent easement, is also hereby granted to the City. The
temporary construction easement shall expire when all work is complete and the
construction contract terminates.
The permanent easement and right-of-way hereby granted is for the purpose of
construction and operation of a water line and allied facilities, together with
maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the CITY, with the free
right of access to such facilities at any and all times.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said permanent easement and right-of-way unto the
said CITY, its successors and assigns forever.
1. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between
the parties hereto, that the CITY, in constructing and in making future
repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a
condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such
construction, repairs and replacement. However, the CITY will not be
responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent
structures, large trees or brush placed within the area described in
this easement.
THE GRANTOR(S) do hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow
to be placed any permanent structures, large trees or brush within the area
described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement,
for the purposes stated herein.
THE GRANTOR(S) does hereby covenant with the CITY that he is lawfully seized
and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a
good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever
defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons
whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto subscribed their signatures
the day and year first hereinabove written.
Grantor
Cherry Lane Christian Church
By: Larry Woodard, Outreach Minister
WATER EASEMENT, Page 2 of 3
0 0
STATE OF IDAHO)
) ss
County of Ada )
On this day of , 2006, before me ,
personally appeared Lary Woddard, Outreach Minister of the Cherry Lane Christian
Church, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that he executed
the same on behalf of the Cherry lane Christian Church.
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
My Commission Expires on
Beneficiary: CITY OF MERIDIAN
Tammy de Weerd, Mayor
ATTEST:
William Berg, Jr., City Clerk
Date approved by City Council:
WATER EASEMENT, Page 3 of 3
0 0
S1210447500
AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
S 45°32044" W
N _8_8'26'51 " W
f 495.21'
486.72'
�g'���4i
S 88'26'51 " E
45°32'44" E
S 44°27' 16" E
Q TEN MILE CREEK
SCALE: 1 "=50'
S1215110050
CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH
co
O ;1-
d in
0
101.01'
S 88'26'51 " E
101.01'
EXHIBIT "A"
SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY
EASEMENT DESCRIPTION
LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF
SECTION 10, T3N, R1 W, BM
ir)
0 I-
0
N p
�Lo
z
48.00
co
rn
0
W
Lo
0
N
O
M
S 89-15'22" E 10 111
FRANKLIN ROAD 15 14
u
L
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7,2W6
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-F
REQUEST Award of Bid for Well No. 27 Flush Line to Star Construction, LLC
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
COMMENTS
See attached
e
VJ�
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
•
0
Well No. 27 Flush Line Two bids were received for this project as summarized below, the
winning bid detailed in the attached spreadsheet:
Star Construction, LLC $39,485.52
Irminger Construction Inc. $43,436.00
This project consists of the construction of Water Well flush line piping across the north
boundary of Cherry Lane Christian Church's property at Franklin and Ten Mile. This project
is slated for fast-track completion by March 24 in order to accommodate the landscaping
plans of the church early this spring. The project was bid informally to keep to this schedule,
but exceeds current City of Meridian informal bid limits. However, since the bids are well
below the adopted State of Idaho informal bid limit of $100,000, the Public Works Department
requests that this bid be awarded as is.
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the contract for the Well No. 27 Flush Line with Star
Construction, LLC -for $39,485.52 and authorize the Mayor to sign it.
Blackrock Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding. This memorandum between the City
of Meridian and the new owners, Blackrock Developers, LLC, will establish the guidelines and
responsibilities of each party for the water and sewer service of Blackrock Subdivision near
Amity and Eagle Roads.
Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends
that City Council approves the Memorandum of Understanding with Blackrock
Developers, LLC regarding Blackrock Subdivision and authorize the Mayor to
sign it.
Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding
any of these items.
0 Page 2
5 T-4- -
U
BID FOR WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
WELL NO. 27 — BY-PASS PIPELINE
BIDDER acknowledges receipt of the following ADDENDUM:
Addendum No. 0 Dated:
NOTE: BIDS shall include sates tax and other applicable taxes and fees. Quantifies shown
are estimated and may vary during construction. BIDDER agrees to perform all the work as
shown on the plans for the following unit prices or lump sum. Any work required to complete
the project not specifically covered under a bid item shall be considered incidental to all other
work and no separate payment will be made. All work is subject to approval by the City of
Meridian, Cherry Lane Christian Church and the Ada County Highway District.
Bid .Schedule
Item No.
Estimated
Unit
Item Description
Unit
Bid Item
Quantity
(With Unit Price Written in Words)
Price
Total
Bid
307.4.1.G.1
16
SY
Type "P" Surface Restoration
Sur dnilar-
Ito--
576—
A) Z >
A1D .
!� la1D
Dollars
401.4.1.A.1.a
632
LF
10", C900, Class 150, DR 18
PVC Water Main With F'ttin s
6a
Dollars
401.4.1.A.1.b
74
LF
12", C900, Class 150, DR 18 -
PVC Water MairkWdh Fitti s
t
' (41Z 9t)
Dolt rs
402.4.1.A.1 a
1
EA
10" Gate Valve
Qve )0Wv59& e�e_
h6m'neeldoll
Dollars
BID SCHEDULE BD -1 OF 2
Item No.
Estimated
Quantity
Unit
Item Description
(With Unit Price Written in Words)
Unit
Price
Bid Item
Total
402.4.1.A.1 b
3
EA
12" Gate Valve
Bid
One
c'�l
Dollars
1103.4.1.A.1
1
LS
Construction Traffic Control
Seven
Dollars
2010.4.1.A.1
1
LS
Mobilization
-7�-a &,W,2d L
Seo
a
a5a�
Dollars
ResP9041 Sorn
Signatur
Name (printed or typed)
Title (printed or typed)
Date
Seal
BID SCHEDULE
of Bid Schedule 131?
, . �?S—
Total S -Z
M
Name of Company
Addresses_ '
License Number
BD -2 OF 2
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-G
REQUEST Blackrock Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER: See aftached
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 Meddian.
• 0
This sheet has been added to the document to
accommodate recording information.
Memorandum of Understanding
between
Blackrock Developers, LLC and the City of Meridian
dated February 24th, 2006
This document supersedes the Memorandum of
Understanding executed on October 17, 2005 and
recorded under Instrument Number 105166614 between
the City of Meridian and Blackrock, LLC, Developers
predecessor in interest.
Approved by City Council March 7, 2006.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
BLACKROCK DEVELOPERS, LLC
AND
THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is made and entered into this 424.0-A
day of Z , 2006, by and between Blackrock Developers, LLC (Developer)
and The City of Meridian, Idaho (City), to establish a mutual understanding of the duties
and responsibilities pertaining to the hookup to City's sewer and water system outside
city limits at the proposed Blackrock Subdivision, located as shown in Figure 1. This
document supersedes the Memorandum of Understanding executed on October
18, 2005 between the City of Meridian and Blackrock, LLC, Developer's
predecessor in interest.
WHEREAS, Developer is the sole owner, in law and/or in equity of certain tract of land
in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, generally depicted in Figure 1 and commonly
known as the Blackrock Subdivision, sometimes referred to herein as the Property; and
WHEREAS, Idaho Code §50-323, provides and empowers cities to establish, create,
develop, maintain and operate Sewer/Water systems; and
WHEREAS, City operates and maintains and develops a Sewer/Water system; and
WHEREAS, the City has enacted an ordinance governing its Sewer/Water system
codified in Meridian City Code § 9-4-26 and 9-1-16; and
WHEREAS, the Developer is the owner of the Property, which is presently located
outside of the city limits of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Developer is desirous of obtaining connection to City's Sewer/Water to
serve the Property and the City is willing to provide that connection to the Sewer/Water
service to the Developer subject to the terms and conditions and consideration of this
agreement, and it is specifically agreed that as a specific consideration of the City's
Blackrock - 1 of 6
willingness to enter into this agreement that the City's Ordinance and
Policy/Regulations which govern its Sewer/Water system be included as terms and
conditions of this agreement and that the Developer provide perpetual consent to
annexation of the Property in to the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:
Water
Developer shall extend a 12" water main from the CITY water system to the Property.
Developer will be reimbursed according to Meridian Code 9-1-13 Reimbursement
Agreements where applicable. The water will feed into a Booster Station building,
constructed by Developer and is to meet CITY specifications and approval. The
building shall be designed and constructed to allow for a future CITY well, which will be
constructed by the CITY. The booster station shall have SCADA as approved by the
CITY and provided by Developer. Additionally, Developer shall construct a Pressure
Reducing Valve (PRV) at this site, which shall meet specifications and approved by the
CITY. Developer may use the 2 booster pumps and variable -frequency -drive (VFD)
located at Well 14, which are "as -is", provided they are adequate to provide the required
flows. Developer shall donate the well lot site to the CITY, which shall have a minimum
125'x125' dimension located near the pressure boundary and approved by the CITY.
Developer shall provide an easement for a future waste line constructed by the CITY
from this site to an appropriate drain ditch. Developer shall sleeve all road crossings
and other appropriate places to minimize future construction costs for the waste line.
The Booster Station shall have backup power with 24 hr tank capacity for both pumps
as approved by the CITY.
Developer shall construct a water distribution system which shall meet CITY standards
and must be approved by CITY prior to construction.
CITY shall operate the pumping facilities and distribution system. CITY shall collect
hookup fees and monthly fees for this service.
Blackrock - 2 of 6
Sewer Lift Station and Pressure Sewer
Developer shall construct a Lift Station and pressure sewer line which will connect into
CITY sewer collection system. The lift station will be owned by Developer and may be
transferred or assigned to the Subdivision Homeowner's Association (HOA). The lift
station shall be operated and maintained by a qualified operator with a Class II or III
license at the expense of the Developer. The pressure sewer will be owned by the City
and the costs for maintenance shall be paid by the Developer. The lift station shall be
designed to pump "off peak" to minimize impact to the CITY sewer system. Storage
capacity shall be approved by CITY and shall have odor reducing capability as directed
by CITY. Additionally, the Developer and/or operator shall add odor reducing chemicals
if CITY determines this is required. The lift station and pressure sewer lines shall meet
CITY standards and must be approved by CITY prior to construction. The Developer
shall pay for maintenance of the lift station and pressure sewer.
Developer shall provide bonding and/or other guaranties as required by CITY for future
abandonment of the lift station and pressure sewer upon annexation. Developer shall
provide SCADA to the WWTP as approved by the CITY.
The parties to this agreement acknowledge that the HOA has not yet been formed, but
that Developer will likely assign its responsibilities under this section of this
Memorandum of Understanding to the HOA upon its formation.
Sewer Lines
Developer shall construct the sewer collection system which shall meet CITY standards
and be approved by CITY prior to construction. CITY shall operate the collection
system and shall collect hookup and maintenance fees.
Inspection
CITY shall inspect construction of all utilities to ensure that they meet CITY
specifications. Developer shall pay for all overtime which may be required for this
service.
Blackrock - 3 of 6
Annexation
At such time as the property becomes legally eligible for annexation into the City,
Developer or any successor or successors agree to give consent to annexation, to pay
the annexation application fee, apply for annexation, and diligently pursue annexation
into the City. The Developer's consent to annexation shall be memorialized in a
document to be recorded against the property and in real estate sales forms so that
each subsequent purchaser within the development shall be aware of the binding
consent to annexation.
Agreement to Negotiate to Final Agreement
The parties contemplate that further negotiations will take place regarding the subject
matter of this agreement and that parties will execute a more detailed Final Agreement
containing additional details, provisions, forms and exhibits.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties do execute this Memorandum of Understanding
the day and year first above written.
Attest:
Blackrock - 4 of 6
BLACKROCK, LLC
BLACKROCK DEVELOPERS, LLC
row,wlm—rw.
CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO
By:
Tammy de Wee ayor
� �G
STATE OF IDAHO, )
. ss.
County of Ada, )
On this gq-'� day of F-d92rLk0-W ,2006, before me, the
Cers a Notary Public in and for the State o Idaho, personally appeared
(1�1ft �C. 415f6L-t- , known or identified to me to be a Manager of
Blackrock Developers, LLC who executed this instrument on behalf of said Limited
Liability Corporation and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the
same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official
seal the day and year first above written.
SEAL`yUTARp°•.•''
°
powC •
;*00RD090090 AN
a�°esaOF I
on �qaa�
STATE OF IDAHO, )
. ss.
County of Ada, )
On this (day of K (' ' \.) , 2006, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the tate of Idaho, personally appeared Tammy
de Weerd and William G. Berg, Jr., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the
City of Meridian, Idaho and who subscribed their names to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official
seal the day and year first above written.
SEAL
Blackrock - 5 of 6
(%A,,S YVUZ4*
Notary Public for Idaho
Residing at: Oe! ,( {
My commission Expires: Ifs—/s-Il
J
w
co
46
0
co
7m
March 3,2W6
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPLICANT
REQUEST Approve Bills
March 7, 2006
ITEM NO. 6-H
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 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
FP 06-003
APPLICANT Paramount Development, Inc. ITEM NO. 10
REQUEST Tabled from February 21, 2006 — Request for Final Plat approval for 45
single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on 14.75 acres in an R-8 zone
for Paramount Subdivision No. 12 — east of N. Linder Road and north McMillan Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
Date: Phone: _
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
APPLICATION OF PARAMOUNT )
DEVELOPMENT, INC., FOR FINAL )
PLAT APPROVAL FOR 45 SINGLE- )
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS )
AND 1 COMMON LOT ON 14.75 )
ACRES IN AN R-8 ZONE )
LOCATED EAST OF NORTH )
LENDER ROAD AND NORTH OF )
MCMILLAN ROAD IN A PORTION )
OF T., 4N., R. 1W., SECTION 25 )
IC
C/C March 7, 2006
CASE NO. FP -06-003
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval pursuant to
Unified Development Code 11-6B-3 on March 7, 2006, and the Council finding that the
Administrative Review is complete from Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and
Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works
Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, to the Mayor and Council, and the Council having
considered the requirements of the preliminary plat the Council takes the following action:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Final Plat of "PLAT SHOWING PARAMOUNT SUBDIVISION NO. 12
LOCATED IN A PORTION OF T., 4N., R. 1W., SECTION 25, BOISE
MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2006, HANDWRITTEN
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR PARAMOUNT SUBDIVISION NO. 12 / (FP -06-003)
Pagel of 3
DATE: 12/20/2005, SHEET 1 OF 3, ENGINEERING NORTHWEST, LLC",
PARAMOUNT DEVELOPMENT, INC., Developer, is Conditionally Approved
subject to those conditions of Staff comments as set forth in the Memorandum to the
Mayor and City Council from Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner for the Planning
and Zoning Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for
the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, listing 16 SITE
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 13 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS,
a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A", and
consisting of 4 pages, and by this reference incorporated herein, and the response
letter from Engineering NorthWest, LLC, a true and correct copy of which is attached
hereto marked Exhibit `B" and consisting of 2 pages , and by this reference
incorporated herein.
2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature of the
City Clerk and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's requirements shall
be signed only at such time as:
1. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and
2. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are completed
and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been issued guaranteeing the
completion of off-site and required on-site improvements.
NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION
AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY TAKINGS ANALYSIS
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR PARAMOUNT SUBDIVISION NO. 12 / (FP -06-003)
Page 2 of 3
0 0
The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may
request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City
Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A
request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial
Review may be filed.
Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521. An affected person being a person who has an interest
in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision 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.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 1 ti'
of Ma )n , 2006.
AOR T
ATTEST: _
WILLIAM G. BERG,
Copy served upon:
City Attorney
By.
City Clerk's Office
JR., CLE � �jy`
� '� WA �{ a
A
Applic� �
,Z PI Planning`1fidr. �annrtg�epartment
✓ Public Works Departh 01 W I
t
ment
Dated: 3-91-OLO
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR PARAMOUNT SUBDIVISION NO. 12 / (FP -06-003)
Page 3 of 3
de WEERD
day
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAAENTS STAFF REPORT
s
r
STAFF REPORT: Hearing Date: February 21, 2006 4
Transmittal Date: February 16, 2006 x ti
r
i11.WC3
TO: Mayor &City Council �
FROM: Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner
Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator C
SUBJECT: Paramount Subdivision No. 12
Request for Final Plat Approval of Paramount Subdivision No. 12 Consisting of
45 Single-family Residential Building Lots and 1 Common Lot on 14.75 Acres in
an R-8 Zone by Paramount Development, Inc. (File# FP -06-003)
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments and conditions of the applicant.
These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the
Meridian City Council:
APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION
The applicant, Paramount Development, Inc., has applied for final plat approval of the twelfth phase of
Paramount Subdivision. The subject final plat consists of 45 single-family residential building lots and 1
common lot on 14.75 acres in an R-8 zone. The gross density for this phase of the subdivision is 3.05
dwelling units per acre. The net density is 3.74 dwelling units per acre.
