Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-04• CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 4, 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: ~G~.~-~- ~~5~~- ~ ~y« ~~~ ~,7 ~Ler.-f ~°/~ ~3~ 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: ~res.~,,,.f~L 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~ f~~-r~v~- a-,f w 5. Consent Agenda: ~~~~~ A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 Pre-Council Meeting: ~~~v`e~ B. Approve Minutes of February 28, 2006 City Council & Kuna City Council Special Meeting: ~cp~y„v~ C. Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: ~p~~v~ D. Approve Minutes of March 21, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: ~f,~rro~c.. E. Approve Minutes of March 23, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: ~/p~® ~ F. Approve New Beer and Wine license for Chicago Connection by Joy Kegley at 1935 S. Eagle Road: ~~j~~ G. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer -Phase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers: ~~,,.01~ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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. • H. Agreement for Consultant Services for Reaulatory Floodwav Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill: ~~~..- I. Contract for Streetlight Maintenance with Power Plus, Inc.: ~~®~- J. Contract for Removal of Pine Avenue Check Valve with Star Construction: e~~~vK. K. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-008 Request to modify the approved Development Agreement for Cedar Springs Professional Center by Lynn Brown -northeast comer of Venable Lane and West Ustick Road: ~~~,~ 6. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Office 1. Proclamation for Fair Housing Month: ~eadi 2. Criteria for Scholarship: B. Attorney /Legal Department ~- ~:d ~a~h~. a,G~~ 1. 5~~ from SWAC on Letter from Cheri Church: ~i~vv~c.- ~°.?~op.,°= 2. Draft RFP / RFQ for New City Hall Building: 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: f~.o~- 8. FP 06-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 16 building lots and 1 common lot on 3.26 acres in C-G and R-40 zones for Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 by Fairview Lakes, LLC -1875 North Lakes Place: ~~ 9. FP 06-013 Request for Final Plat approval for 20 single-family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 3.57 acres in a R-8 zone for Breinholt Subdivision by Richard Breinholt - 2580 North Meridian Road: ~ie~~ 10. FP 06-012 Request for Final Plat approval for 22 building lots and 1 other lot on 15.55 acres in a L-O zone for Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley - 3805 East Franklin Road: ~~~ 11. MFP 06-002 Request to modify the approved fencing for Hacienda Subdivision in a R-8 zone by Jayo Construction - 6000 North Meridian Road: ~~~.t, Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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. ~ ~ 12. FP 06-016 Request for Final Plat approval for 103 residential lots and 7 common lots on 31.72 acres in a R-4 zone for Estancia Subdivision by Gem Star Development, LLC -east of South Locust Grove Road and north of Amity Road: ~~~,~.u 13. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zoninu 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-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: ~e~~a~~ f~ ~ ~®®~ 14. Continued Public Hearing from March 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 Canvon Creek Subdivision by JBS Enterprises, LLC -1845 West Franklin Road: ~'7'I'~'"j`'s /r,-~/'~,,`" ~~~¢ c%~ ~r rv~ 4-25-06 15. Continued Public Hearrng from March 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: ~„ ~.e.. ~yr~paz ,G'/~ ~~!-C ~- ~/'Irny'~ ~-~S o6 16. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: CUP 05-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for amixed-use development within 300' of a residence for Harks Canvon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: ~~~ ~ ~~,~ y%/~~ ~/~ ~- ~~7'ym`~~.e 4-1-s-o6 17. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: AZ 05-062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT to R-8 for Share Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC - 2445 North Wingate Lane: ~ ~ 18. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: 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: ~'%p~~o ~~~c/,C ccr r2 19. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.55 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Una Mas by Una Mas, LLC - 3475 East Ustick Road: arc., Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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. • 20. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-064 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 116.81 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road: ~fncc~, ib/h ~a ~s~5~~ 21. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: PP 05-064 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 321 building lots and 34 common lots on 116.81 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road: ~y;,~, ~,/~. ,,co ¢~2~ vb 22. Public Hearing: VAR 05-026 Request for a Variance to exceed maximum block lengths in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of Overland Roa~~ east of Linder Road and west of Stoddard Road: ~~~, »~.w~ /~+- ~ ~'®~ 23. Public Hearing: VAC 06-003 Request for a Vacation of a drainage easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Cham pion Park Subdivision No. 3 by Creekside, Inc. - 2484 East Garber Drive: ~ fir,.-~,~- ~ ~~ c%e v ~ v~ - ~f~'~~ f' ~'~/a arc rcrai erJ 24. Public Hearing: AZ 05-058 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 49.95 acres from RUT to a R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: ~~,,,,~s,,~~/~ ~ ~- 6806 25. Public Hearing: PP 05-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 building lots and 9 common lots on 49.95 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: ~®a~.~ay~x. ~/~ ,,e.~ ~~®8-®d 26. Public Hearing: VAR 05-024 Request for a Variance to reduce front garage setbacks to 15 feet from back of sidewalk in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: ~-,-~,~. ~/~, ~ ~.,/~ ~~ 27. Public Hearing: AZ 06-002 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 0.43 acres from RUT to L-O (Limited Office District) for Strada Bellissima Subdivision Outparcel by Strada Bellissima, LLC - 3015 South Meridian Road: ~-,rv~ ~l~ ¢ G/-C aEv,- ~ 28. Public Hearing: Amendments to the Pawnbroker Ordinance: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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. °I~se Pe~~,- ~Pu.~c~N~t~cn,-~fho~si,l CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 4, 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 swQrr~ testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the preser~#er." 