This phase is located on the east side of N. Meridian Road and north of N. McMillan Road, in the SW '/a
of Section 25, TAN., R.l W. The site has not been previously platted.
The common lot proposed within this phase of Paramount Subdivision will consist of common area open
space. The pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be owned and maintained by the
Paramount Homeowners Association.
A Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development was approved for this subdivision that allowed for
a reduction in the minimum lot size from 6,500 s.f. to 5,500 s.f.; front setbacks for living area reduced
from 15' to 10'; street side setbacks reduced from 20' to 10'; and a reduction in street frontage from 65'
to 50'.
The final plat submitted for this phase depicts two lots fewer than were approved on the preliminary plat;
however, the proposed density is within the range of a medium density development, as depicted on the
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Even with the change in density, staff believes that the
proposed final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat.
Staff recommends approval of Paramount Subdivision No. 12 with the comments and conditions stated in
this report.
SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat (PP -03-004), conditional use
permit (CUP -03-008) and development agreement (Inst. No. 103137116).
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-003 Paramount Sub 12 FP.doc PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAAENTS STAFF REPORT
2. The applicant has indicated that the Paramount Homeowners Association will own and maintain
the pressure irrigation system within this development. Plans and specifications for the irrigation
system shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review
process, and a draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system Operations and Maintenance manual
must be submitted prior to plan approval.
3. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water. Since earlier phases of Paramount have installed a single -point connection, the
developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable common areas
prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer.
4. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7.
Temporary construction fencing to contain debris shall be installed at the subdivision boundary
where permanent fencing does not exist.
5. Sanitary sewer service and municipal water to this site shall be via extensions from existing
mains in previous phases. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to
and through this proposed development, thereby making them available to adjacent properties.
Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.
Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are
required to provide service.
6. Lot 16, Block 30 does not meet the required 50 -feet of street frontage, please revise the plat so
this lot meets the required street frontage.
7. The Certificate of Owner's appears to call out a government corner that is not denoted on the face
of the plat. The applicant shall confirm this information and make any necessary corrections.
Include all CP&F numbers of government corners shown on the plat.
9. The center % corner of section 25 is shown on the plat without a graphical representation of the
type of monument, revise the plat to include this.
10. Graphically depict a 5 -foot wide Public Utilities, Drainage and Irrigation easement in the
following locations. They will be interior lot lines to an existing phase.
a. Western boundary of Lot 22, Block 15.
b. Western boundary of Lots 11 Block 25.
C. Western boundary of Lot 2, Block 26.
d. Northeastern boundary of Lot 5, Block 33.
11. The landscape plan, prepared by The Land Group and dated 1/25/06, shall be revised as follows:
a. Revise plan to reflect seed instead of sod in the drainage swales.
Submit 3 copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature on
the final plat by the City Engineer.
12. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat prepared by Engineering Northwest,
stamped on 12/20/05 by James R. Washburn, prior to signature on the final plat by the City
Engineer:
2.) Revise to read, "... property drainage, public utilities and property irrigation ... "
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-003 Paramount Sub 12 FP.doc PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PAING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAENTS STAFF REPORT
3.) Revise to read, "A portion of the following Lots; Lots 2-, 3, 41 8 ..."
*.) Add a note dedicating a 10 -foot wide public utilities, drainage, and irrigation easement
centered along all interior lot lines.
13. Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's "Final" letter for the street
names and lot & block numbering. Make all corrections necessary to comply.
14. All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11-
3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non -vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-
11. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction.
15. Complete the Certificate of Owners, including the book and page number of recorded data, and
the accompanying acknowledgement.
16. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved development
agreement, preliminary plat or conditional use permit does not relieve the Applicant of
responsibility for compliance.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6.
Plans 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. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, alternative plans will be
reviewed and approved by the meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
2. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, road base shall be approved by the Ada County Highway District, and
the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
3. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% shall be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the final plat.
4. All development improvements, including but not limited to water, sewer, fencing, micro -paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
5. A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, landscape
designer or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the
landscape installation. The Certificate of Completion shall verify that all landscape
improvements, including plant materials and sprinkler installation, are in substantial compliance
with the approved landscape plan.
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-003 Paramount Sub12 FP.doc PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLWING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPASENTS STAFF REPORT
6. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat
per Resolution 02-374.
7. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for
non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
8. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
9. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
11. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair
Housing Act.
12. 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 removed.
13. Approval of the preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record the
fmal plat within two years of the approval of the preliminary plat per UDC 11 -6B -7A. 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 months, may be considered for final approval
without resubmission for preliminary plat approval per UDC 11 -6B -7B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Paramount Subdivision No. 12 (FP -06-003) with the
above stated comments and conditions.
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-003 Paramount Sub12 FP.doc PAGE 4
•
•
Engineering North We LLC
423 N. Ancestor Place, Suite 180 Boise, Idaho 83704 (208) 376-5000 • Fax (208) 376-5556
Pehruary 27, 2006
'Mayor and City Council
City of Meridian
()60 E. Watertower, Suite 200
Meridian, ID 83642
c: File No. FP -06-003 Paramount Subdivision No. 12
ain writing on behalf of our client, Paramount Development, Inc. who has indicated to us their
acceptance of the conditions of approval as outlined by staff for the above referenced.
Our response to the City's Site Specific Comments for this project is as follows:
Site Specific Requirements
1) All terms of the approved Preliminary Plat (PP -03-004), Conditional Use Permit
(CUP -03-008) and Development Agreement (Inst. No. 103137116) have been
met.
2) The Paramount Homeowner's Association will own and maintain the pressure
irrigation system within this development. An irrigation well will be continued for
use as a secondary source as in previous phases.
3) Agree.
4) Agree.
5) Sewer and water mains will be constructed through this phase of development by
connecting to existing extensions from previous phases.
6) Lot frontage will be adjusted.
7) Agree
8) CP&F number will be included.
9) The center'/4 corner of section 25 will be noted.
10) The plat has been revised to graphically depict a 5 -foot wide Public Utilities,
Drainage and_Irrigation-easement the-&Ilowi-ng-lots.-- -- - ---
a. Western boundary of Lot 22, Block 15.
b. Western boundary of Lots 11, Block 25.
c. Western boundary of Lots 2, Block 26
d. North Vbm boundary of Lot 5, Block 33.
11) The comments for the landscaping plan have been forwarded to The Land Group
for revisions.
12) Agree
13) The Ada County Street Name Committee Final letter will be submitted to the City
of Meridian prior to signature by the City Engineer.
14) Agree.
15) The Certificate of Owners will be completed prior to final plat signature.
16) Agree.
Exhibit "B"
•
City of Meridian — General Requirements
9
The developer agrees to all the general requirements contained in the staff report dated
February 17, 2006.
' ;hould you have any questions or need anything else feel free to give me a call.
"hank yo
I-ison S. Davies, P.E.
vr: Jay Walker, Brighton Development
Exhihil "B"
2
March 3,2W6 FP 05-073
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO.
REQUEST Tabled from January 24, 2006 — Request for Final Plat approval for 11
residential building lots and 4 common area lots on 5.36 acres in an R-3 zones for
EI Gato Subdivision — 701 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:
COMMENTS
See previous Item Packet / Minutes
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Email from Lori Den Hartog
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
•
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
APPLICATION OF CONGER )
MANAGEMENT GROUP FOR )
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 11 )
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOTS )
AND 4 COMMON AREA LOTS ON )
5.36 ACRES IN AN R-2 ZONE )
LOCATED AT 701 BLACK CAT )
ROAD IN A PARCEL OF LAND IN )
THE NE 1/ OF THE SE 1/ OF T. 3N., )
R. 1W., SECTION 9 )
1
C/C March 7, 2006
CASE NO. FP -05-073
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval pursuant to
Unified Development Code 11-6B-3 on March 7, 2006, and the Council finding that the
Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and
Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works
Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, to the Mayor and Council, and the Council having
considered the requirements of the preliminary plat the Council takes the following action:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Final Plat of "PLAT SHOWING EL GATO SUBDIVISION A PARCEL OF
LAND LOCATED IN THE NE/40F THE SE 1/ OF T. 3N., R. 1W., SECTION 9,
BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2005,
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR EL GATO SUBDIVISION / (FP -05-073)
Page 1 of 4
•
HANDWRITTEN DATE: 12/11/2005, SHEET 1 OF 3, W & H PACIFIC", EL
GATO DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Developer, is Conditionally Approved subject to
those conditions of Staff comments as set forth in the Memorandum to the Mayor and
City Council from Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and
Zoning Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the
Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, listing 27 SITE
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 14 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS,
a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A", and
consisting of 5 pages, and by this reference incorporated herein, and the response
letter from Conger Management Group, a true and correct copy of which is attached
hereto marked Exhibit `B" and consisting of 1 page, and by this reference
incorporated herein, and the response letter from Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "C" and
consisting of 1 page, and by this reference incorporated herein, and the additional
requirements from the action of the Council taken at their March 7, 2006 meeting as
follows, to -wit:
1.1 Adopt the Recommendation of the Central District Health
Department as follows:
The Central District Health requires after written approval
from the appropriate entities are submitted, they can approve
this proposal for central sewage and central water; that plans
must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department
of Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality for
central sewage and central water; that run-off is not to create a
ORDER OF CONDMONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR EL GATO SUBDIVISION / (FP -05-073)
Page 2 of 4
mosquito breeding problem; and it is suggested that the
stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to
discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater
and surface water quality; that engineers and architects should
obtain current best management practices for stormwater
disposal and design a stormwater management system that is
preventing groundwater and surface water degradation.
Manuals for guidance:
1. State of Idaho Catalog of Stormwater Best
Management Practices for Idaho Cities and
Counties. Prepared by the Idaho Division of
Environmental Quality, July 1997.
2. Stormwater Best Management Practices
Guidebook. Prepared by City of Boise Public
Works Department, May 2000.
2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature of the
City Clerk and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's requirements shall
be signed only at such time as:
1. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and
2. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are completed
and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been issued guaranteeing the
completion of off-site and required on-site improvements.
NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION
AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY TAKINGS ANALYSIS
The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may
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
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR EL GATO SUBDIVISION / (FP -05-073)
Page 3 of 4
0
9
request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial
Review may be filed.
Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521. An affected person being a person who has an interest
in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision 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.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the -14'.'
of MaTr�N , 2006.
t7{11819 g
®� � AOR TA
de WEERD
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.,
Copy served upon: ✓ Applica,
Planning an°Client
Public Works Department
City Attorney
By; Dated: 3 -a -i -0 U
C-6 Clerk's Office
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR EL GATO SUBDIVISION / (FP -05-073)
Page 4 of 4
day
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLIONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAWENTS STAFF REPORT
r
STAFF REPORT:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
We have reviewed this
These conditions shall
Meridian City Council:
Hearing Date: March 7, 2006
Transmittal Date: March 3, 2006
Mayor & City Council
Ow IV-
ti 1L)AHo F'
Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner d"W
Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator C
El Gato Subdivision
Request for Final Plat Approval of El Gato Subdivision Consisting of 11 Single-
family Residential Building Lots and 4 Common Lots on 5.36 Acres in an R-2
Zone by Conger Management Group (File# FP -05-073)
submittal and offer the following comments and conditions of the applicant.
be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the
APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION
The applicant, Conger Management Group, has applied for Final Plat approval of 11 building lots and 4
common lots on 5.36 acres in an R-2 zone for El Gato Subdivision. The gross density of the proposed
subdivision is 2.0 dwelling units per acre. The net density of this development is 2.62 dwelling units per
acre.
El Gato Subdivision was annexed under the R-3 zoning district; however, as part of the Unified
Development Code amendments, the City has rezoned all existing R-3 districts to R-2.
The property is located on the southwest corner of N. Black Cat Road and El Gato Lane at 701 N. Black
Cat Rd., in the SE % of Section 9, T.3N., R.1 W.
The final plat submitted for this phase substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat.
Staff recommends approval of El Gato Subdivision with the comments and conditions stated in this
report.
SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved annexation (AZ -05-012), preliminary plat (PP -05-
014), and vacation (VAC -05-013) for this development.
2. The applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system in this development will be an
extension of a Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District system in Castlebrook Subdivision. The
applicant shall submit a letter of plan approval for Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District prior to
scheduling of a pre -construction meeting.
3. If the applicant is unable to supply this pressurized irrigation system from extensions of
Castlebrook, and an irrigation pump station is constructed on this site it shall not be allowed in
the required landscape buffer and shall not be allowed to use City of Meridian potable water as its
main source.
Exhibit "A"
FP -05-073 El Gato Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAAENTS STAFF REPORT
4. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the
culinary water system shall be required. Said connection cannot be used as the primary source of
water for the system. If a single -point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible
for the payment of assessments for the irrigable common areas prior to signature on the final plat
by the Meridian City Engineer.
5. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7.
Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to release of building permits.
6. Sanitary sewer service to this site is being proposed from mains in Black Cat road that discharge
to the yet to be operational Black Cat lift station. Certificates of Occupancy shall not be issued
until the Black Cat Lift Station has been finaled and is operational.
7. The applicant shall coordinate sewer main size and routing with the Public Works Department.
Cover over sanitary sewer mains shall be no less than three feet from finish grade to the top of the
pipe. If cover is less than three feet from the sub -grade to the top of the pipe, alternated pipe
materials shall be used per the Meridian Public Work's Standard Specifications.
8. Water service to this site will be from main line extensions from existing water mains Black Cat
Road. The applicant will be responsible to construct water mains to and through this proposed
development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works
Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any
mains that are required to provide service.
All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11-
3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non -vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-
11. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction
10. If any storm drainage is to be discharged into surface water, a copy of the signed discharge
agreement with the receiving agency shall be submitted prior to signature on the final plat.
11. The applicant shall include into Lot 8, Block 1, 20 -feet along the southern boundary of this
property and dedicate a permanent public pedestrian easement over this lot for a possible future
multi -use pathway. The applicant shall adjust additional lots to ensure that the minimum lot size
of 12,000 square feet for this zone is maintained.
12. Include the CP & F number for the W. '/a corner of Section 9.
13. Revise the plat to show all curve data. The curve table on the submitted plat starts with C23.
14. Include the recorded instrument number for the ACRD sidewalk easement along Black Cat Road,
Puma Street, & Bengal Court.
Exhibit "A"
FP -05-073 El Gato Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAENTS STAFF REPORT
15. Staff is uncertain if the ACHD Quitclaim deed instrument number needs to be included on the
plat. The applicant shall coordinate with the Ada County Engineer to determine if it is necessary
on the plat and if so include the instrument number.
16. Dedicate additional public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement along the right-of-way, there
needs to be 10 -feet free and clear past the sidewalk.
17. Revise the Certificate of Owners and the face of the plat to include, existing and donated right-of-
way, in the boundary description of this subdivision.
18. Remove all buildings that do not meet setbacks or the zoning ordinance prior to signature on the
final plat by the City Engineer.
19. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for
non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
20. If the existing house is to be retained on site, it must meet all applicable setbacks, and the
applicant shall be responsible for the payment of sewer and water assessments as well as the
actual physical hook-up to the house.
21. Access to the existing house on Lot 3, Block 1 shall be provided from Bengal Court; direct lot
access to Black Cat Road is prohibited.
22. Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's "Final" letter for the street
names and lot & block numbering. Make all corrections necessary to comply.
23. The landscape plan submitted for this project stamped 12/12/05, prepared by Landscape Design
and Construction, shall be revised as follows:
a. Include tree class in plant schedule.
b. Include a calculations table per the requirements specified in the final plat landscape plan
submittal checklist.
C. Mitigation shall be required for all existing trees four -inch (4") caliper or greater that are
removed from the site with equal replacement of the total calipers lost on site up to an
amount of one hundred percent (100%) replacement. (Example: two (2) 10 -inch caliper
trees removed may be mitigated with four (4) 5 -inch caliper trees, five (5) 4 -inch caliper
trees, or seven (7) 3 -inch caliper trees.)
d. Include fencing type & location along with details (diagram) on the landscape plan per
the submitted fencing plan. Fencing provided adjacent to Lot 8, Bock 1 shall comply with
11 -3A -7A7.
e. Provide landscaping in the parkway along Bengal Court in accordance with UDC 11 -3B -
7C. A minimum density of one tree per 35 linear feet is required along street buffers.
Trees may not be located within a five foot radius of water meters.
f. Remove the "Purdam Drain" label from the south end of the property; the drain is
actually located to the south of the property.
g. Include landscaping and contours for the storm drainage area on Lot 8, Block 1.
Submit 3 copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature on
the final plat by the City Engineer
24. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat dated 1/12/06, prepared by W&H
Pacific, prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer:
Exhibit "A"
FP -05-073 El Gato Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PAWING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAXENTS STAFF REPORT
(2.) "...purpose of utilities, storm drainage, and landscape and shall be owned and maintained
by the Homeowner's Assocation."