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of February 28, 2006 City Council & Kuna City Council Special Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Coupcil Regular Meeting: D. Approve Minutes of March 21, 2006 City Coupcil Regular Meeting: E. Approve Minutes of March 23, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: F. Approve New Beer and Wine license for ~hicacto Connection by Joy Kealey at 1935 S. Eagle Road: G. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer - Pt}ase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 2006 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of tlhe City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documerjts and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. H. Agreement for Consultant Services for ~eaulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill; I. Contract for Streetlight Maintenance with dower Plus, Inc.: J. Contract for Removal of Pine Avenue C~ieck Valve with Star Construction: K. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-008 Request to modify the approved Development Agreement for Cedar Sarinas Professional Center by Lynn Brown - northeast corner of Venable Lane and West Ustick Road: 6. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Office 1. Proclamation for Fair Housing Mont: 2. Criteria for Scholarship: B. Attorney /Legal Department 1. Resort from SWAC on Letter from ~herrv Lane Christian Church: 2. Draft RFP / RFQ for New City Hall Building: 7. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: 8. FP 06-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 16 building lots and 1 common lot on 3.26 acres in C-G and R-40 zgi~es for Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 by Fairview Lakes, LLC -1875 Forth Lakes Place: 9. FP 06-013 Request for Final Plat approval for 20 single-family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 3.57 acres in a R-8 zone for Breinholt Subdivision by Richard Breinholt - 2580 North Meridian Road: 10. FP 06-012 Request for Final Plat approval for 22 building lots and 1 other lot on 15.55 acres in a L-O zone for Touchmark Ce,;~ter Subdivision No. 1 by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley - 3805 East Franklin Road: 11. MFP 06-002 Request to modify the approved fencing for Hacienda Subdivision in a R-8 zone by Jayo Construction - 6000 North Meridian Road: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 2006 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of tie 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 prim to the public meeting. 12. FP 06-016 Request for Final Plat approval for 10~ residential lots and 7 common lots on 31.72 acres in a R-4 zone for Es~~ncia Subdivision by Gem Star Development, LLC -east of South Lafrust Grove Road and north of Amity Road: 13. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment with tha 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 `fequirements; how to measure block length; screening and chainlink fencing; requirement for certificates of zoning compliance; off-street parking space standards and measurements; off-street loading space requirem~:nts; family day care standards; and sign standards for family day care ~,y the City of Meridian Planning Department: 14. Continued Public Hearing from March 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 Cannon Creep, Subdivision by JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: 15. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: P-P 05-058 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 Rommercial lots and 7 common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN-R anc~ C-C zones for Harks Cannon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: 16. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: CUP 05-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for amixed-use develQ ment within 300' of a residence for Harks Cannon Creek Subdivision J~S Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: 17. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: ADZ 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: 18. Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: IMP 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 zQpe for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC - 2445 North Wingate Lane: 19. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006,. AZ 05-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.55 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Una Mas by Una Mas, LLC - 3475 East Ustick Road: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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 priop to the public meeting. • • 20. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006 AZ 05-064 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 116.81 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road: 21. Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 20068 PP 05-064 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 321 building lots apd 34 common lots on 116.81 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Cr~lek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road: 22. Public Hearing: VAR 05-026 Request for a Variance to exceed maximum block lengths in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of Overland Road, east of Linder Road and west of Stoddard Road: 23. Public Hearing: VAC 06-003 Request for a Vacation of a drainage easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 by Creekside, Inc. - 2484 East Garber Drive: 24. Public Hearing: AZ 05-058 Request for Annexatiop and Zoning of 49.95 acres from RUT to a R-8 zone for Keego Springs-Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: 25. Public Hearing: PP 05-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 building lots and 9 common lots on 49.95 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: 26. Public Hearing: VAR 05-024 Request for a Valriance to reduce front garage setbacks to 15 feet from back of sidewalk in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: 27. Public Hearing: AZ 06-002 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 0.43 acres from RUT to L-O (Limited Office District) fpr Strada Bellissima Subdivision Outparcel by Strada Bellissima, LLC ~ 3015 South Meridian Road: 28. Public Hearing: Amendments to the Pawnbroker Ordinance: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 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 documegts and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prigs to the public meeting. >~ TX ~RMRTION REPORT ~Pok AS OF MAR 31 '069 PRGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN 07 DATE TIME TO/FROM 03/31 14 30 3810160 MODE MINiSEC PCdS CMDtt STRTUS ~ 0331 1432 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S EC-S 02'17" 004 01'19" 004 134 134 OK 09 03131 1434 8848723 EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK OK 10 03131 14:36 WATER DEPT EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK 11 03131 14:38 2088840744 EC-S 01'22" 004 134 OK 12 03/31 1440 POLICE DEPT EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK 13 03/31 1442 8985501 EC-S 01' 19" 004 134 OK 14 03131 14:43 LIBRARY EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK 15 03/31 1445 2083776449 EC-S 01'19" 004 134 OK 16 03/31 1447 3886924 EC-S 01'19" 004 134 OK 17 031 1449 P-AND-Z EC--S 01' 19" ~4 134 OK 18 03/81 1451 FIRE DEPT EC-S 01'19" 004 134 OK 19 03131 14: S.i 208 888 2682 EC-S 01' 21 " 004 134 OK 20 03131 14:55 208 387 6393 EC-S 01'19" 004 134 OK 21 03/31 1457 ADA CTY DEUELMT EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK 22 03131 1458 2088885052 EC-S 01' 21 " 004 134 OIC 23 03/31 1500 LRIlEUIEW GOLFCOU G:i-S 02'40" 004 134 OK 24 03/31 1504 IDRHO ATHLETIC C EC-S 01'20" 004 134 OK 25 03/31 15:06 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC-S 01'19" 004 134 OK 26 03131 1508 2088701 EC--S 01'19" 004 134 OK ulf~se (~os~ ~ ~'u.