(3.) "Lot 4$ 8 or a portion of said lot ... "
(*.) Add a note, "Maintenance of any irrigation or drainage pipe or ditch crossing a lot is the
remonsibility of the lot owner unless such responsibility is assumed by an
irrigation/drainage district."
(*.) Add a note, "The bottom elevation of house footings shall be set a minimum of 12 inches
above the highest known normal ground water elevation
(*.) Add a note, "Garage setbacks shall be measured from the prop= line or the adjacent
sidewalk, whichever is more restrictive."
25. Complete the Certificate of Owners and accompanying acknowledgement.
26. Revise the Certificate of Owners to indicate that the City of Meridian is supplying water service
to this subdivision and remove United Water.
27. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation,
preliminary plat, or vacation does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-
13. 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. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, alternative plans will be
reviewed and approved by the meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
2. A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, landscape
designer or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the
landscape installation. The Certificate of Completion shall verify that all landscape
improvements, including plant materials and sprinkler installation, are in substantial compliance
with the approved landscape plan. (UDC 11-3B-14)
3. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, road base shall be approved by the Ada County Highway District, and
the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
4. A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% shall be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the final plat.
All development improvements, including but not limited to water, sewer, fencing, micro -paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat
per Resolution 02-374.
Exhibit "A"
FP -05-073 El Gato Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAENTS STAFF REPORT
7. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
8. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all
street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established
normal groundwater elevation.
Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works department.
10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
11. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
12. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair
Housing Act.
13. 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 removed.
14. One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by
the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdividers expense. Typical
locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are
determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light
contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to
commencing installations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the final plat for El Gato Subdivision (FP -05-073) with the above stated
comments and conditions.
Exhibit "A"
FP -05-073 El Gato Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 5
+' +06 10:14AM CO0R MANAGMENT GROUP
CH
CONGER MANAGEMENT GROUP
AUT
1 ate: March 6, 2006
an: Mayor and City Council, City of Meridian
J , El Gato Subdivision, Final Plat
�. Lar Mayor and Council,
No, 2063 P. 2/2
V,,; have reviewed the staff report prepared for the Final Plat of EI Gato Subdivision, and
are in agreement with the conditions of approval. We will have our engineer begin
,rk on making adjustments to the plat per your staff s recommendations.. The only
C :stion that I have is whether or not you really need a detail (diagram) of what chain
k fencing looks Iike on the landscaping plan (per condition No. 23 d.)? Just
adering... we are happy to do it, it just seems odd to require it.
V ou have any questions concerning this plat, please call meat 353-2515 or email meat
0-, , ekinnon co.agergLogp com.
icerely,
D we McKinnon
.IG .
Exhibit .,B„
405 S. 8th Street, Suite 290 • Boise, Idaho 83702.208.336.5355 • Fax 208.336.2282
Reoistered Contractor RCE -219
.5 '06 09:0? FR C OOF MERIDIAN 208 880 4218 TO P -&Z P.01/02
U 1-cembcr 2005
1503 FIRST STIMET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-d345
FAX s 208-A63-0092
Phones Arlo We 200
OFFICE: Nampo 466.7861
SHOP_ Nampa 466.0663
_"- a Canning
!'�t, of Meridian
6h( F. Watertower Lane #Suite 202
El Gato Subdivision
... Alma:
itis:, ipe & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change Application be filed, for
(e w, prior to final platting, Please contact Donna Moore at 466-7861 for hviher information.
11 laterals -and waste ways must be protected. the District's Purdam Drain courses along the
h boundary ofd" proposed project. This easement must be protected and Any
114 Toaelument without a signed License Agreement and approved pian, botore any
c ,.,!. ;truclion is started, is unacceptable.
" nunicipal surface drainage must be retained on site. Many municipal surface drainage leaves
site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plaw. Tice developer
z i comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that in*fion water be made
i I able to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
erely,
� enson
;..a:.. Water Superintendent
i rape & Meridian Irrigation District
i?'l/,ibS
Crew Fatemon
File - Of9iaJShop
Exhibit "C"
APPROX WATE IREGARIE ACM
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
FP 06-005
APPLICANT Beckit Development ITEM NO. 12
REQUEST Final Plat approval of 24 residentail building lots and 4 common lots on
5.10 acres in a R-8 zone for Windwalker Subdivision - 2770 South Locust Grove Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See attached Staff Comments
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached Comments
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Email from Kevin Harris
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF THE
APPLICATION OF BECKIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL OF 24 RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING LOTS AND 4 COMMON
LOTS ON 5.10 ACRES IN AN R-8
ZONE LOCATED AT 2770 SOUTH
LOCUST GROVE ROAD IN A
PORTION OF THE NW/40F THE
SW 1/ OF T. 3N., R. 1E., SECTION 20
C/C March 7, 2006
CASE NO. FP -06-005
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval pursuant to
Unified Development Code 11-6B-3 on March 7, 2006, and the Council finding that the
Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and
Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works
Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, to the Mayor and Council, and the Council having
considered the requirements of the preliminary plat the Council takes the following action:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Final Plat of "PLAT SHOWING WINDWALKER SUBDIVISION A PORTION
OF THE NW 1/ OF THE SW % OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 20, BOISE
MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2005, HANDWRITTEN
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR WINDWALKER SUBDIVISION / (FP -06-005)
Page 1 of 4
DATE: 12/12/2005, SHEET 1 OF 2, BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC", BECKIT
DEVELOPMENT, INC., Developer, is Conditionally Approved subject to those
conditions of Staff comments as set forth in the Memorandum to the Mayor and City
Council from Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning
Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public
Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006, listing 19 SITE SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 13 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, a true and
correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A", and consisting of 4
pages, and by this reference incorporated herein, and the response letter from Kevin
Harris with Briggs Engineering, Inc., a true and correct copy of which is attached
hereto marked Exhibit `B" and consisting of 1 page, and by this reference
incorporated herein, and the response letter from Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "C" and
consisting of 1 page, and by this reference incorporated herein, and the additional
requirements from the action of the Council taken at their March 7, 2006 meeting as
follows, to -wit:
1.1 Adopt the Recommendation of the Central District Health
Department as follows:
The Central District Health requires after written approval
from the appropriate entities are submitted, they can approve
this proposal for central sewage and central water; that plans
must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department
of Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality for
central sewage and central water; that run-off is not to create a
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR WINDWALKER SUBDIVISION / (FP -06-005)
Page 2 of 4
• 0
mosquito breeding problem; and it is suggested that the
stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to
discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater
and surface water quality, that engineers and architects should
obtain current best management practices for stormwater
disposal and design a stormwater management system that is
preventing groundwater and surface water degradation.
Manuals for guidance:
1. State of Idaho Catalog of Stormwater Best
Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties.
Prepared by the Idaho Division of Environmental
Quality, July 1997.
2. Stormwater Best Management Practices Guidebook.
Prepared by City of Boise Public Works Department,
May 2000.
2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature of the
City Clerk and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's requirements shall
be signed only at such time as:
1. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and
2. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are completed
and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been issued guaranteeing the
completion of off-site and required on-site improvements.
NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION
AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY TAKINGS ANALYSIS
The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may
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
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR WINDWALKER SUBDIVISION / (FP -06-005)
Page 3 of 4
0
request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial
Review may be filed.
Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521. An affected person being a person who has an interest
in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision 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.
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the I
�R T de WEERD
ATTEST:
7, 7
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.4khll CU Z1
Copy served upon: ✓' Applie
Planning aria'2sd4iil:49bepartment
Public Works Department
City Attorney
By: Dated: —o U
CN'1'ry Clerk's Office
ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT
FOR WINDWALKER SUBDIVISION / (FP -06-005)
Page 4 of 4
day
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARRENTS STAFF REPORT
r
elT nir P"
STAFF REPORT: Hearing Date: March 7, 2006
Transmittal Date: March 3, 2006
IDAHO
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner tov
Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator C -
SUBJECT: Windwalker Subdivision
Request for Final Plat Approval of Windwalker Subdivision Consisting of 24
Single-family Residential Building Lots and 4 Common/other Lot on 5.10 Acres
in an R-8 Zone by Beckit Development. (File# FP -06-005).
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments and conditions of the applicant.
These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the
Meridian City Council:
APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION
The applicant, Beckit Development, has applied for final plat approval of Windwalker Subdivision which
consists of 24 single-family residential building lots and 4 common/other lots on 5.10 acres in an R-8
zone. The residential lots will consist of a mix of attached and detached single-family homes. The gross
density for this subdivision is 4.71 dwelling units per acre. The net density is 6.45 dwelling units per acre.
Windwalker Subdivision is located in a portion of the N.W. % of the southwest 1/ of section 20, T.3N.,
R.IE. The site is located on the east side of S. Locust Grove Road, approximately 1/ mile north of E.
Victory Road. This property has not been previously platted.
The submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat.
Staff recommends approval of Windwalker Subdivision with the comments and conditions stated in this
report.
SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved annexation (AZ -05-030), preliminary plat (PP -05-
030), and variance (VAR -05-018).
2. The applicant has indicated Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District will own the pressurized
irrigations system in this proposed development. Since it is to be owned and operated by an
Irrigation District then a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to the scheduling of a pre -
construction meeting.
The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, a single -point connection to the
culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is used, the developer shall
be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable common areas prior to signature
on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer.
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-005 Windwalker Sub FP.doc PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARRENTS STAFF REPORT
4. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7.
Temporary construction fencing to contain debris shall be installed at the subdivision boundary
where permanent fencing does not exist. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to release of
building permits for this subdivision.
5. Sanitary sewer service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains Inglenook
Subdivision. The applicant shall install all sewer mains necessary to serve this development. The
applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department. Cover over
sanitary sewer mains shall be no less than three feet from finish grade to the top of the pipe. If
cover is less than three feet from the sub -grade to the top of the pipe, alternated pipe materials
shall be used per the Meridian Public Work's Standard Specifications.
6. Water service is being proposed to this development via extension of mains in Inglenook and
Sherbrooke Hollows Subdivision. The applicant will be responsible to construct all water mains
necessary to serve this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing
and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian
standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service.
7. 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 94-8. Wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
8. Remove all buildings that do not meet setbacks or the zoning ordinance prior to signature on the
final plat by the City Engineer.
Revise the plat to include the length and boundary of the northern boundary of Lot 9 Block 1.
10. Revise the year of platting from 2005 to 2006.
11. All common driveways shall have a perpetual ingress/egress easement. The applicant may record
an easement and include the instrument number on the face of the plat prior to signature of the
City Engineer, OR dedicate it via a plat note.
12. Per the City of Meridian Fire Department Standards one side of E. Horse Creek Street shall be
signed as no parking, and the common driveways shall be signed as no parking.
13. All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All
stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11-
3B-11 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non -vegetated
surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B-
11. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed
such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as
proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved
open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3B-11, then the applicant shall relocate the
facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of
the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at
the time of final construction
14. The landscape plan, prepared by Murillos Landscape & Hydroseeding, LLC and dated 2/06, shall
be revised as follows:
a. Label or depict the required minimum 5 -foot wide sidewalk along S. Locust Grove Road.
b. Label or include a symbol in the legend, grass within the landscapelcommon areas. Seed
Exhibit'W'
FP -06-005 Windwalker Sub FP.doc PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAENTS STAFF REPORT
is required instead of sod in the bottom of drainage swales.
C. The minimum planting size for evergreen trees is a minimum of 6 feet in height per UDC
11 -3B -5B; revise plant schedule accordingly.
d. A six-foot tall non-combustible fence is required along the Nine Mile Drain; revise plan
accordingly.
e. No trees shall be planted within a five foot radius of water meters.
Submit 3 copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature on
the final plat by the City Engineer.
15. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat dated 12/12/05, prepared by Briggs
Engineering, Inc., prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer:
(7.) Revise to read, "... applicable zoning regulations and variance file # 05-018 of the City.
(14.) Include instrument number.
16. Complete the Certificate of Owners and accompanying acknowledgement.
17. Any existing structures must be removed prior to the signature on the final plat by the City
Engineer.
18. The applicant's professional engineer shall submit a signed stamped statement that the centerline
elevations are a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater
elevation.
19. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation,
preliminary plat, or variance does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or
lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-6.
Plans 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. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, alternative plans will be
reviewed and approved by the meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature.
2. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed,
drainage lots constructed, road base shall be approved by the Ada County Highway District, and
the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits.
A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% shall be required for all uncompleted
fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to
signature on the final plat.
4. All development improvements, including but not limited to water, sewer, fencing, micro -paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, landscape
designer or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the
landscape installation. The Certificate of Completion shall verify that all landscape
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-005 Windwalker Sub FP.doc PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLONING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAWENTS STAFF REPORT
improvements, including plant materials and sprinkler installation, are in substantial compliance
with the approved landscape plan.
6. Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat
per Resolution 02-374.
7. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for
non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
8. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
9. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
10. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
11. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair
Housing Act.
12. 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 removed.
13. Approval of the preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record the
final plat within two years of the approval of the preliminary plat per UDC 11 -6B -7A. 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 months, may be considered for final approval
without resubmission for preliminary plat approval per UDC 11 -6B -7B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Windwalker Subdivision (FP -06-005) with the above
stated comments and conditions.
Exhibit "A"
FP -06-005 Windwalker Sub FP.doc PAGE 4
C�
Tara Cr..
0
From: Sonya Watters
Sent: Friday, March 03, 200611:27 AM
To: Jessica Johnson; Machelle Hill; Sharon Smith; Tara Green; Will Berg
Subject: FW: Windwalker Sub Final Plat Staff Report Response
----- Origi: + Message
From: kc ;mailto:kevinh@briggs-engineering.com]
Sent: Fri March 03, 2006 10:55 AM
To: Sone Watters
Subject. + 4 Windwalker Sub Final Plat Staff Report
Sonya,
We agrG, the conditions as stated in the staff report dated March 3, 2006 for Windwalker
Subdivisi
Thank ya .
Kevin Ha.
----- Origit : Aessage---
From: So+ Watters[mailto:watterss@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Fric March 03, 200610:04 AM
To: kevin
Cc: Jessie : + tohnson; Machelle Hill; Sharon Smith; Tara Green; Will Berg
Subject: V,- iwalker Sub Final Plat Staff Report
Attached i, jr staff report for the above-mentioned project.
Please st 0 . I L a written response to the staff report to me prior to the City Council meeting on
Tuesday, ,. � ch 7th.
Thanks,
Sonya
Sonya Wz 3
CITY OF '.iDIAN
Planning C .i-irtment
660 E. We ower Ln., Ste. 202
Meridian, r io 83642
Phone: (2t 84-5533 Fax: (208)888-6854 M...................,--- VM.V...........
..
1
Exhihit "B"
0
I M arch 2006
I'I•nming Department
c i t y of Meridian
000 F. Watertower Lane Suite 202
, idian, ID 83642
;:I FP 06-005/Windwalker Subdivision
I)—, L Anna:
0
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651.4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
Phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampo 466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
i,tpa & Meridian Irrigation District finds this application for Final Plat approval of 24
:•'.I(Iential building lots and 4 common lots on 5.10 acres in a R-8 zone for Windwalker
II' division to be acceptable.
1 1. WORK WITHIN NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FACILITIES
t
It ST BE COMPLETED BY MARCH 15, 2006.
crely,
1l 1lenson
I. Water Superintendent
.:I 1)ra & Meridian Irrigation District
I, -g
File - Office/Shop
Exhibit "C
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APPLICANT
March 7, 2006
ITEM NO. 13
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006 - Request for a CPA
to amend the text and future land use map of 2002 Comp Plan for the North Meridian
Area and to expand area of city impact boundary
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT.
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Letter from Sindon's
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes
See attached
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
VAR 05-027
APPLICANT White -Leasure Development Company ITEM NO. 14
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 21, 2006 — Request for a Variance
to UDC 11-3.H requirements for access to State Highway 69 for Meridian Gateway —
1601 South Meridian Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See Previous item Packet / Minutes
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Leiter from W1111am Howell
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
AZ 05-056
APPLICANT J BS Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. 15
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006 — Request for Annexation
and zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN -R and 4.07 acres from RUT to C -C zones for
Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision — 1845 West Franklin 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:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Letter from William Howell
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT JBS Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. 16
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006 — Request for Preliminary
Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7 common lots on 10.15 acres
in proposed TN -R and C -C zones for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision — 1845 Franklin Rd.
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Letter from William Howell
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
CUP 05-051
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT J BS Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. 17
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2006 — Request for a CUP for a
mixed use development within 300 foot of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek
Subdivision — 1845 West Franklin 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:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet / Minutes
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Letter from WHIllam Howell
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
March 3,2W6 AZ 05-062
,
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT The Gables, LLC ITEM NO. 18
REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from
RUT to R-8 zones for Sharp Estates Subdivision — 2445 North Wingate Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Recommendations / Findings
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Letter from W1111am Howell
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
PP 05-062
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT The Gables, LLC ITEM NO. 19
REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family
residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in the proposed R-8 zone for Sharp
Estates Subdivision — 2445 North Wingate Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
Date:
COMMENTS
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Recommendations / Findings
Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
RZ 05-022
APPLICANT Church of the Holy Nativity ITEM NO. 20
REQUEST Public hearing — Request for a Rezone of 3.36 acres from R-8 to L -O zones
for Church of the Holy Nativity — 828 West Cherry Lane
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
COMMENTS
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Recommendations / Findings
OTHER: See attached Email from Clay Lisle
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shag become properly of the City of Meridian.
i
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND
DECISION & ORDER
' v k
MAR 0 3 2000
eridian
Office
tL'sVid)
In the Matter of a request to Rezone 3.36 acres from R-8 (Medium Density Residential) to
L -O (Limited Office) for an existing church, by Church of the Holy Nativity.
Case No(s). RZ-05-022
For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March
7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). RZ-05-022 - PAGE 1 of 3
i 0
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon
the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected
party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description and the Conditions of Approval
all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by
reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet
such requirements as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and
based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby
ordered that:
1. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff
Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat
or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis.
Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request
for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for
Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has
an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of
the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of
this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho
Code.
E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the yA day of
2006.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). RZ-05-022 - PAGE 2 of 3
•
COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE
COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON
COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD
TIE BREAKER
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., cirry CL
VOTED_^
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
Copy served upon: ✓ Applicant
�r Planning Department
�~ Public Works Department
City Attorney
By: Dated:
rty Clerk's Office
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). RZ-05-022 - PAGE 3 of 3
. It CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE&G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
STAFF REPORT City Council Hearing
Hearing Date: 3/7/2006
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Josh Wilson, Associate City Planner
SUBJECT: Church of the Holy Nativity
• RZ-05-022
C>W6 WNW
y
e®
�P
Rezone of 3.36 acres from R-8 to L -O zone
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Church of the Holy Nativity has applied for a Rezone (RZ) of 3.36 acres from R-8
(Medium -Density Residential) to L -O (Limited Office). The site is located on the north side of Cherry
Lane, east of N. Linder Road. This site currently contains three structures which all house the church use.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the
item on February 2, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Clayton Lyle
ii. In opposition: None.
iii. Commenting: None.
iv. Staff presenting application: Josh Wilson.
v. Other staff commenting on application: None.
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. None.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. None.
d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. None.
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approve
I move approve File Number RZ-05-022 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
March 7, 2006, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed
modifications).
Deny
I move to deny File Number RZ-05-022 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
March 7, 2006, for the following reasons: (you must state specific reasons for denial).
Continue
I move to continue the public hearing for File Number RZ-05-022 to (date certain).
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
North side of Cherry Lane, east of N. Linder Road/ 828 W. Cherry Lane
Church of the Holy Nativity RZ-05-022 PAGE I
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN&EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Se V4, SW V4, Section 1, T3N R1W
b. Owners:
Episcopal Church in Idaho, Inc.
510 W. Washington St.
Boise, Idaho 83702
c. Applicant:
Church of the Holy Nativity
828 W Cherry Lane
Meridian, Idaho 83642
d. Representative: Clayton Lisle
e. Present Zoning: R-8
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Public/ Quasi -Public
g. Applicant's Justification Statement (from application materials): "The Holy Spirit Catholic
Church has a street sign on Cherry Lane. Two brick pillars supported this non -lit sign. The Catholic
Church removed the sign and took it with them when they relocated to their new facilities (Holy
Apostles) at Linder and Meridian Road in Meridian. Holy Nativity wants to install a street sign fronting
Cherry Lane supported by the two existing brick pillars. To that end, we engaged the Young Electric
Sign Company (YESCo) to design, construct, and install a lighted sign. When YESCo filed an
application with the City of Meridian for a permit to erect the sign, they were informed that the Zoning
Ordinances had been revised, and that street signs were not permitted in residential zones. This project
was initiated to change the zoning of the property from R-8 zoning to L -O zoning, bringing the property
into compliance with the newly revised city ordinances and thus enabling installation of a street sign. No
other construction, renovation, or remolding requiring a permit is planned."
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute a rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By
reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5B-3, a public hearing is required before the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16 and 30, 2006
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 6, 2005
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 24, 2006
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Church use with three buildings
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The area along Cherry Lane near the subject
site is developed as a diverse mix of offices, commercial uses, residences and public/quasi
public uses such as churches and a middle school.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Existing residences in Cherry Manor Subdivision, zoned R-4.
2. East: Assisted living apartments, zoned R-8.
3. South: Meridian Middle School, zoned R-4.
Church of the Holy Nativity RZ-05-022 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEOG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
4. West: Medical offices, zoned L -O.
d. History of Previous Actions: None.
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: Existing.
Location of water: Existing.
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: Existing mature trees
3. Flood plain: NA
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities.
5. Hazards: None.
6. Proposed Zoning: R-8
7. Size of Property: 3.36 acres
h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks: per the L -O zone
L -O Standard
Front 20 feet
Side 10 feet
Rear 20 feet
Max. Building Height 35 feet
Min. Lot Size None
Min. Street Frontage None
i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The access
to the site will be from existing curb cuts on Cherry Lane.
7. COMMENTS MEETING
On January 13, 2006 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments
present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department,
Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments
and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the property as "Public/Quasi Public" and it is
currently zoned R-8. Public/Quasi Public is defined as "Areas are designated to preserve and protect
existing private, municipal, state, and federal lands for area residents and visitors (emphasis added)."
Staff finds that the Public/ Quasi -Public designation was intended to apply to existing churches and that
the proposed rezone complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and furthers the
goals and objectives set forth therein.
9. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists churches as a Permitted use in the L -O
zone.
Church of the Holy Nativity RZ-05-022 PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
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.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
REZONE ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan
and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Zoning Ordinance, staff
believes that this is a good location for the proposed rezone. Please see Exhibit D for detailed
analysis of facts and findings.
The rezone legal description submitted with the application (prepared on December 12, 2005 by
Colleen Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the
City of Meridian.
That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. All future uses shall not involve
uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be
detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production
of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of RZ-05-022 for Church of the Holy
Nativity as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 2, 2006 based on the
Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the approval comments as listed in Exhibit
B as attached to this report. Staff has prepared findings consistent with this recommendation.
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. (None)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Church of the Holy Nativity RZ-05-022 PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN&EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HAG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
A. Drawings
1. None.
Exhibit A
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEOG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 REZONE COMMENTS
1.1.1 All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions
of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of
excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
1.1.2 All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of
Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1. The proposed project has no Public Works concerns.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. The proposed project has no Fire Department concerns.
4. POLICE DEPARTMENT
1. The Police Department has no concerns related to the application.
5. PARKS DEPARTMENT
1. The Parks Department has no concerns related to the application.
6. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY
1. SSC has no concerns related to the application.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
1. Approved with no conditions.
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN&EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HAG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
C. Legal Description
ray —1 —4
MARkS
CAD. -y
Colleen Marks, L.S. 7048 •8405 Ustick Road • Boise, Idaho 83704
PpIrw�fVU Phon9: (208) 378-7703 • Fax: (208) 378-7769 • Email: markals@velocltus.net
REZONE DESCRIPTION
A parcel of land lying in a portion of the SEI/4 SWI/4 of Section 1, T.3N., R 1 W., B.M.,
Ada County, Idaho, and being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a point lying along the centerline of Cberry Lane and marking the S 1/4
Comer of said Section 1, T.3N., R. I W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho; thence N.89.34'21 "W.
180.00 feet along the said centerline of Cherry Lane and along the soutberly boundary of
the said SEI/4 SWI/4 of Section I to a point, said point marling the REAL POINT OF
BEGINNING:
thence continuing N.89.34'21"W. 483.19 feet along the said centerline of Cherry Lane
and also along the said southerly boundary of the SE1/4 SWI/4 of Section 1 to a point;
thence N.0.18'39"E. 300.87 feet along the easterly boundary of the Brady-Tiingey
Medical Building Condominium Project Amendment No. 1 as recorded in Book 92 of
Plats at Pages 10915 thru 10917, records of Ada County, Idaho to a point marking the NE
Comer of said Brady-Tingey Medical Building Condominium property;
thence N.89°34'21 "W. 0.75 feet along the northerly boundary of the said Brady-Tingey
Medical Building Condominium property to a point marking the SE Comer of Deerfield
Manor Subdivision as recorded in Book 59 of Plats at Pages 5778 and 5779, records of
Ada County, Idaho;
thence N.0.09'57"E. 43.09 feet along the easterly boundary of said Deerfield Manor
Subdivision to a point marking the SW Comer of Cherry Manor Subdivision as recorded
in Book 22 of Plats at pages 1442 and 1443, records of Ada County, Idaho;
thertce S.89.34'21'E. 484.09 feet along the southerly boundary of said Cherry Manor
Subdivision to a point;
thence S.0.19' 11 "W. 343.96 feet to the point of beginning, containing 3.82 acres, more or
less.
The above description was prepared from data of record, a field sure
performed. 9
SE W ARP ROYAL, i
{pan s=uat.tc
"XIS DEPT.
Exhibit C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN&EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEW DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
REZONE SKETCH FOR
CLAYTON LISLE
A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF THE SE1/4 SWI/4 OF
SECTIDN i, UK, RAW. BOISE MERIDIAN. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
2005
M
rz
r,
CL
Ica
Ile
mm
MERIDIAN PUBLIC
WORKS DEPT.
LINE TABLE
F- D sra
I N.89'3421i4. 0.75'
12 N.00.09STE. t
S
12 lz
=' e� 0 cl
®rtEEN IA
Poo/zoo 12
Exhibit C
CHERRY MANOR SUBDIVISION
BK. 22 PGS. 1442.1443
5.89'3421"E. 484.09,
3.82 ACRES
483,19'
21.1N. 2652.88
I[ W. CHERRY LANE
REVIEW APPROVAL
e v PUBLIC
? DEPT
NOT TO SCALE
8NSA3AHnSnNVlSlHVN
LEGEND
Si/4 COR.
SEC. I
PROPERTY UNE
CENTERLINE
CALCULATION POINT
IN®EX No. 314--01-320-000
MARKS LAND S(JR VE YiNG. INC.
COLLEEN MARKS, L.S. 7045
6405 US77CK RD.
BOISE, IDAHO 83704
PF* (206) .776-7703 FX: 376-7759
0A1€ 12A2 3 VRAPJV 8n. !Av Ptd_: dash—'+ron9,OrQ
R.i)R)gAn; xva nn c1 6An7/�� rai
T
m
8
Ile
mm
MERIDIAN PUBLIC
WORKS DEPT.
LINE TABLE
F- D sra
I N.89'3421i4. 0.75'
12 N.00.09STE. t
S
12 lz
=' e� 0 cl
®rtEEN IA
Poo/zoo 12
Exhibit C
CHERRY MANOR SUBDIVISION
BK. 22 PGS. 1442.1443
5.89'3421"E. 484.09,
3.82 ACRES
483,19'
21.1N. 2652.88
I[ W. CHERRY LANE
REVIEW APPROVAL
e v PUBLIC
? DEPT
NOT TO SCALE
8NSA3AHnSnNVlSlHVN
LEGEND
Si/4 COR.
SEC. I
PROPERTY UNE
CENTERLINE
CALCULATION POINT
IN®EX No. 314--01-320-000
MARKS LAND S(JR VE YiNG. INC.
COLLEEN MARKS, L.S. 7045
6405 US77CK RD.
BOISE, IDAHO 83704
PF* (206) .776-7703 FX: 376-7759
0A1€ 12A2 3 VRAPJV 8n. !Av Ptd_: dash—'+ron9,OrQ
R.i)R)gAn; xva nn c1 6An7/�� rai
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNODEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE&G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
1. Rezone Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation
and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive
plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to L -O. City Council finds that
the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the
Staff Report.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed
district, specifically the purpose statement;
City Council finds that churches are permitted uses within the requested zoning district of
L -O. There is no new development proposed and any new development must conform
with City Code. The applicant will be required to apply for a Certificate of Zoning
Compliance prior to construction of any site improvements to ensure compliance with
City Code.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of
services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City
including, but not limited to, school districts; and,
City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse
impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to
this site.
Exhibit D
March 3,2W6 AZ 05-066
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT Architecture Northwest ITEM NO. 21
REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Annexation and Zoning of .50 acres from R-12
to C -G zones for Meridian Veterinary Clinic — 415 West Franklin Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Recommendations / Findings
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
0
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND
DECISION & ORDER
In the Matter of a request for Annexation and Zoning of .50 acres from R-12 to C -G
(General Service and Retail Commercial) at 415 West Franklin Road, by Meridian
Veterinary Clinic.
Case No(s). AZ -05-066
For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
�erldlail
4dZdlce
A1A
19�°n
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March
7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-066 - PAGE 1 of 3
0 •
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon
the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected
party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description and the Conditions of Approval
all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by
reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet
such requirements as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and
based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby
ordered that:
1. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff
Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat
or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis.
Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request
for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for
Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has
an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of
the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of
this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho
Code.
E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of
/1 /® „ , k r , 2006.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-066 - PAGE 2 of 3
COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE
COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON
COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD
TIE BREAKER
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD
ATTEST:
•
r
Copy served upon: ✓ Applicant
�r Planning Department
✓' Public Works Department
City Attorney
0
VOTED_ J�
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED__P,--
VOTED
By 9 Dated: 3'g' ® �
City Clerk's Office
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-066 - PAGE 3 of 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
STAFF REPORT City Council Hearing
Hearing Date: 3/7/2006
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Josh Wilson, Associate City Planner
SUBJECT: Meridian Veterinary Clinic
• AZ -05-066
C��Cdnaitw b a
Annexation and Zoning of .50 acres from RI (Ada County) to C -G zone
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Joe Thompson of Architecture Northwest, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of
.50 acres from R12 (Ada County) to C -G (General Retail and Service Commercial) for the construction of
a new building at an existing veterinary clinic. The site is located on the south side of Franklin Road, west
of N. Meridian Road. The site is currently vacant and a veterinary clinic exists on the property which is
adjacent.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the
item on February 2, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Joe Thompson
ii. In opposition: None.
iii. Commenting: Larry Rackham
iv. Staff presenting application:
v. Other staff commenting on application:
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Alternative Compliance for required landscaping along the west property line and
the desire to see landscaping along Franklin Road.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. None.
d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. None.
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approve
I move to approve File Number AZ -05-066 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
March 7, 2006, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed
modifications).
Deny
I move to deny File Number AZ -05-066 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
March 7, 2006, for the following reasons: (you must state specific reasons for denial).
Continue
I move to continue the public hearing for File Number AZ -05-066 to (date certain).
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
a. Site Address/Location:
South side of Franklin Road, west of N. Meridian Road/ 415 W. Franklin Road
NE %, NE %, Section 13, T3N R1W
b. Owners:
Scott Higer
415 W. Franklin Road
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Joe Thompson, Architecture Northwest
224 16d' Avenue S.
Nampa, Idaho 83651
d. Representative: Joe Thompson
e. Present Zoning: R12 (Ada County)
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial
g. Applicant's Justification Statement (from application materials): "We feel that developing the
property as commercial would be a better fit with the surrounding land uses. Conceptually, our client is
proposing to use the parcel to expand his Veterinary facilities to meet our increased customer demand.
The proposed 7,200 sq. ft. facility would be located on the south end of the subject parcel."
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute a annexation as determined by City Ordinance.
By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5B-3, a public hearing is required before the Planning
and Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16 and 30, 2006
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 6, 2005
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 24, 2006
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Vacant with existing veterinary clinic on adjacent parcel which fronts
on Franklin Road
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The area along this portion of Franklin Road is
developed as mostly commercial, with some industrial and residential uses to the west of the
site.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Louisiana Pacific manufacturing plant, zoned C -G and I -L.
2. East: Existing residence and vacant land, zoned C -G.
3. South: Existing office building in Troutner Business Park, zoned C -G.
4. West: Existing office building in Troutner Business Park, zoned C -G.
d. History of Previous Actions: None.
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: In W. Franklin Road
Location of water: In W. Franklin Road
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: None.
3. Flood plain: NA
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities.
5. Hazards: None.
6. Proposed Zoning: C -G
7. Size of Property: .50 acres
h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks: per the L -O zone
C -G Standard
Front
0 feet
Side
0 feet
Rear
0 feet
Max. Building Height
65 feet
Min. Lot Size
None
Min. Street Frontage
None
i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The access
to the site will be from an existing curb cut on Franklin Road.