>ci.~ c~ Nt~.iee, --fn~'iKs1, I. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, April 4, 2006 at 7;00 p.m, City Councit Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Joe Gorton 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 besf of the ability of the presenter. 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center. 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of February 28, 2006 City Council & Kuna City Council Special Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Approve Minutes of March 21, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: E. Approve Minutes of March 23, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: F. Approve New Beer and Wine license for Chicago Connection by Joy Keeley at 1935 S. Eagle Road: G. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer - PFtlase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -April 4, 2008 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public moetings shall become property of the Ciiy of Meridian, Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents amJ/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888.4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • Meridian City Council Meetinu April 4, 2006 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:10 P.M., Tuesday, April 4, 2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and Joe Gorton. Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Bill Musser, Joe Silva, 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: Okay. Good evening. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. I will have to apologize for our delay in starting. Our planning director locked all of her files and presentations in her trunk and, then, locked the keys in her car. So, right now we are trying to get her car unlocked. But, in the meantime, we will go ahead and get this started. Hopefully, we will get somewhere before she joins us. So, good evening. We will go ahead and start with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance and we are going to be led today by Chase Olsen and he's with Troop -- and Zach Tyler. With Troop -- what number? 130. Whose is your sponsor? The LDS Church. So, if you will all rise and join our Boy Scouts in the pledge. (Pledge of allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: De Weerd: I would like to give both of you boys a pin, if you will come forward, for leading us tonight. There you go. Thank you so much. Good luck on earning those badges. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Gordon Slyter. He's with the Treasure Valley Worship Center. We'd also like to thank Pastor Slyter. He is organizing the Mayor's prayer breakfast, which will be held at 6:45 tomorrow morning and so thank you, Pastor. We appreciate you being here tonight. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Pastor. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 2 of 78 Slyter: So, for those attending the breakfast we want to pray for a brief meeting tonight: is that right? Let's pray. Dear God, we thank you for the .opportunity of living in this great country and in this great community. Thank you for the public servants we have who serve us faithfully and loyally and we do pray that tonight you would grant them wisdom and your guidance as they deliberate with the -- over the matters and issues before them. We thank you for the people who are choosing to make Meridian their home and we ask that we might, with wisdom and with your provision, be able to provide for the services and the safety and security that they need. Now, we place all of these things in your hands and we give you thanks through Christ, our Lord, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor. We will see you bright and early. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Items 24, 25, and 26 will be moved, becoming Items 8, 9, and 10, the first items taken up after the Consent Agenda. With that amendment, I move we adopt the agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of February 28, 2006 City Council & Kuna City Council Special Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Approve Minutes of March 21, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: E. Approve Minutes of March 23, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: F. Approve New Beer and Wine license for Chicago Connection by Joy Kegley at 1935 S. Eagle Road: Meridian City Council • April 4, 2006 Page 3 of 78 G. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer -Phase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers: H. Agreement for Consultant Services for Rectulatorv Floodway Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill: I. Contract for Streetlight Maintenance with Power Plus, Inc.: J. Contract for Removal of Pine Avenue Check Valve with Star Construction: K. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-008 Request to modify the approved Development Agreement for Cedar Springs Professional Center by Lynn De Weerd: Okay. Item 5, Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published 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, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Mayor's Office 1. Proclamation for Fair Housing Month: De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 6-A. I do have a proclamation to read. This month is Fair Housing Month. Whereas April 2006 marks the 38th anniversary of the passage of the Title 8 -- or Title 13 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing Act, and whereas the Idaho Human Rights Commission Act has prohibited discrimination in housing since 1969 and whereas equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, family status, or national origin is the fundamental goal of our nation, state, and city and whereas equal access to housing is an important Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 4 of 78 component of this goal, as fundamental as the right to equal education and employment and whereas housing is a critical component of family and community health and stability, and whereas housing choice impacts our children's access to education, our ability to seek and retain employment options, the cultural benefits we enjoy, the extent of our exposure to crime and drugs and the quality of health care we receive in emergencies and whereas the law of this nation and our state seek to insure such equality of choice for all transactions involving housing and whereas ongoing education, outreach, and monitoring are key to raising awareness of fair housing principle, practices, rights, and responsibilities, and whereas only through continued cooperation, commitment and support of all Idahoans can barriers to fair housing be removed, thereafter, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim April 2006 to be fair housing month in the City of Meridian, to promote awareness of equal housing opportunities. Dated this 4th day of April, 2006. 