7. COMMENTS MEETING
On January 13, 2006 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments
present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department,
Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments
and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as `Commercial'. 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. Uses may include retail, wholesale, service and
office uses, multi -family residential, as well as appropriate public uses such as government offices. Staff
finds that the requested C -G zoning generally conforms to this stated purpose and intent of the
commercial designation within the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff finds the following Goals, Objectives, and Action items contained in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan
to be applicable to this application (staff analysis is in italics below policy):
• "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III,
Objective D, Action item 5)
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HAG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
The applicant is not specifically proposing to install any landscaping with the subject annexation
application. The applicant will be required to submit a development application prior to constructing
any use on the site. When the future development application(s) are processed by the City, the
applicant will be required to construct landscaping which complies with the Unified Development
Code.
• "Permit new ...commercial development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at
the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter IV, Goal I, Objective
A, Action item 6)
The subject site can be serviced by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer and water systems.
• "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII,
Goal 1, Objective B)
The proposed use does contribute to the variety of commercial uses in this area, as envisioned with
the Comprehensive Plan.
Stafffinds that a C -G zone is harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
9. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists animal care facilities as a Permitted use
in the C -G zone.
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.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
ANNEXATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive
Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Zoning Ordinance, staff
believes that this is a good location for the proposed annexation and veterinary clinic. Please see
Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings.
The annexation legal description submitted with the application (prepared on December 13, 2005
by Darren Leavitt, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of
the City of Meridian.
That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service
extension. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are
available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation.
That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. All future uses shall not involve
uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIIDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production
of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
Special Considerations: Staff is generally supportive of the proposed site design as presented in
the conceptual site plan labeled as Sheet A-1.0, dated August 12, 2005, with the following
comments:
Perimeter Landscape Strip UDC 11 -3B -C1 requires a five-foot minimum perimeter
landscape buffer along all interior lot lines adjacent to parking, loading, or other paved
vehicular use areas. This landscape buffer shall be planted with one tree per thirty-five lineal
feet and shrubs, lawn, or other vegetative groundcover. The submitted site plan does not
depict the required landscape strip along the western property line. It appears that due to the
location of the existing building, there is insufficient space to provide the required five-foot
strip and Alternative Compliance may be appropriate. The applicant should be aware that
they will be required to submit an Alternative Compliance application with the application for
Certificate of Zoning Compliance and the Planning Director will make the determination
whether the proposal meets the requirements of UDC 11-513-5.
Fire Department and SSC Access: The Meridian Fire Department and Sanitary Services
Company (SSC) have commented that the drive aisle on the west side of the proposed
building must be twenty feet in width and marked as "No Parking".
Parking Adiacent to New Building_ The submitted conceptual site plan shows ten parking
spaces adjacent to the proposed building, including one handicap accessible space. The
Meridian Fire Department and SSC have commented that the turning radius at the corner of
the parking spaces and the drive aisle on the west side of the building is insufficient. The
applicant should eliminate the western -most space along the proposed building to address this
concern. The Unified Development Code also requires that a landscape planter be placed at
the end of the row of parking, which contains vegetative groundcover and at least one tree.
With the elimination of the one parking space and the placement of a planter at the end of the
row of parking, the turning radius will be sufficient for the Fire Department and SSC.
The applicant shall submit plans for the required Certificate of Zoning Compliance which
address and remedy these concerns, and comply with the Unified Development Code.
Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into
between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and
the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this
process within 18 months of City Council approval of the annexation request. The DA shall
incorporate the following:
• That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by
reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
• That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with
City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development.
• That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service
extension.
• That any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are
available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation.
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
• That prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for construction of the new
building, the applicant shall submit a recorded cross access and parking easement between the
two parcels.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of AZ -05-066 for Meridian Veterinary
Clinic as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 based on the Findings
of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the approval comments as listed in Exhibit B as
attached to this report. Staff has prepared findings consistent with this recommendation.
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Conceptual Site Plan
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Ada County Highway District
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Meridian Veterinary Clinic AZ -05-066 PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
A. Drawings
1. Conceptual Site Plan
Exhibit A
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Exhibit A
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE*G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS
Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into
between the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and
the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney Bill Nary at 888-4433 to initiate this
Process within 18 months of City Council approval of the annexation request The DA shall
incorporate the following:
• That all future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by
reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
• That all future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City
of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development.
• That the applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service
extension.
• That any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be
removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are
available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation.
• That prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for construction of the new building,
the applicant shall submit a recorded cross access and parking easement between the two parcels.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1. The proposed project has no Public Works concerns.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. The proposed project has no Fire Department concerns.
4. POLICE DEPARTMENT
1. The Police Department has no concerns related to the application.
5. PARKS DEPARTMENT
1. The Parks Department has no concerns related to the application.
6. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY
1. SSC has no concerns related to the application.
7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
1. Approved with no conditions.
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANMIWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HAG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
C. Legal Description
ARROW
r,Ps. f3�_vl>�s
TQPCGRAPHE<7 1 N -D A z.TA
SURVEYS
landurveyin Inc,
CCASM-'CriON ST.AXINrc
®
Yu &Ck\Nff�
1121 E. State Sheet Suite 183 • Eagle, Idaho 83616 •
office. 1-208-939-73P8 6 Foal; 1.20&-939-3321
Jon No. 03993
D.R i..
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
FOR
SCOTT HIDER
ANNEXATION
A portion of the Ivorth.Est 114 o= the Northwest 114 of the Northeast ®!'Semon 1 i.
014nship 3 Nota- Range i West of'thC Boise Mcridiun. Ada County. Idaho. described as
fn!Ico."!
Commencing at the Norheast corner of Section 13. Township 3 North, Rance 1 West o!
the Boise Meridian, Ada Cotctty. Idaho, and running thence West 1432.13 feet `long t,'te
North Line of said section to the POINT O. EEG1Nid1NG::hence SO' 13'48"W 313. 10
feet: thence Fast 124.00 feet. Uwace NO' 13'f -8"E 150.00 feet; thence West 99.00 feet;
thence N0113'48"E 163.: C feet to the North line of said section; thence We.,A 23.00 feet
to t?te point of beginning.
Parcel contains 0.3 acres which includes rroposed right -of -w y aiong Franklin Roac.
Exhibit C
I- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNWEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TILE HAG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Exhibit C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK&EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
1. Annexation Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation
and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive
plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to C -G. City Council finds
that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the
Staff Report.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed
district, specifically the purpose statement;
City Council finds that animal care facilities are allowed within the requested zoning
district of C -G as a Principally Permitted Use. The applicant will be required to submit
for approval of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance prior to commencement of any
construction on the property, to ensure compliance with City Code.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare;
City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of
services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City
including, but not limited to, school districts; and,
City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse
impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to
this site.
5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11 -5B -3.E).
City Council finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the
developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public
funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in general compliance with the
City's Comprehensive Plan. This is a logical expansion of the City limits. In accordance
with the findings listed above, staff finds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to
C -G would be in the best interest of the City.
Exhibit D
March 3,2W6
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 7, 2006
AZ 05-065
APPLICANT Jonathan Seel ITEM NO. 22
REQUEST Public Hearing — Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.50 acres from RUT
to C -G zones for Nesmith Annexation — 2820 East Ustick 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:
COMMENTS
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Recommendations / Findings
See attached Comments
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Email from Jonathan Seel
Contacted:
Emailed:
Date: Phone: _
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
0
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND
DECISION & ORDER
RECEIVED
06
COf Meridian
City, rk Office
fw I�
In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 1.50 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C -G
(General Commercial) AND Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development
Agreement for Blue Marlin by subjecting an additional 1.50 acres of property to the
provisions of the Development Agreement, by Jonathan Seele.
Case No(s).: AZ -05-065 and MI -05-017
For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March
7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE 1 of 3
i
11
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon
the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected
party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, and the amended Development
Agreement provisions all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7,
2006 incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the
applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-5A and
based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby
ordered that:
The following modifications to Development Agreement provisions were made at the
City Council hearing:
a. None.
2. The provisions/conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE 2 of 3
0
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the da of
MOL rC� 92006.
y
COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED
TIE BREAKER
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED
Copy served upon: V-0101, Applicant
✓ The Planning Department
Public Works Department
( itv Atfnrnr-v
1.1L.Y..J�✓
City Clerk's Office
Dated: 3- 2-0 -OLP
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE 3 of 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIAPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAR DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Hearing Date: 3/7/06
Mayor & City Council
C. Caleb Hood, Current Planning Manager
Meridian Planning Department
208-884-5533
�� lll.iHf)
a�
Nesmith Annexation
AZ -05-065
Annexation and Zoning of 1.50 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C -G
(General Commercial), by Jonathan Seel.
MI -05-017
Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development Agreement for
Blue Marlin by subjecting an additional 1.50 acres of property to the
provisions of the Development Agreement, by Jonathan Seel.
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Jonathan Seel, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to C -G (General
Commercial) for 1.50 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located
on the north side of Ustick Road, approximately 1/4 mile west of Eagle Road. This site is
currently rural residential with one single-family residential building and accessory buildings.
The applicant is not proposing any land use, development or subdivision at this time. Instead, the
applicant is proposing to amend the existing development agreement for the adjoining Blue
Marlin parcel to include this lot (see MI -05-017). A condition of recorded Development
Agreement for Blue Marlin includes a requirement that all future uses require a Conditional Use
Permit or that a Planned Development (PD) application be submitted for the entire project (see
Miscellaneous Application (MI -05-017) for analysis related to amending the recorded
development agreement for Blue Marlin below). The subject property is within the Urban Service
Planning Area.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on February 2, 2006. At the
public hearing they moved to recommend approval.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Jonathan Seele (Applicant)
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Staff presenting application: C. Caleb Hood
V. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Setbacks and land use buffers between the subject property and the property to
the west.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. Required the applicant to submit an Alternative Compliance application to reduce
the landscape buffer to the west.
d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. The UDC requires a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer between C -G zoned property
and residential uses/zones. Since the Planning & Zoning Commission hearing,
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH 7 2006
the applicant has submitted an application for Alternative Compliance to reduce
the landscape buffer width along the west property line of both the Blue Marlin
and Nesmith properties to 10 -feet. Staff is recommending approval of the
applicant's request (see bold and underline additions in Section 10, below).
The subject applications (AZ and MI) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review.
By City Ordinance, the Planning & Zoning Commission does not take action on Miscellaneous
Applications, as the Council is the final decision making body (with a recommendation from staff).
However, because the City Council is the final decision making body on the Annexation and
Miscellaneous applications, and because the two applications are inter -related, the subject
applications are being combined into one staff report. Any comments related to the Annexation
application (AZ -05-065) will be include in the Commission's recommendation to the Council.
The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending_ approval of the Nesmith Annexation
AZ -05-065) and Miscellaneous Application (MI -05-017) with an amendment to the recorded
Development Agreement for Blue Marlin
3. PROPOSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing)
Approve
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ -
05 -065 and MI -05-017 as presented in Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 with the
following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.)
Deny
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ -
05 -065 and MI -05-017 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers
AZ -05-065 and MI -05-017 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the
following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location: 2820 E. Ustick / 4NIE32
b. Owner:
Winston H. Moore
1940 Bonito Way, Ste. 160
Meridian, ID 83642
c. Applicant/Representative: Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Company
d. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County)
e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use - Regional
f. Description of Applicant's Request: Request for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to C -G
(General Commercial) for 1.50 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County.
Miscellaneous Request (MI) to amend the recorded Development Agreement (DA) for Blue
Marlin by including the subject 1.50 acres.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
g. Applicant's Statement/Justification: As background information, Winston H. Moore owns 58
acres at the northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle. In early 2004, Mr. Moore submitted an
application to annex and rezone the entire 58 acres to C -G zoning. This parcel is referred to as
Blue Marlin. At that time we did not have any specific plans for the project, but felt it would
be a commercial development based on strong interest from the retail sector. However,
interested retailers would not enter into serious discussions until the land was annexed and
zoned for their use.
Subsequent to the approved annexation and rezone, Mr. Moore purchased the adjoining 1.46
acre parcel with no plans for development. He simply purchased the lot to square -off the Blue
Marlin parcel and avoid conflicts with the owner of the residential lot (please see Applicant's
Submittal Letter.)
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance.
By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is
required before the City Council on this matter.
b. Miscellaneous applications are not currently addressed in Title 11 of the Meridian City 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 City
Council.
c. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16 and 30, 2006 (for Planning & Zoning
Commission hearing) and February 13 and 27, 2006 (for City Council hearing).
d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 6, 2006 (for Planning &
Zoning Commission hearing) and February 10, 2006.
e. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 23, 2006 (for Planning & Zoning Commission
hearing) and February 24, 2006 (for City Council hearing).
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): There is an existing home and other outbuildings on the subject site.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The parcels directly to the north, south,
east and west are currently approved/zoned for commercial uses. Adjacent to the northwest
corner of this property, in Champion Park, attached single-family uses are being proposed
(Champion Park Addition). This area is rapidly transitioning from rural to urban.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Future commercial, zoned C -G, Blue Marlin
2. East: Future commercial, zoned C -G, Blue Marlin
3. South: Proposed Sadie Creek Promenade, zoned C -G
4. West: Commercial lots, proposed C -G and C -N zoning; Single-family
development, zoned R-8, Champion Park and Champion Park Addition
d. History of Previous Actions: NA
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities:
1. Public Works:
Location of sewer: Sewer is available in Ustick Road.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Location of water: Water is available in Ustick Road
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: There are some existing trees on this site that should be protected or
mitigated for when this property develops.
3. Floodplain: N/A
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Any irrigation ditches, laterals and canals that cross this
property should be tiled when this property develops.
5. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards associated with this property.
6. Proposed Zoning: C -G (General Commercial)
7. Size of Property: 1.50 acres
f. Subdivision Plat Information: The applicant has not submitted a preliminary plat with
the subject annexation application. Staff recommends that the City include the subject
property as part of the recorded Development Agreement (DA) for the adjoining Blue Marlin
property. Please see Analysis below for recommended DA provisions.
g. Landscaping:
1. Width of street buffer(s): Per City Code (UDC 11-2A) and the Comprehensive
Plan, a 35 -foot wide landscape street buffer is required adjacent to Ustick Road, an
entryway corridor and arterial roadway.
2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: Per City Code (UDC Table 11-2B-3) a 25 -
foot wide landscape buffer is required between C -G zoned properties and residential
uses/zones. As part of the Miscellaneous Application, the applicant is requesting to
provide only a 5 -foot wide landscape buffer. Subsequent to the Planning & Zoning
Commission hearing, the applicant submitted an Alternative Compliance
application. The applicant's application requests that the existing DA for Blue
Marlin be amended to require only a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer adiacent to
the Champion Park Development. The applicant is also requesting that future
buildings and parking along the west property line be allowed to be constructed
up to the landscape buffer (10 -feet to the property line). Staff is supportive of the
applicant's Alternative Compliance request (please see Analysis below regarding
the applicant's request).
h. Required Commercial Standards: C -G
Setbacks Proposed Required
Landscape (Local/Commercial) NA 10'
Arterial Road (Ustick) NA 35'
Collector Street NA 20'
Maximum Building Height NA 65'
i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: As mentioned above, the applicant is not
proposing to develop/plat this property at this time. There may be a future collector roadway
east of this site which will eventually connect Ustick Road and Eagle Road to Wainwright
Drive to the north.
7. COMMENTS MEETING
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINGOPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARODATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
On December 21, 2005, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers
in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian
Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. The
Meridian Fire Department was the only department or agency to provide comments. These
comments are "standard" and have not been included as conditions of annexation. Once a
development plan(s) is submitted staff will provide the applicant with specific comments and
conditions from all commenting agencies and departments.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Mixed Use Regional" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, this designation is defined in part as an area that
is situated in highly visible or transitioning parts of the City where innovative and flexible design
opportunities are encouraged. The Mixed Use — Regional designation has no upper limit on the
square footage of non-residential uses and is intended to allow a broad range of uses.
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply
to the subject property (staff analysis in italics below policy):
• Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services.
(Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands
proposed to be annexed in the following manner.-
Sanitary
anner.Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the
developer's expense.
• The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire
District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian
City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the
Meridian Rural Fire Department.
• The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's
Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police
Department (MPD).
• The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained
by the Ada County Highway District (ACRID). This service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This
service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This
service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no
revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation.
Municipal, fee -supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department,
the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian
Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing
Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
• Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels. (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING llEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH 7 2006
The applicant is proposing a commercial zone adjacent to proposed or established
commercial districts. However, residences are being proposed as part of the Champion Park
Addition Subdivision to the northwest. Staff finds that if the subject annexation application
and the Champion Park Addition applications are both approved, approximately 100 feet of
the subject property will abut residential lots. However, the impacts to the proposed
residential properties to the northwest can be limited through the construction of land use
buffers, fencing, and design. NOTE: On January 26, 2006, the applicant provided staff with a
letter stating that they believe they should only be required to provide a 5 -foot wide
landscape strip along the west boundary of the Blue Marlin/CentrePoint development. The
applicant has since amended this request and is now seeking a l0 foot wide landscape
buffer and building/ arking setback to the west property line Please see the Analysis
section below.
• "Permit new ... commercial developments only where urban services can be reasonably
provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter
IV, Goal I, Objective A, Action 6)
Municipal water, solid waste and other services exist to this area of Meridian.
"Locate new community commercial areas on arterials ... near residential areas in such a way
as to complement with adjoining residential areas." (Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective D,
Action 3)
Ustick Road is a designated arterial roadway. A 35 foot wide street buffer will be required
along Ustick Road when this property develops. Staff finds that commercial uses on this
property should complement the nearby residential land uses.
• "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal
IV, Objective D, Action 2)
There are existing access points to/from Ustick Road to from this property. Staff recommends
that access to this site be provided by the future internal roadway/driveway system and not
Ustick Road when this property develops.
• Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and
collectors in adjacent developments. (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13)
No stub streets are currently provided to the subject site. Currently there are no opportunities
to connect to roads in adjacent developments. Staff believes that when the roadway/driveway
system in Blue Marlin is constructed, this parcel will be provided access to Ustick and Eagle
Roads.
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 ACHD to minimize access
points on arterial ... roadways as development applications are reviewed." (Chapter VI, page
72)
"Develop methods, such as cross -access agreements, frontage roads, to reduce the number of
existing access points on to arterial streets." (Chapter VI, page 79)
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN• PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7 2006
Stafffinds that the proposed C -G zoning designation is generally harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal
or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's
zoning and development request is appropriate for this property.
9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
a. Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists the permitted, accessory,
and conditional uses in the C -G zoning district. However, the existing DA for Blue Marlin,
which the applicant is proposing to subject the 1.50 acres to, requires all uses to obtain
conditional use approval prior to construction and operation.
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.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
1. AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive
Plan, and the development surrounding the subject site, staff believes that the
requested C -G zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit C for detailed
analysis of the required facts and findings.
The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on
December 9, 2005 by Peter W. Lounsbury, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to
the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian.
2. MI Application: There are no required findings for a miscellaneous
application/development agreement modification. Below, staff has provided the most
pertinent facts and analysis related to the proposed development agreement
modification.
UDC 11 -5B -3.D.2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the City the authority to
require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City
that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Staff believes that a DA
is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent
with the comprehensive plan designation and does not negatively impact nearby
properties.
W.H. Moore, the current owner, has previously entered into a DA with the City and
is requesting that the recorded DA for Blue Marlin be amended to include the
subject 1.5 acres. The development agreement for this property was record on April
12, 2005 as Instrument No. 105048793. Staff recommends that the Commission and
Council direct the City's Legal Department to draft modifications to the recorded
development agreement for Blue Marlin as follows:
• Page 1, Item 1.4 - "Whereas, "Owner" has submitted an applications
for annexation and zoning (AZ -03-025 and AZ -05 -065) --of the
"Property's" described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of
(C -G) General Retail and Service Commercial District, (Municipal
Code of the City of Meridian; and"
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH
7, 2006
• Page 2, Item 1.7 - "Whereas, City Council the 23' day of March,
2004, and the 7th day of March 2006 has approved certain Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, set forth in as
if set froth in full, hereinafter referred to as (the "Findings"); and"
• Page 3, Item 3.3 - "'Property": means and refers to that certain
parcels(s) of "Property" located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian
as described in Exhibit A, amended to include 1.50 acres along
Ustick Road as well as the 58 acres originally subjected to this
agreement, describing the parcels to be annexed and zoned C -G
(General Retail and Service Commercial District) attached hereto and
by this reference incorporated herein as set forth at length."
• Page 3, Item 4.1 - "'Owner/Developer" shall not develop all or any
part of the "Property" unless and until it has applied for and received
either (a) a site-specific conditional use permit for the parcel to be
developed, or (b) approval for a planned development of the entire
"Property." The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the
City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to fids AZ -02-
025 and AZ -05-065 applications:....."
• Page 4, Item 5B- The applicant is requesting to further amend the DA
by asking that the City only require -510 feet of landscaping adjacent to
the proposed residential uses to the west, in Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition. The UDC currently requires a 25 -foot wide
landscape buffer, between commercially zoned property and residential
uses (UDC Table 11-213-3). The applicant has submitted an
AlternativeCompliance application that requests a 10 foot wide
buffer with building andarkin being able to be constructed u
to the 10 -foot wide buffer. In exchange for the reduced buffer
width, the applicant is proposing to include a condition within the
DA that would restrict trash compactors and loading docks along
the west side of the future buildings Further, the applicant is
proposing to require that all trash enclosures on the western lots be
constructed of concrete or masonry materials The applicant believes
that they should not incur the financial burden of allocating additional
land to landscaping because of the proposed Champion Park Addition
going from mini -storage to residential (see Applicant's Letters dated
January 26, 2006 and February 15, 2006.)
Although Champion Park is proposing to amend their use of the
property to the west, from mini -storage to residential, staff believes that
some type of substantial landscape buffer (not just a 6 foot vinyl fence
as proposed by the developer of Champion Park Addition) does need to
be constructed along the west property line. Staff also believes that the
applicant has some good reasons why they should not be required to
construct a full 25 -foot wide landscape buffer. Staff believes that at
least a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer, constructed in accordance with
UDC 11-313-9C, should be constructed along the entire western
boundary of the subject site, where the site abuts residential uses, for
the following reasons: 1) the area to the west (Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition) is shown on the Comprehensive Future Land
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Use Map as "Medium Density Residential". This medium density
designation existed prior to Blue Marlin or the subject 1.5 acre parcel
requesting annexation; 2) The land to the west (Champion Park) was
zoned for residential uses prior to Blue Marlin being annexed into the
City; 3) As the future homeowners are not living in the homes proposed
with Champion Park Addition, or the adjacent phase of Champion
Park, staff believes that the City needs to protect their interest. If the
City does not look out for the interest of the future homeowners no one
will. Even though the developers of Champion Park are proposing to
amend their development, the City should not waiver in the standard
practice of buffering residential uses from commercial uses. The
applicant even agrees that the (future) home owners need to be
protected in these instances, they just believe that they should not be
burdened with doing so (see Applicant's letters); and, 4) There are
previously approved residences within Champion Park, to the north of
the proposed Champion Park Addition, that are not a part of the
Champion Park Addition application. These home lots were approved
prior to Blue Marlin/CentrePointe and should also be provided with a
10 -foot wide landscape buffer. UDC 11 -5B -5B allows the City to
provide alternative means in which to meet the intended purpose of
certain development regulations when explicit compliance is not
feasible or the alternative means is superior to what is required
The intent of alternative compliance is to encourage creative
solutions to land use problems Staff finds that due to space
limitations on the site and the proposed change of use on the
adjacent Champion Park Addition the applicant's alternative
compliance request should be granted
For the reasons listed above staff recommends that Page 4 Item 5B be
amended to include the followige restrictions/re uirements for the
subject 1.50 acre Nesmith parcel and the 58 acres commonly known as
Blue Marlin and marketed as CentrePointe•
2, As an alternative to the standard 25 -foot wide land use
buffer, construct at least a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer in
accordance with UDC 11 -3B -9C along the entire western boundary
of the subiect site, which includes the 58 acres approved as Blue
Marlin and the 1.5 acres approved as Nesmith where the site abuts
existing or proposed residential uses in Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition In exchan a for the reduced buffer width
(10 feet), trash compactors and loading docks along the west side of
the future buildings are prohibited Further, all trash enclosures on
the western lots shall be constructed of concrete or masonry
materials. The applicant/owner can construct parking and buildings
up to the landscape buffer.
3. Landscape buffers along Ustick Road and Eagle Road shall
be constructed along the perimeter of the development which
includes the 58 acres approved as Blue Marlin and the 1.5 acres
approved as Nesmith in accordance with the Unified Development
Code.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINGOPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARODATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a modification to the recorded
Development Agreement (Instrument No. 105048793) shall be entered into between
the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption),
and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney Bill Nary. at 888-
4433 to initiate this process.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff and the Commission recommend approval of the subject
applications AZ -05-065 and MCU -05-017 with the conditions listed in the recorded
Development Agreement for Blue Marlin, including the amendments listed in the MI
Application Analysis of Section 10 of the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7 2006
11. EXHIBITS
A. Legal Description
B. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 2, 2006
Exhibit A — Legal Description
Dale; Dwmher 09,200
Owner: W. H. Mm,
Pared Na: S0532449300
Page: I oft
WEQuadrant
Consulting, Inc.
1�.XMMff "A"
A pal of being that twt as descn7bcd in Wanviy De W Instrment No. 99046304, Ada
county recgnls, situated in the South! % of the Southeast is of �eclion 32, Townssbip 4 North,
Range 1 East. Boise M w, Ada C.onnty, Imo, . buioj more particularly dmdbed as follows:
C41nmeacing at the Southeast ccomer of said Section 32, th=e aloes the Scall line ofacid Section
bring the Ca"Wd a of East Usticic Road, Nem 89°44'39" Nest 1195.23 fat to obs BOlNT OF
13EMMING; thence a oatiaeting along mid Soul lime ad mntmam
North 89x'4439" West 133:0() feet to &e Bast 1116 cow common to sold Sec tion 32 incl Section
5, Tow -&W 3 No&% itange i , Boise Meridian; ri, leaving mid South line and
dw Woad line of said hart
Noetb 0()°34'()T' Fast 491.28 f)ct 19 the Idnathwclt earner of said tract; thence leaving said Wen
line along dw Netrth fine of said !tact
South 89°441W Bag 133.00 feet to the Northeast cornofsaid tact; gree laving said Not
line along ft East line of said tmd
South OV30'02" West 491.28 feat to the POINT OF REGAMOMC
Smd 178md 00nWw 65.340 squm or 1.50 a== mese or less.
405 S. Sth Street, Ste. 295 • Sabo -1083n2 •Phone ON) 342,M I . FM IM) U2 -OM • tntanel: wewrw.qu3d10nt.cc
tcvHFn�ftt in9 • 5—eyh9 • con--tw*mmanageram
Exhibit A – Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 2 2006
Exhibit A — Page 2
sa�4a'3e'�
i 33.G0'
z�
I I
ul
?tea ®n
W
'*
in
t
I � I
f !
I t
I !
R/ t RWM _ t
32
E. COPAER _ *las 4g'3swa
COWER EAST USTICK ROAR
1195-23',1
'`-POINI OF BEGINNING
R/W opi
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 2, 2006
B. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Annexation Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full
investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. N order to
grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to C -G. City
Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the
applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive
Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report for more information.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the
proposed district, specifically the purpose statement;
No development is proposed concurrent with the zoning map amendment. The
Council finds that there are several uses that are allowed and conditionally
allowed within the requested zoning district of C -G. Council further finds that the
recorded DA for Blue Marlin requires all future uses on this site to either obtain
conditional use permit approval or obtain approval for a planned development. If
the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in the modified development
agreement, Council finds that the proposed commercial district will be in
compliance with the specific district regulations. Council finds that future
development of this property should comply with the established regulations and
purpose statement of the C -G zone.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public
health, safety, and welfare;
Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare. The Council relies on any oral or written
testimony that may be provided when determining this finding.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery
of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the
City including, but not limited to, school districts; and,
Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse
impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing
services to this site.
5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11 -5B -3.E).
The C -G zoning amendment will provide commercial area that is similar in
nature to existing and proposed commercial development in the vicinity. Council
finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer
to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public
funds. In accordance with the findings listed above, Council finds that
Annexation and Zoning of this property to C -G would be in the best interest of
the City, if the applicant enters into a modified Development Agreement (DA,)
with the City, as mentioned in Section 10 of the Staff Report
Exhibit B — Page 1
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
MKIR IN
APPLICANT Jonathan Seel ITEM NO. 23
REQUEST Public Hearing — Miscellaneous Request to amend the previously approved
Development Agreement for Blue Marlin (AZ 03-025) for Nesmith Annexation — 2820
East Ustick 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:
COMMENTS
See attached Recommendations / Findings
No Comments
No Comments
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER: See attached Emall from Jonathan Seel
Contacted:
Emailed:
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
0
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND
DECISION & ORDER
MAR 0 2 2006
S
C7 eridlan
m_ % Officce
In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 1.50 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C -G
(General Commercial) AND Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development
Agreement for Blue Marlin by subjecting an additional 1.50 acres of property to the
provisions of the Development Agreement, by Jonathan Seele.
Case No(s).: AZ -05-065 and MI -05-017
For the City Council Hearing Date of. March 7, 2006
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
incorporated by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March
7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE I of 3
0
E
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon
the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected
party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, and the amended Development
Agreement provisions all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7,
2006 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 § I1 -5A and
based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby
ordered that:
1. The following modifications to Development Agreement provisions were made at the
City Council hearing:
a. None.
2. The provisions/conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of March 7, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE 2 of 3
0
0
By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the —14v, day of
f1(1(lYM, , 2006.
COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED
TIE BREAKER _
MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG JR.
1VY i1,Y de WEERD
LE'
Copy served upon: V"Applicant 1W
�0
�/ The Planning Department
✓' Public Works Department
✓ City Attorney
By: Dated: 3- 20-000
City Clerk's Office
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 - PAGE 3 of 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING75EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Hearing Date: 3/7/06
Mayor & City Council
C. Caleb Hood, Current Planning Manager
Meridian Planning Department
208-884-5533
�iLp:W4�
�"rsa
Nesmith Annexation
AZ -05-065
Annexation and Zoning of 1.50 acres from RUT (Ada County) to C -G
(General Commercial), by Jonathan Seel.
MI -05-017
Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded Development Agreement for
Blue Marlin by subjecting an additional 1.50 acres of property to the
provisions of the Development Agreement, by Jonathan Seel.
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Jonathan Seel, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to C -G (General
Commercial) for 1.50 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located
on the north side of Ustick Road, approximately 1/4 mile west of Eagle Road. This site is
currently rural residential with one single-family residential building and accessory buildings.
The applicant is not proposing any land use, development or subdivision at this time. Instead, the
applicant is proposing to amend the existing development agreement for the adjoining Blue
Marlin parcel to include this lot (see MI -05-017). A condition of recorded Development
Agreement for Blue Marlin includes a requirement that all future uses require a Conditional Use
Permit or that a Planned Development (PD) application be submitted for the entire project (see
Miscellaneous Application (MI -05-017) for analysis related to amending the recorded
development agreement for Blue Marlin below). The subject property is within the Urban Service
Planning Area.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on February 2, 2006. At the
public hearing they moved to recommend approval.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Jonathan Seele (Applicant)
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Staff presenting application: C. Caleb Hood
V. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Setbacks and land use buffers between the subject property and the property to
the west.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. Required the applicant to submit an Alternative Compliance application to reduce
the landscape buffer to the west.
d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council:
i. The UDC requires a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer between C -G zoned property
and residential uses/zones. Since the Planning & Zoning Commission hearing,
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING•DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
the applicant has submitted an application for Alternative Compliance to reduce
the landscape buffer width along the west property line of both the Blue Marlin
and Nesmith properties to 10 -feet. Staff is recommending approval of the
applicant's request (see bold and underline additions in Section 10, below).
The subject applications (AZ and MI) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review.
By City Ordinance, the Planning & Zoning Commission does not take action on Miscellaneous
Applications, as the Council is the final decision making body (with a recommendation from staff).
However, because the City Council is the final decision making body on the Annexation and
Miscellaneous applications, and because the two applications are inter -related, the subject
applications are being combined into one staff report. Any comments related to the Annexation
application (AZ -05-065) will be include in the Commission's recommendation to the Council.
The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending approval of the Nesmith Annexation
(AZ -05-065) and Miscellaneous Application (MI -05-017) with an amendment to the recorded
Development Agreement for Blue Marlin.
3. PROPOSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing)
Approve
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ -
05 -065 and MI -05-017 as presented in Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 with the
following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.)
Deny
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ -
05 -065 and MI -05-017 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006
for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation.)
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers
AZ -05-065 and MI -05-017 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the
following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location: 2820 E. Ustick / 4N1 E32
b. Owner:
Winston H. Moore
1940 Bonito Way, Ste. 160
Meridian, ID 83642
c. Applicant/Representative: Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Company
d. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County)
e. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use - Regional
f. Description of Applicant's Request: Request for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to C -G
(General Commercial) for 1.50 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County.