2. Criteria for Scholarship: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the criteria for the youth scholarship funds that we created during our budget process last month. You should have that on your department reports. Did you have any comments? Do those look satisfactory as far as the selection process to the Council? Any comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: What I read and stuff, I agree with wholeheartedly and, as I understand, one from Mountain View and one from Meridian will be selected. De Weerd: Yes. We will be bringing it to the youth council next Monday night and asking for a focus group to help us in selection and also getting the word out to the two high schools. Would any of our Council members like to serve also on this selection committee? Okay. Well, I will bear the burden myself, then. Okay. Okay. I will find three volunteers. B. Attorney /Legal Department 1. Report from SWAC on Letter from Cherry Lane Christian Church: De Weerd: I will go ahead and move onto the attorney legal department. Mr. Baird. Baird: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The first item on the report in your packet is a letter from the Cherry Lane Christian Church requesting a certain exception to the solid waste advisory committees usual practice. Unfortunately, I don't have my computer up. For some reason it's not on line. I will work on that. But you ! i Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 5 of 78 have got the letter and what we need is a motion to approve that expenditure of funds. And the total is 1,800 dollars. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: 3,600, not 1,800. That's the -- De Weerd: I believe that the original understanding from the church was that they could only request half of the amount and they would have to provide the other half. When they started accounting for all of it, they showed in kind and cash that exceeded that amount, so they were told that they could be eligible to request the whole amount and that would be 3,600 dollars. Baird: Madam Mayor, that's correct. Thank you for that additional information. The letter also outlines the number of in-kind hours that they are putting in and I think the additional consideration is that the facility, although it will remain on church property, will be open and available to the public for the public's use. So, it appears to be a win-win. Bird: So, it's 3,600? Baird: That's the total and that's the motion we would be looking for tonight. Bird: I move that we award the 3,600 dollars to the Cherry Lane Christian Church. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll? Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Draft RFP / RFQ for New City Hall Building: Baird: Thank you. And the next item I do have more information on, thankfully. In printed form. And it pertains to the request for qualifications for a consultant for the construction of City Hall. There are, actually, two RFQs that we will be asking for your approval to release. The first one is for the construction manager and the form follows the form that was used for the police department. It's my understanding the police building was constructed and was a success in part to the fact that we did use a construction manager on that project. It's mainly technical. It's just to get the word out, so we can get the consultants to give us their qualifications. The idea is to have a review committee select at least three to come back for interviews. The law requires us to select the most qualified candidate and, then, enter into a contractual agreement for Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 6 of 78 their services at a fair price. The process -- the time line is the same for both of these, so I will mention it now. The idea is to do the statutory advertising beginning next Monday, April 10th, have the second on April 17th, with a reply date -- the earliest possible reply date would be Monday, April 24th. So, you have those back within the month. If there are no questions about the construction manager, I'll get into my explanation about how we put together the architectural request for qualification. It's a little bit more involved. De Weerd: Council, any questions on the construction manager? Okay. Baird: A hard copy of the RFQ for the architectural services was put in your boxes yesterday. It's been updated already and the item that's posted on the laser fiche contains today's version of it. The changes that were made from the original item includes additional background on the City of Meridian, additional background on the site, additional information on the city's preliminary plans for the site. The idea is that the more the architects know about our plans about the historic nature of the site, the better that they can do in coming forth and showing us what their credentials would be like. Again, the same selection process is envisioned where the selection committee would choose at least three to come back for interviews and, then, select the winning candidate and enter into a contract and move forward. A couple other items about what we put in. I do want to mention it's been requested that we ask for qualifications to include sustainable design, otherwise known as green building. There is a certification process known as the lead process. We did not specify the Lead process, but we did identify that we would be interested in hearing from the architects about what they can do to make the building more efficient, both for energy, more efficient for productivity, use of recycled material, those types of things. So, I think what we have done is we have raised the issue and we are inviting people to tell us what they could do to put those principles into the new the City Hall. Another item that was included, in addition to the site information, we have received an engineering analysis of the smoke stack, indicating that it is overstressed significantly for seismic activity and for wind activity. We thought it was important that the proposers know that that's going to be a challenge and so we have included that, just so that information is out in the public. Those are all the comments I have at this point. I'm continuing to take input on potential changes through Thursday of this week. We can have the final version to the clerk to send out publication. Any questions at this time? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Mr. Baird, on -- I think it's page four under -- when you're asking for information on the qualifications and experience, the staff side of the project, is it possible in that Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 7 of 78 provision to include a request to have them describe their experience with the Lead process on -- not necessarily requiring it to be part of this application, but if it's going to be a consideration, at least they can address whether or not they have got experience. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, I did include the sentence; include details on level of experience utilizing sustainable design principles. Are you asking that I go one step further and ask specifically about their experience with the lead certification? Borton: I would think so, if there are sustainable design principles that are different than Lead certification. I mean it couldn't hurt. Baird: I will be happy to put that in there. Like you say, it wouldn't hurt. Because the process that -- you're not getting a proposal for your City Hall, you're getting a proposal for the people who are to construct it and if that's part of their credentials and if that's important to the selection committee, then, we should know about it. So, it's a point well taken. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we proceed forward and give Ted the go ahead to get that -- those two proposals out on the street. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to move forward with the two RFP's -- or the RFP and RFQ. Baird: Madam Mayor, for clarification, they are both RFQs. De Weerd: Okay. Baird: The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are distinct and it is important for the record that these are requests for qualifications. RFQ is your motion. De Weerd: Is there any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. C: Planning Department -Anna Canning: • s Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 8 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. We did add something for the planning department. Oh. No, we didn't. But I will ask Council -- the planning director did want to give you an update of the challenges of the month of May for scheduling public hearings with limited staff. Would you consider those comments at this time? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Go ahead, Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did want to let you know that two of my associate staff have resigned effective the end of the month. One effective April 20th, the other April 27th. So, I will be, essentially, short three planners for some time. I anticipate I will be able to hire someone mid May. We are having a very hard time finding qualified applicants. The other person will likely come on mid June. So, for the two May hearings we went through and looked at all the applications that we received. Fortunately, the load is fairly light. But we tried to limit it to three new applications per hearing for the Planning and Zoning Commission and we prioritized them as follows: Any commercial project was given first priority. Especially commercial projects with available services. And, then, residential projects with available services. Commercial projects where there aren't services readily available. And, then, lastly, residential projects where they are either pumping sewage out of district or where there are not services available. So, with those criteria in mind, we did have to push off two applications until the June hearing. I spoke to one of them today. He understood the situation and I don't think was too concerned. They were the ones that were pumping out of district. The other one, again, as I said, they won't have services available for 18 months to at least two years. Or at least 18 months, probably two years. So, putting them off a month shouldn't be an issue. But I know that you all are the ones that get the calls. So, I wanted to let you know what was going on and why we did it and how we prioritized those decisions. And that's all. Do you have comments? De Weerd: She's telling you that primarily because we put your phone numbers on our answer machine. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any questions for Anna? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have no questions, but I think it's important to let the folks know the situation we are in. I think they will understand. I hope they understand and minimize the calls. Canning: Yeah. And as I said, Justin Martin was one of them and it's a large project and I don't think -- he really didn't have too many concerns and not that he visibly showed or reacted to anyway, so -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 9 of 78 De Weerd: I guess we will be getting a call if that's not the case. Okay. Any other questions or comments? Thank you, Anna. Nice to see you here. Canning: Yes, ma'am. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: Item 24: Public Hearing: AZ 05-058 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 49.95 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: Item 25: Public Hearing: PP 05-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 building lots and 9 common lots on 49.95 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: Item 26: Public Hearing: VAR 05-024 Request for a Variance to reduce front garage setbacks to 15 feet from back of sidewalk in a proposed R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 24, 25, and 26 were added at this time and -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Because of a conflict of interest with my representation of a client who has got a direct interest in this process, I need to recuse myself from consideration of these three items. De Weerd: Okay. Council -- or I guess I would address our citizens that are here for these items. We are going to continue them for two weeks when Councilman Borton will be -- or when Councilman Wardle will be here. And that is we can go ahead and hear this with just two Council members, but one of the reasons we have four elected officials is to bring the diversity of opinion to the table and to the discussion and so for that matter we would like to continue this for two weeks when Councilman Wardle is back and we will, then, have three Council members to hear this application. Any comment from Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would agree wholeheartedly and I think just open up the public hearings and we can continue them. • Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 10 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Bird: That would be my favor. Rountree: I concur. De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead, then and open 24, 25, and 26, public hearings AZ 05-058, PP 05-060, and VAR 05-024, for consideration of a motion to continue the Public Hearing to April 18th. Mr. Berg is April 18th -- it's not too much different than April 25th at this point? Okay. And to any citizens that are here for these three items, we do apologize and hope to see you again in two weeks and -- do you want it on the 18th or the 25th? Bird: Let's go to the 18th. De Weerd: Okay. We will go ahead and put it on the 18th. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue public hearings AZ 05-058, PP 05-060, and VAR 05-024, until April 18th, 2006. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue these items for Keego Springs Subdivision to the 18th of April. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. And that was excluding Mr. Borton on that. So, again, we appreciate you joining us tonight and we apologize. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: FP 06-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 16 building lots and 1 common lot on 3.26 acres in C-G and R-40 zones for Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 by Fairview Lakes, LLC -1875 North Lakes Place: Item 9: FP 06-013 Request for Final Plat approval for 20 single-family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 3.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Breinholt Subdivision by Richard Breinholt - 2580 North Meridian Road: Item 1: FP 06-012 Request for Final Plat approval for 22 building lots and 1 other lot on 15.55 acres in an L-O zone for Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley - 3805 East Franklin Road: Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 11 of 78 Item 11: MFP 06-002 Request to modify the approved fencing for Hacienda Subdivision in an R-8 zone by Jayo Construction - 6000 North Meridian Road: Item 12: FP 06-016 Request for Final Plat approval for 103 residential lots and 7 common lots on 31.72 acres in an R-4 zone for Estancia Subdivision by Gem Star Development, LLC -east of South Locust Grove Road and north of Amity Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items -- Anna, on these final plats do we have any issues with Items 8 through 12? Canning: No, ma'am, we do not. De Weerd: Okay. We have final plats on FP 06-015, FP 06-013, FP 06-012, MFP 06- 002, and FP 06-016. Council? Okay. Anna. Canning: Yes, ma'am. De Weerd: On the -- on Item No. 12 there were no issues on off-peak pumping? Canning: Those issues, as I understand, were -- it was more of a question. The way it's worded is okay and I think that the applicant's concerns have been satisfied. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We also have a letter from Leavitt and Associates on Item No. 9, FP 06-013. Canning: Madam Mayor, we -- the issue was regarding the need for the common driveways to be capable of supporting fire department equipment and we contacted the fire department. They will not be driving on those common drives. They are not flag lot type common drives, so they will not need to use them. So, the applicant is okay with the condition as worded. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, if there is no further comments, I would entertain a motion. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the subdivision plats for Items 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. ~~ Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 12 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Bird: Second. • De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the final plat approvals of Items 8 through 12. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, some of you looked concerned over those. Would you rather that we bring those two your attention, rather -- if we have worked them out? De Weerd: Anna, I guess if there is a Council -- or a letter in front of Council, they probably would need knowledge that those issues have been worked out. Canning: Okay. I will do that next time. I'm sorry. Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: 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. Thank you. Okay. Item 13 is a continued Public Hearing from March 7th on ZOA 05-002 on the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have provided a rather lengthy summary for you on this one. These are the text amendments for the Unified Development Code. The primary purpose was to go back and address the traditional neighborhood residential development standards that we were unable to come to consensus on when the UDC was drafted. So, it was to go back and fill in that table, as it were, and, then, I have also included a number of cleanup items. What I'm going to do is -- I debated long on how to best present this to you and I fear it's going to be lengthy, but I think it's important that you're aware of all the changes that we are _~ Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 13 of 78 making. I'm first going to go through the Commission recommendation, summary of the Public Hearing, the issues discussed, the changes they made, those are the standard things we talk about. And, then, I'm going to talk about the items where we have come to consensus on the issue just briefly. I'm not going to go over them in detail. And, then, the outstanding issues before City Council. And I think we are just -- we are down to five outstanding issues. So, if on the consensus issues, if there is something that you want to know more about, please, ask me and I will go through that in more detail. Otherwise, I'm going to focus mostly on the outstanding issues before Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on February 2nd and they have recommended approval to the City Council of the text amendments. At that hearing David Turnbull and Sherry McKibben spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition and no one commented. I presented the application. And also Joe Silva presented -- made a presentation and he was generally opposed to street and alley standards. That was from the staff side. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were alleys and turn radii from the street onto the alley, making sure that the fire department can make that turn. Lighting fixtures along the alley, so that it was always lit. Loading spaces for commercial and industrial uses. That's just in general, not related to traditional neighborhoods. Wrought iron fences. And, then, concrete ribbons along the edge of the alley to provide a clean edge, rather than just asphalt paving where it sometimes gets weak and breaks. The key Commission changes were they did add a standard to the alleys that they have to have a concrete ribbon edge or be made of concrete. They added a standard that the alley will be designed with a 28 foot minimum inside curve radius and 48 foot outside curve radius. And that loading spaces for commercial and industrial uses shall be off street and that was paring down a table that we had, but still keeping that requirement. They removed a requirement for wrought iron fences in the traditional neighborhood residential district. They added a standard to provide gates in any wrought iron fences that are greater than three