Miscellaneous Request (MI) to amend the recorded Development Agreement (DA) for Blue
Marlin by including the subject 1.50 acres.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
g. Applicant's Statement/Justification: As background information, Winston H. Moore owns 58
acres at the northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle. In early 2004, Mr. Moore submitted an
application to annex and rezone the entire 58 acres to C -G zoning. This parcel is referred to as
Blue Marlin. At that time we did not have any specific plans for the project, but felt it would
be a commercial development based on strong interest from the retail sector. However,
interested retailers would not enter into serious discussions until the land was annexed and
zoned for their use.
Subsequent to the approved annexation and rezone, Mr. Moore purchased the adjoining 1.46
acre parcel with no plans for development. He simply purchased the lot to square -off the Blue
Marlin parcel and avoid conflicts with the owner of the residential lot (please see Applicant's
Submittal Letter.)
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance.
By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is
required before the City Council on this matter.
b. Miscellaneous applications are not currently addressed in Title 11 of the Meridian City 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 City
Council.
c. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16 and 30, 2006 (for Planning & Zoning
Commission hearing) and February 13 and 27, 2006 (for City Council hearing).
d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 6, 2006 (for Planning &
Zoning Commission hearing) and February 10, 2006.
e. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 23, 2006 (for Planning & Zoning Commission
hearing) and February 24, 2006 (for City Council hearing).
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): There is an existing home and other outbuildings on the subject site.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The parcels directly to the north, south,
east and west are currently approved/zoned for commercial uses. Adjacent to the northwest
corner of this property, in Champion Park, attached single-family uses are being proposed
(Champion Park Addition). This area is rapidly transitioning from rural to urban.
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Future commercial, zoned C -G, Blue Marlin
2. East: Future commercial, zoned C -G, Blue Marlin
3. South: Proposed Sadie Creek Promenade, zoned C -G
4. West: Commercial lots, proposed C -G and C -N zoning; Single-family
development, zoned R-8, Champion Park and Champion Park Addition
d. History of Previous Actions: NA
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities:
1. Public Works:
Location of sewer: Sewer is available in Ustick Road.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNAPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Location of water: Water is available in Ustick Road
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: There are some existing trees on this site that should be protected or
mitigated for when this property develops.
3. Floodplain: N/A
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Any irrigation ditches, laterals and canals that cross this
property should be tiled when this property develops.
5. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards associated with this property.
6. Proposed Zoning: C -G (General Commercial)
7. Size of Property: 1.50 acres
f. Subdivision Plat Information: The applicant has not submitted a preliminary plat with
the subject annexation application. Staff recommends that the City include the subject
property as part of the recorded Development Agreement (DA) for the adjoining Blue Marlin
property. Please see Analysis below for recommended DA provisions.
g. Landscaping:
1. Width of street buffer(s): Per City Code (UDC 11-2A) and the Comprehensive
Plan, a 35 -foot wide landscape street buffer is required adjacent to Ustick Road, an
entryway corridor and arterial roadway.
2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: Per City Code (UDC Table 11-213-3) a 25 -
foot wide landscape buffer is required between C -G zoned properties and residential
uses/zones. As part of the Miscellaneous Application, the applicant is requesting to
provide only a 5 -foot wide landscape buffer. Subsequent to the Planning & Zoning
_Commission hearin% the applicant submitted an Alternative Compliance
application. The applicant's application requests that the existing DA for Blue
Marlin be amended to require only a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer adiacent to
the Champion Park Development The applicant is also requesting that future
buildings and parking along the west property line be allowed to be constructed
up to the landscape buffer (10 -feet to the property line). Staff is supportive of the
applicant's Alternative Compliance request (please see Analysis below regarding
the applicant's request).
h. Required Commercial Standards: C -G
Setbacks Proposed Required
Landscape (Local/Commercial) NA 10'
Arterial Road (Ustick) NA 35'
Collector Street NA 20'
Maximum Building Height NA 65'
i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: As mentioned above, the applicant is not
proposing to develop/plat this property at this time. There may be a future collector roadway
east of this site which will eventually connect Ustick Road and Eagle Road to Wainwright
Drive to the north.
7. COMMENTS MEETING
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAWNRIPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
On December 21, 2005, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers
in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian
Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. The
Meridian Fire Department was the only department or agency to provide comments. These
comments are "standard" and have not been included as conditions of annexation. Once a
development plan(s) is submitted staff will provide the applicant with specific comments and
conditions from all commenting agencies and departments.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Mixed Use Regional" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use
Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, this designation is defined in part as an area that
is situated in highly visible or transitioning parts of the City where innovative and flexible design
opportunities are encouraged. The Mixed Use — Regional designation has no upper limit on the
square footage of non-residential uses and is intended to allow a broad range of uses.
Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply
to the subject property (staff analysis in italics below policy):
• Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services.
(Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands
proposed to be annexed in the following manner.-
Sanitary
anner:Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the
developer's expense.
• The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire
District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian
City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the
Meridian Rural Fire Department.
• The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's
Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police
Department (MPD).
• The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained
by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD). This service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This
service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This
service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no
revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation.
Municipal, fee -supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department,
the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian
Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing
Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
• Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels. (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINVEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAROG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
The applicant is proposing a commercial zone adjacent to proposed or established
commercial districts. However, residences are being proposed as part of the Champion Park
Addition Subdivision to the northwest. Staff finds that if the subject annexation application
and the Champion Park Addition applications are both approved, approximately 100 feet of
the subject property will abut residential lots. However, the impacts to the proposed
residential properties to the northwest can be limited through the construction of land use
buffers, fencing, and design. NOTE.- On January 26, 2006, the applicant provided staff with a
letter stating that they believe they should only be required to provide a 5 -foot wide
landscape strip along the west boundary of the Blue Marlin/CentrePoint development. The
anplicant has since amended this request and is now seekine a 10 foot wide landscape
buffer and building_/parking setback to the west Property line Please see the Analysis
section below.
• "Permit new ...commercial developments only where urban services can be reasonably
provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter
IV, Goal I, Objective A, Action 6)
Municipal water, solid waste and other services exist to this area of Meridian.
"Locate new community commercial areas on arterials ... near residential areas in such a way
as to complement with adjoining residential areas." (Chapter VII, Goal in, Objective D,
Action 3)
Ustick Road is a designated arterial roadway. A 35 foot wide street buffer will be required
along Ustick Road when this property develops. Staff finds that commercial uses on this
property should complement the nearby residential land uses.
• "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal
IV, Objective D, Action 2)
There are existing access points tofrom Ustick Road tofrom this property. Staff recommends
that access to this site be provided by the future internal roadway/driveway system and not
Ustick Road when this property develops.
• Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and
collectors in adjacent developments. (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13)
No stub streets are currently provided to the subject site. Currently there are no opportunities
to connect to roads in adjacent developments. Staff believes that when the roadway/driveway
system in Blue Marlin is constructed, this parcel will be provided access to Ustick and Eagle
Roads.
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)
"Develop methods, such as cross -access agreements, frontage roads, to reduce the number of
existing access points on to arterial streets." (Chapter VI, page 79)
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINOEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAA• DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Stafffinds that the proposed C -G zoning designation is generally harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal
or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's
zoning and development request is appropriate for this property.
9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
a. Allowed Uses in the Commercial Districts: UDC Table 11-213-2 lists the permitted, accessory,
and conditional uses in the C -G zoning district. However, the existing DA for Blue Marlin,
which the applicant is proposing to subject the 1.50 acres to, requires all uses to obtain
conditional use approval prior to construction and operation.
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.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation:
1. AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive
Plan, and the development surrounding the subject site, staff believes that the
requested C -G zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit C for detailed
analysis of the required facts and findings.
The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on
December 9, 2005 by Peter W. Lounsbury, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to
the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian.
2. MI Application: There are no required findings for a miscellaneous
application/development agreement modification. Below, staff has provided the most
pertinent facts and analysis related to the proposed development agreement
modification.
UDC 11 -5B -3.D.2 and Idaho Code § 65-6711A provides the City the authority to
require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City
that may require some written commitment for all future uses. Staff believes that a DA
is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent
with the comprehensive plan designation and does not negatively impact nearby
properties.
W.H. Moore, the current owner, has previously entered into a DA with the City and
is requesting that the recorded DA for Blue Marlin be amended to include the
subject 1.5 acres. The development agreement for this property was record on April
12, 2005 as Instrument No. 105048793. Staff recommends that the Commission and
Council direct the City's Legal Department to draft modifications to the recorded
development agreement for Blue Marlin as follows:
• Page 1, Item 1.4 - "Whereas, "Owner" has submitted an applications
for annexation and zoning (AZ -03-025 and AZ-05-065)_of the
"Property's" described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of
(C -G) General Retail and Service Commercial District, (Municipal
Code of the City of Meridian; and"
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINAPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAR DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
• Page 2, Item 1.7 - "Whereas, City Council the 23' day of March,
2004, and the 7th day of March. 2006, has approved certain Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, set forth in as
if set froth in full, hereinafter referred to as (the "Findings"); and"
• Page 3, Item 3.3 - "'Property": means and refers to that certain
parcels(s) of "Property" located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian
as described in Exhibit A, amended to include 1.50 acres along
Ustick Road as well as the 58 acres originally subjected to this
agreement, describing the parcels to be annexed and zoned C -G
(General Retail and Service Commercial District) attached hereto and
by this reference incorporated herein as set forth at length."
• Page 3, Item 4.1 - "'Owner/Developer" shall not develop all or any
part of the "Property" unless and until it has applied for and received
either (a) a site-specific conditional use permit for the parcel to be
developed, or (b) approval for a planned development of the entire
"Property." The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the
City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this AZ -02-
025 and AZ -05-065 applications:....."
• Page 4, Item 513- The applicant is requesting to further amend the DA
by asking that the City only require -510 feet of landscaping adjacent to
the proposed residential uses to the west, in Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition. The UDC currently requires a 25 -foot wide
landscape buffer, between commercially zoned property and residential
uses (UDC Table 11-213-3). The applicant has submitted an
Alternative Compliance application that requests a 10 -foot wide
buffer, with building and parking being able to be constructed up
to the 10 -foot wide buffer. In exchange for the reduced buffer
width, the applicant is proposing to include a condition within the
DA that would restrict trash compactors and loading docks along
the west side of the future buildings. Further, the applicant is
proposing to require that all trash enclosures on the western lots be
constructed of concrete or masonry materials. The applicant believes
that they should not incur the financial burden of allocating additional
land to landscaping because of the proposed Champion Park Addition
going from mini -storage to residential (see Applicant's Letters dated
January 26, 2006 and February 15, 2006.)
Although Champion Park is proposing to amend their use of the
property to the west, from mini -storage to residential, staff believes that
some type of substantial landscape buffer (not just a 6 foot vinyl fence
as proposed by the developer of Champion Park Addition) does need to
be constructed along the west property line. Staff also believes that the
applicant has some good reasons why they should not be required to
construct a full 25 -foot wide landscape buffer. Staff believes that at
least a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer, constructed in accordance with
UDC 11-313-9C, should be constructed along the entire western
boundary of the subject site, where the site abuts residential uses, for
the following reasons: 1) the area to the west (Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition) is shown on the Comprehensive Future Land
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINGEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Use Map as "Medium Density Residential". This medium density
designation existed prior to Blue Marlin or the subject 1.5 acre parcel
requesting annexation; 2) The land to the west (Champion Park) was
zoned for residential uses prior to Blue Marlin being annexed into the
City; 3) As the future homeowners are not living in the homes proposed
with Champion Park Addition, or the adjacent phase of Champion
Park, staff believes that the City needs to protect their interest. If the
City does not look out for the interest of the future homeowners no one
will. Even though the developers of Champion Park are proposing to
amend their development, the City should not waiver in the standard
practice of buffering residential uses from commercial uses. The
applicant even agrees that the (future) home owners need to be
protected in these instances, they just believe that they should not be
burdened with doing so (see Applicant's letters); and, 4) There are
previously approved residences within Champion Park, to the north of
the proposed Champion Park Addition, that are not a part of the
Champion Park Addition application. These home lots were approved
prior to Blue Marlin/CentrePointe and should also be provided with a
10 -foot wide landscape buffer. UDC 11 -5B -5B allows the City to
Provide alternative means in which to meet the intended purpose of
certain development regulations when explicit compliance is not
feasible or the alternative means is superior to what is required
The intent of alternative compliance is to encourage creative
solutions to land use problems Staff finds that due to space
limitations on the site and the proposed change of use on the
adjacent Champion Park Addition the applicant's alternative
compliance request should be granted
For the reasons listed above staff recommends that Pae 4 Item 5B be
amended to include the following restrictions/requirements for the
subject 1.50 acre Nesmith parcel and the 58 acres commonly known as
Blue Marlin and marketed as CentrePointe:
2. As an alternative to the standard 25 -foot wide land use
buffer, construct at least a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer, in
accordance with UDC 11 -3B -9C along the entire western boundary
of the subject site, which includes the 58 acres approved as Blue
Marlin and the 1.5 acres approved as Nesmith where the site abuts
existing or proposed residential uses in Champion Park and
Champion Park Addition. In exchange for the reduced buffer width
(10 feet), trash compactors and loading docks along the west side of
the future buildings are prohibited Further, all trash enclosures on
the western lots shall be constructed of concrete or masonry
materials. The applicant/owner can construct parking and buildings
up to the landscape buffer.
3. Landscape buffers along Ustick Road and Eagle Road shall
be constructed along the perimeter of the development which
includes the 58 acres approved as Blue Marlin and the 1.5 acres
approved as Nesmith, in accordance with the Unified Development
Code.
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 / MI -05-017 PAGE 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIAPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006
Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a modification to the recorded
Development Agreement (Instrument No. 105048793) shall be entered into between
the City of Meridian, property owner (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption),
and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney Bill Nary, at 888-
4433 to initiate this process.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff and the Commission recommend approval of the subject
applications AZ -05-065 and MCU -05-017 with the conditions listed in the recorded
Development Agreement for Blue Marlin including the amendments listed in the MI
Application Analysis of Section 10 of the Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7 2006
11. EXHIBITS
A. Legal Description
B. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Nesmith Annexation — AZ -05-065 I MI -05-017 PAGE 10
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINAPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 2, 2006
Exhibit A — Legal Description
Date: Decemher o9, 2405
hers: W. H. Mt
Parcel Net.: S053244930t1
Page: 1 of 2
117unQuadrant
Consulting, inc.
FJUU ""A"
A parcel of laW tieing that ftd as desmfed in Warranty deed kuOvmcnt No. 99446304, Ada
county ret tvd �tetain rite %. ofdm /4 ofS�ion 32, ToMIft 4 Nord{,
18ange 1 East. Tioiag MeuidM, Ada County, Idaho, bft more Particularly dewaibed as follows:
Of the SOuthulmt coiner of said Section 32, dmw alon& the Son% line of sad Section
lacing the a "ne of Fast Us d& Road, North 5944'39" West 1195.23 feet to the poEirr OF
11ECUVIVWG, &ence c:ontiauiag along raid Soudt Ime and
North 59044'39" Wen 133.00 feet to the Bast 1116 corner a omnm to said Sermon 32 and Section
5, Township 3 North, Rage I Ems, Boise' Meridian: th&tce leaving awd South hoe and
ahmg the West line ofmid had
North 40°3p'02" Ease 491.9 %nt to am Nwowcst =nay of said tract;d==leaving said Went
fim W[Ong the North fine of amid tract
Sotnh 119*4439" East 133.00 fwt to the Northeast come, of said batt; them leaving said Nmth
line alb Oto East fine of sW trust
South 40°30'02' Wea 491,25 tib go the POINT OF EAG
Said parcel contains 65.344 square or 1.So asps more or less.
405 5. Sth Street, Ste. 395 • gahe. DB3702 • Fhone {22081342°coq i • F=12N)342-M2 • tnle rnet: www.gvackunt.ec
Od naln—Ing • SurveyEn9 • Ccs„stauct 0n Managerne nj
Exhibit A — Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINAEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAL DATE OF FEBRUARY 2, 2006
sa�aa'sa"�
� f I
ti
f
}
ofti coy ®QC,
% r V-
0
in
�q
N
f � g
f
I
I
R/ I R/W
32 t
3M.2 i' 133.0w
Cd o.c-R VU,9-4 .'39`Ya�
�t3RMER r{ EASI USTtCK ROAD-
-a1s� R/w
w�
oa
Exhibit A — Page 2
—� Ln
u
r
r
0
z
1195 -2 L -A,— ai 3jj
' POIN1 OF BEGINNING g
Rte.
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINAARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAROG DATE OF FEBRUARY 2, 2006
B. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
1. Annexation Findings:
Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full
investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to
grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan;
The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to C -G. City
Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the
applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive
Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report for more information.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the
proposed district, specifically the purpose statement;
No development is proposed concurrent with the zoning map amendment. The
Council finds that there are several uses that are allowed and conditionally
allowed within the requested zoning district of C -G. Council further finds that the
recorded DA for Blue Marlin requires all future uses on this site to either obtain
conditional use permit approval or obtain approval for a planned development. If
the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in the modified development
agreement, Council finds that the proposed commercial district will be in
compliance with the specific district regulations. Council finds that future
development of this property should comply with the established regulations and
purpose statement of the C -G zone.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public
health, safety, and welfare;
Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare. The Council relies on any oral or written
testimony that may be provided when determining this finding.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery
of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the
City including, but not limited to, school districts; and,
Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse
impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing
services to this site.
5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-513-3.E).
The C -G zoning amendment will provide commercial area that is similar in
nature to existing and proposed commercial development in the vicinity. Council
finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer
to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public
funds. In accordance with the findings listed above, Council finds that
Annexation and Zoning of this property to C -G would be in the best interest of
the City, if the applicant enters into a modified Development Agreement (DA)
with the City, as mentioned in Section 10 of the Staff Report.
Exhibit B — Page 1
March 3,2W6 ZOA 05-002
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT City of Meridian Planning Department ITEM NO. 24
REQUEST Request for a Zoning ordinance Text Amendment with areas to be amended include Definition!
of collector streets, adult entertainment, net density, standards for TN -R Districts; fence standards, table
detailing Decision making authority by application changes to application requirements etc.
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
See attached P&Z Item Packet / Minutes
See attached Email from Director
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 25
REQUEST Public Hearing — New Fees and Modification of Existing Fee by the Public
Works Department necessary to cover the costs of development plan review,
inspections, site plan and development plan reviews
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT.
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
See attached Memo
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
0
CITY OF MERIDIAN
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
•
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold
a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, at the
hour of 7:00 p.m. on March 7, 2006, for the purpose of reviewing and considering
fee changes authorized in Title 9, Chapter 1 Water Use and Service, and Title 9,
Chapter 4 Sewer Use and Service of Meridian City Code.
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider proposed updated fees
including water and wastewater assessments, water meters and appurtenances, and
water system itemized damage fees.
A more particular and specific description of the above proposed amendments
and new and updated fees is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33
East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho and is available for inspection during regular
business hours, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing, and the
public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. Oral testimony may be limited to
three (3) minutes per person. Written materials may be submitted seven (7) days prior
to the above hearing date so that all interested parties may examine them prior to the
hearing.
DATED this 14th day of February, 2006.
WILLIAM G. BERG, J
PUBLISH 20th and 27th of February, 2006.
�}.dgti4 �iV O9 aid���d�
I, ERK
/,ejeeijet n ee B6e9A500�1
• 0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
City of Meridian
PUBLIC WORKS FEES
The City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 7, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chambers at Meridian City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. The purpose of
the public hearing is to receive public comments regarding imposition of new fees and modification of
existing fees by the Public Works Department. The fees are necessary to cover the costs of
development plan review, inspections, site plan and development plan reviews.
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. The hearing will be
held in a facility that is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone desiring accommodation for
disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least
72 hours prior to the public hearing.
Commercial or Industrial Site Plan
Utility Plan Review
With no new water or sewer mains (services
existing)
With no new water or sewer mains (services not
existing)
With new public water or sewer mains
Drainage Plan Review
< 1.5 acres
1.5 to 10.0 acres
10.0 to 20 acres
> 20 acres
Water and Sewer Inspection
No new water or sewer mains
New water main
New sewer main
Drainage System Inspection
< 1.5 acres
1.5 to 10.0 acres
10.0 to 20 acres
> 20 acres
Subdivision Plans
Water System Modeling — by Public Works
Water System Modeling — by Consultant
Sewer System Modeling — by Public Works
Sewer System Modeling — by Consultant
Preliminary Plat Water & Sewer Model Input
Development Plan Review
Off-site Water or Sewer Main Plan Review
Homeowners Association Pressurized Irrigation
System Review
Sewage Lift Station Review
Private Street Review
Floodplain Review (if applicable)
Initial
Review
$96
$144
$288 + $0.40 per lineal foot
$48
$96
$192
$192
One-time Fee
$72
$0.69 per lineal foot
$0.69 per lineal foot
$76
$152
$228
$380
One -Time Fee
$328
Time and Materials
$328
Time and Materials
$99
$378 + $10 per lot
$0.40 per lineal foot
$125 + $5 per lot
$492
$300 + $0.10 per lineal foot
along street centerline
$96
Third and Subsequent
Reviews
$48
$72
$144 + $0.20 per lineal foot
$24
$48
$96
$96
Third and Subsequent
Reviews
$100
$0.20 per lineal foot
Master Grading & Drainage Review
$200 + $5 per lot
Subdivision Grading & Drainage Review
< 1.5 acres
$76
1.5 to 10.0 acres
$152
10.0 to 20 acres
$228
> 20 acres
$380
Inspection
Water Main Inspection
$0.69 per lineal foot
Sewer Main Inspection
$0.69 per lineal foot
Pressurized Irrigation System Inspection
$150 50 or less services
$225 51 to 100 services
$300 101 or more services
Sewage Lift Station Inspection
$576
The public is encouraged to review the proposed fee structure, attend the public hearing and offer
comments and testimony. Oral testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes per person. Written
comments are welcome and need to be submitted / sent to the Meridian City Clerk, 33 E. Idaho Avenue,
Meridian, Idaho 83642 of by fax at 888-4218.
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. The hearing will be
held in a facility that is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone desiring accommodation for
disabilities related to documents and / or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at
least 72 hours prior to the public hearing.
DATED this 14th day of February, 2006 ®�gNN
t-
William G. Berg, Jr. - City erk m'.',.
�a
Published 20tt' and 27th of February, 2006 S ,� +`
March 3, 2006 RZ 05-021
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT Hillview Development Corporation ITEM NO. 26
REQUEST Ordinance — regeust for a Rezone of .94 acres from R-8 to C -G and Rezone
of .95 acres from R-8 to C -N for Champion Park Addition — north of Ustick Road and
west of Eagle Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT.
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
COMMENTS
See attached ordinance
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 I
BOISE IDAHO 03/09/06 02.08DEPUTY Nava ��
RECORDED - REQUEST OF I�I ���IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ���
Meridian City 106036649
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. C% 12,16
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, WARDLE
AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT HILLVIEW DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, THE OWNER OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HAS MADE
A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR REZONE OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION
(RZ-05-021— CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION fk.a. PARKSTONE
SUBDIVISION) FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/ OF
SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, MERIDL&N, ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO, AS DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A" OF THIS
ORDINANCE AND RE -ZONING CERTAIN LANDS AND TERRITORY,
SITUATED IN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND WITHIN THE CORPORATE
LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AND RE -ZONING THE LAND USE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SAID LANDS FROM R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL) TO C -G (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) AND C-
N(NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) 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 re- zoning by the owner of sad property, to -wit: Hillview Development
Corporation.
SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby re -zoned from R-8
to C -G (General Commercial) and C -N (Neighborhood Commercial) 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 re -zone said property.
RE -ZONE OF CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION - RZ-05-021 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 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 S. 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 day of , 2006.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,
this day of All-al-11-aLl , 2006.
RE -ZONE OF CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION - RZ-05-021 Page 2 of 3
MAYOR TAJWY de WEERD
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK
STATE OF IDAHO, )
: ) ss.
County of Ada )
On this -}' day of MCM►'C� , 2006, 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.
�(�—vy
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
RESIDING AT: On I A 1 W,1, 11)
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 10-I I-1 1
RE -ZONE OF CHAMPION PARK SUBDIVISION - RZ-05-021 Page 3 of 3
i
QTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 8'1nrF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 14, 2606
C. Rezone Legal Descriptions
IDAHO 1430 r=VVmmtoaar Se
SURVEY tam ISO
GROUP " %%wAeetua4x
phaoa lib e4sa67o
— .—..—...— —. — —..-- .—• — .— _ hx7ee4ssv9
Frapmed CN 7.000
Proprt,ed CbampM Park AddWoa
Rac&° 111804 BM Med dkagimu Ads Calory iaaaea m 1 >;°` *32, rowmhip Mane
Iona"' CommandAl at toe Y. am= c mmoato tit, add ��� dandd
Sudan 5,
as
Towaaeip 3 North, Re,rge 1 Ea H.M., from w m h the8 corm of odd $pylon 32
Boma North 89"43.17" Pap, 203AO fea4 theme almtg the much Eno ofehe S8 Y. ofstdd
14edioa 32 North 99°41'04' Fad. 1124.23 fmk tbmtoe WMA 00"l3'Sr Wed. 200.68
feet to ON REAL POMr OF BWjNMC,
Than= txratintdng Nash 0043'56" West, 56.25 &d to a paint ofcmvataN
Thmra 41.48 fool along the aro of a tastve to to Int staid emve httvbg a rediae of
3W.00
4143 fern k addm a& ofO7°MS'22", �Ia bag chord emtng North 04°51'35' West,
point of tanseocy,
Thon"Nonh 08°1119" WpK, 8177 fad to nptdat afWMft6;
nooca 00fnot•ad� fed along oro areofaamm'be W%add —hyy'ng a radio, of
166.
166- an& of 0218'20". end a long ,hord boins NaNt 09n4 28" West,
Thm w North 74115.19` Had, 61.81 fmt to a point of
uavvorM
That- 2.1,16 feet abtnt the am ofa cave to the bag, Ndd curve having andina of
WM ft 'k 41%,ogle of24"14'36", and a loag abed baa&g Noah 62°08.01" E.4
2100 fad
Thm— South 19°59'17" Fast, 25.00 fe,C
69114 Theaoe North 89°58'28" Rad, 126.83 dmf to a point an the Erin Rnc of Laid
Theaw along acid Rae Setab OVO1'324 Bea, 193.99 OW;
Thmtco SUM WOWW" Wed, 204.84 Red to the pO1NT OF B%ORYNWCL
Coeaming 0.95 antes, orae or less.
l
4459
,,to 3,8o
50914\50914 en dx Orr
professional Land 5tot veyoro `AYr'F'
Exhibit C—Page 1
f �
Crry OF MERIDIAN PLANNING D6PARTM6NT S.,.IF REPORT POR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 14,2M
IDAHO Ilse I Vvara per Sc
SURVEY sww Iso
GROUP Mwl-A n.idlF.W642
Pb— Cl" 84"M
— _ — — — — -- — — — . — —• — Fam ttwl ee�s3ss —
Odober2g. 2005
Propowd CG Zone
PMPMW Chatoptoa PMh Addition
RadwA parent of bo d being a pardon of the $ri Y. orSmtWn 32, Totanshlp 4 Notch,
14266 B.M. Merman, Ada County. Idaho, more pm*WMly des.rlbed at
f ll Co at ft Y Darner nomman to the 9m4 Section 32 ad Seetiqu 9,
3
ltmrs North NWI%89*43'.IR-So East$.M., hm whish the SW oormr orasid Swdon 32
Feat. 2653.40 font; am= along tho Moth lineorthe BE V ofsaid
Section 32 North 139°44'04" Etat, 1124.23 feat to tit. ZPAL PMT OF9EGINNrMG,
Theme North 00°15-56" west, 200.8 fact;
5-a 1/4;Thrnca North ww'w" But 204.84 fou to a point on are East line oradd
Thence 01-9 said line South 00°01.32^ East, 1".73 font to Ute Fast I(LC comM
common toSoctien 5 sad the Said Section 32;
Thorns mons the wu& line of are SE P, ormid $action 32, Sottas 89°44'04"
Went. 204"00 rod to the POINT OF $F.t:3INNIMG. ConWft 0.94 acres, mese or less.
w 4431 $
so9la�So914igdoc
Professional Land Svrveyoes
Exhibit C—Pago2
z
F
a
CD
cn N
c 46
CD
rn
csy �
J
Q
CZ) �O
m y�
o°
�rn
N OO'15'56" VV
.e a sr0� e
CA MOM' �
X22
s i gg
00
-�
199.73' .�193.99'
0G0132p E
t„
CHAIMONPAM ADLNi
� s
ll �
r rr
00
-�
199.73' .�193.99'
ENGINEERING
(M) AM-" ra (z08era-Mi
0G0132p E
t„
CHAIMONPAM ADLNi
d
P�, .-_
w
m`Y
ENGINEERING
(M) AM-" ra (z08era-Mi
I
CHAIMONPAM ADLNi
d
P�, .-_
w
m`Y
5E 1/4 SEC 32. T.4M.. R.1 E, O.AL
►1UMM, ADA COUMY. IDAHO
ENGINEERING
(M) AM-" ra (z08era-Mi
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
AZ 05-050
APPLICANT Conger Management Group, Inc. ITEM NO. 27
REQUEST Ordinance — Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.0 acres from RUT
to R-4 zone for Reserve Subdivision — west of North Locust Grove Road and south of
Chinden Boulevard
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT.
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See attached ordinance
Date: Phone: _
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Merldlan.
ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT .00
BOISE IDAHO 03/09/06 02:08 PM
DEPUTY Nava RECORDED- REQUEST OF (II I I II I� I II I'I I II II I'I I I III I I III
Meridian City 106036648
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO.
®f - 12-17
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BIRD, BORTON, ROUNTREE, WARDLE
AN ORDINANCE (AZ -05-035 THE RESERVE SUBDIVISION) FOR
ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SE 1/ OF THE NE 1/ OF
SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 4 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 R4
(LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) 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: Jake Centers.
SECTION 2. That the above-described real property is hereby annexed and re-
zoned from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (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.
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.
ANNEXATION OF AZ -05-035 THE RESERVE SUBDIVISION 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 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 day of &A26CA✓ , 2006.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO,
this � day of al -L- , 2006.
ANNEXATION OF AZ -05-035 THE RESERVE SUBDIVISION Page 2 of 3
ATTEST:
e
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK
STATE OF IDAHO, )
: ) ss.
County of Ada )
On this -1t�-% day of r alar\ , 2006, 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.
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
RESIDING AT: &tft 1,Lje 1�1 ll)
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 10-11-11
ANNEXATION OF AZ -05-035 THE RESERVE SUBDIVISION Page 3 of 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF NOVEMBER 17, 2005
C. • Legal Description
Roylance & Associates P.A. tats -* Swvtprs • Lendpisnners
a91 W. Sta@a Sbaet, Suis E .Idaho B 16 Tete (M MR24 Fax CM) 239-2855
September 14,201
Project No. 2.586
Legal Description
CS Development, LLC
A» aoxidon Area
5.00 Acres
A tract ofTad for annexation purposes located in the Southeast One Qumterof the Northeast One Quarter
of Section 30, Township 4 North, Range I East, Hod -se Meridian. Ada County, Idaho, described as follows:
Camomcwft at a found brans cap moitur !enting the Northeast Carnet of said Section 30. thence following the
eastatly line of said Seetion 30, South 0003750" West a distance of 132819 feet to the 1''O1NT OF
BLGMING,
Thence fallowing said easterly line South 009759° West a distance of 331.98 feet to a point•,
Tltdmce leaving said easterly litre NTcsth 89°49143" West a diistanm of 655.96 feet to a point,
Thence North 00038'00' rm a distatu:e of 332.10 feet to a point;
Thence Sdwth W49106" East a distance of M5.96 feet to the POINT OF RWINMNG.
The above ibed pact of land contains 5.00 acne, more or Ie ss. subject to all existing easemenLc and Tigias-
way" •
l edBy: ROYLANCE &ASSOCTA'TFS P.A.
391 W. STATE STREET, Si tM, E
EAGLE, JDAHO 83616
208.939-2824
208-939-2855 (FAX)
W APPftpUA '
a
PUBUG
}C1ProjeclaVC u SabSAd�sunU egalsl4nneseGtm WSM dm
Exhibit C — Page 1
act — rpt -o j
Z
RgL.
'evam
MM 6S jMD
a4 3AOM 1SMOI 'N
Wo
c
4)
1
Lij �-
00-
W
EL
rx
w
'4
W
Wo
c
4)
1
Arc 3
I
io
to
d �g�
N
w
F m
Q`co a�
U *-Do'
0vv
N -o m oc
N =-W-
a w``
¢;
w�®�
U�
.�.
rm�rn�
} ` (n
m
0 3
M�
W
d
:3
W
?-
ED
�
0
I
�•
V
w
LU
�
Li,
1,411
I
Arc 3
I
io
to
d �g�
N
w
F m
Q`co a�
U *-Do'
0vv
N -o m oc
N =-W-
a w``
¢;
w�®�
U�
.�.
rm�rn�
} ` (n
m
0 3
M�
March 3, 2006
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7, 2006
APPLICANT ITEM NO. 28
REQUEST Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(l)(a){c.)(f)
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
OTHER:
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.