feet in height parallel to the street. The fire department can't knock down a wrought iron fence like they can a wood fence, so they wanted gates in those. And they added a standard that lighting fixtures that are required facing the alley be shielded on the top to prevent uplighting. So, those were the only changes that the Commission made. In the interim time between the Commission hearing in February and the hearing now, the staff -- the police department, the fire department, and the planning department and Ada County Highway District and public works department all got together to discuss some of the unresolved issues. And out of that have come some other changes and those were detailed in your staff report. It gets very confusing. There is double underlines and underlines and strike outs and regular strike outs and regular underlines and I know it's very confusing and I apologize. So, I'm just trying to really step through everything tonight, so that you understand what we have come to. I am going to go through the consensus items and these are consensus from Planning and Zoning Commission and from the staff group and the commenting public. So, everyone seems to agree on the following items: Definition for net density and adult entertainment. The TNR minimum density of eight and the maximum density of 15 units per acre net. That's eight gross. Sorry. And minimum of eight net and maximum of 15 net. I'm sorry. TNR minimum front setback of ten feet. TNR street landscape buffer standards. There is several of those. TNR lighting requirements. There was aclean-up provision to change chain link to open Meridian City Council M April 4, 2006 Page 14 of 78 vision fencing along irrigation ditches. Also aclean-up one for the decision making authority for vacation applications. Planning and Zoning Commission review of application forms as an agenda item, not as a Public Hearing. Clarifications to how block length would be measured. We didn't really change any standard, we just wanted to make sure there was -- it clarified how that was measured. We removed code stating that sign fees would be paid to the building department. They are just lumped with all the other applications and paid directly to the planning department. Clarification that chain link with slats does not qualify as a screening material within the landscape ordinance. That was a provision in another part that was meant to apply to the landscape as well -- landscape provisions as well, so that's another clean up. Clarification that single family attached dwellings, single family detached dwellings, secondary dwellings, and two family or duplex dwellings do not require certificates of zoning compliance. A clarification on day cares, on clients versus children. We mistakenly put children instead of clients in one area. And we added a standard for day cares run as a home occupation to make them similar to the home occupation standards. Correction to the off-street parking requirements. Adding sign allowances for approved home occupation and family day cares. Off-street loading provisions. Fencing provisions. The alley construction materials seemed to be resolved. The alley approach turn radii and parking restrictions across the street from those approaches all seem to be resolved. And, then, the alley design with regard to visibility of the alley from the public street seems to be resolved. So, that leaves a few outstanding issues. have received phone calls from Mr. Turnbull and Ms. Suggs and from those comments - - oh, and also from Joe Silva with the fire department. There seems to be five outstanding issues. The first is with regard to street sections. And on your staff report, which I don't have a copy of, because all my files are locked in my trunk. On page 12 of the staff report were -- you will find there what the Planning and Zoning Commission approved. The alternative proposal is on page seven of the staff report and that's figure one and figure two. Figure one represents a chicane idea and figure two is kind of an offset parking idea. ACHD was with us when we came up with the offset parking, so those meet their standards. I have not had a chance to run the first chicane idea by ACHD, so I do need to get with them and that's another outstanding issue, I suppose. Side yard setbacks. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved four feet. The alternative proposal -- this alternative proposal being the one that the combined staff came up with after the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. It would have four feet for eaves up to 20 feet -- five feet -- a five-foot setback for eaves 21 to 25 and a six foot setback for eaves greater than 25 feet. Regarding alleys, the Planning and Zoning Commission approval was for a five foot garage build to setbacks. So, that would mean you would have to build up to five feet or the next standard would be a 20-foot setback. So, you wouldn't ever build anything in between five and 20 feet. You would either have five feet, so that no one would park there or be encouraged to park there or you would have 20 feet, so that there would be adequate room for them to park there. And, then, the setbacks for the living area on the Planning and Zoning Commission approval was five feet. The alternative proposal eliminated the garage build to setback. It changed the garage setback to 20 or 18 feet, depending on the width of the alley. And, then, a ten foot setback to the living area. Block length. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved 500 to 700 feet. The alternative proposal has 500 to 600 feet. The alley right Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 15 of 78 of way restrictions. At the Planning and Zoning Commission approval there were none discussed. Since that time we added aproposal -- or added a standard to alleys that reads like this, "All alleys shall serve as fire lanes. Where the paved alley width is less than 20 feet, the remainder of the alley right of way shall be designed to insure that the area will remain free of shrubs, trees, or other obstructions within the fire lane." The fire department has concerns that this isn't specific enough. When we were talking in the meeting we specifically mentioned something like grass Greet on those two feet. wanted to leave it open for some other ideas, since we hadn't really taken this to the general public yet and I think that there are some other options than grass Greet, which can be very expensive. I wanted to leave it a little more open. So, that would be the fire department's outstanding issue is the wording on that last one. Are there any of the consensus issues that you would like explained further or are there any other outstanding issues that you would like explained in more detail? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Council? Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, on the side yard setbacks, four feet, explain to me four feet, I take it, for eaves up to 20 feet, is that in height or is that in length? Canning: Height to the eave. Bird: Is that one side of the roof or both sides? Canning: I think it was to the nearest height of the eave. The fire department wanted to be able to get a ladder up to the nearest eave portion, was my understanding. Bird: That is the height, then? Canning: Yes, sir. Bird: Okay. Thank you, Anna. De Weerd: Any other questions for Anna? Any other comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I do have a comment. Who is going to make sure these no parking is adhered to and stuff? Signs don't do it. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that was -- that is certainly one of the discussion items. I think there may be an opportunity to do something other than grass Greet or gravel. There may be an opportunity if you put a ribbon curb or some Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 16 of 78 demarcation of this is still right of way. I couldn't come up with all the answers, but I think that there may be opportunities for something other than grass Greet. And I hate to use that name repeatedly, but there is no generic term for it that I know of, so -- Bird: Drivable surface with grass -- Canning: Growing on top of it. Bird: Grass growing on top of it. I'm like you, grass Greet is a brand name, not a -- that's all we have ever called it. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Okay. This is a continued Public Hearing. Is there anyone would who like to provide comment on this item? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Suggs: Good evening, Council members. My name is Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street in Boise. I only would like to encourage you to consider the alley setback at the five to build to line or for an 18-foot setback or 20-foot setback, depending on the width of the alley. I see from the information presented to you that that five foot build to line has been eliminated and I would encourage you to do that. You know that we will be discussing that later tonight, hopefully, so I won't belabor the point now, but I'd like to see that. I believe that that's in keeping with the new urbanism designs which you are trying to accomplish through the traditional neighborhood residential zone and I'm seeing it used very successfully in other jurisdictions. De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Any questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Turnbull: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, David Turnbull. 12601 West Explorer Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. Turnbull: I'm speaking today as a member of the Process Improvement Group that spent a lot of time on the whole UDC, but we spent many many hours on just the TNR, TNC districts. I'm also speaking as a developer who is kind of familiar with this type of product and we have done a couple of these projects here in the valley. When we embarked on this type of development we -- I traveled this country coast to coast looking at these types of developments. I took my measuring tape. I measured everything from alley widths to parkway strip widths, to street back-to-back curb widths, to all sorts of dimension standards. Front setbacks. Side setbacks. The whole works. And, you know, I have to tell you that there are various standards throughout the country. I will say in regard to this five-foot build to line that has been eliminated in this draft, in all of the projects I saw none of them actually had parking pads on the alleys. Almost all of them were three to eight foot setbacks from the garage. I don't -- and in discussing this during the Process Improvement Group, we decided to make that a build to line at five feet, so that you don't have room to even parallel park in front of your ~~ Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 17 of 78 garage. So, that's where that came from. This hasn't been a real hot button issue for me, because the developments that we have done, we came back and we decided we have done all of ours in single family detached and so all of them we have provided that parking pad in the rear. But I can see ascenario -- and what we may do in the future -- if you're building an attached townhome or brown stone or row house type of developments, that if you were requiring a parking pad behind all of those, you would have a 20-foot parking pad, a 20-foot alley, a 20-foot parking pad -- essentially, you would have a 60-foot ribbon of concrete going all the way down the alley, which would be cost prohibitive, number one, and, esthetically, I think a disaster, number two. And I don't know where you'd put all the storm drainage that would come off that kind of a section. So, I want to just go through a little bit of the process we went through. And we did meet with the fire department and listen to their concerns and made some compromises. Like I said, on alleys I have seen standards anywhere from nine feet wide to -- I don't think I saw one that I have visited around the country that was 20 feet wide. I think 16 feet wide was the widest one that I have reviewed. The Process Improvement Group compromised on a 16-foot wide alley section. I will back up and say that if you were doing an attached townhome type -- or even if you were doing probably the build to five foot line, you might want to go to a 20-foot wide paved alley, just to give you the backing out room that you would be missing if you had the parking pad. When Anna sent out this draft just -- was it yesterday, Anna? I don't know. I just - - you know, we are all coming back from vacations or spring break or whatever and trying to -- trying to get back up to top speed on this. I had a couple of concerns that I voiced to Anna and as I have read through it a little bit more this afternoon, I think I boiled it down to just a couple. One was the addition of a six foot side setback for any structure with eaves greater than 25 feet. And I guess my point there is that in the R-8 zone currently you can go to 35 feet with a five foot setback. I don't know why we would make this one more restrictive. So, I would suggest and ask that that be revised to anything greater than 35 feet being consistent with the R-8 zone at least as a minimum. The deletion of the five foot build to setback for garages on alleys without parking, I think that covered a lot of the points on that and this -- you know, the thought that struck me as I was listening to Anna's presentation -- I don't know if this will help Joe out, but if that was available with the 20-foot paved alley, maybe that would be an accommodation that helps out the fire department concerns. The suggestion that we put in -- if we put in 16 foot alleys that, then, we put in two feet of grass Greet on either side I think is a non- starter. It's cost prohibitive. Nobody would choose to take that option. We have built our alleys to date with 12-foot width. That's adequate for all almost any occurrence that we have experienced. So, I would suggest that with the 16-foot alley that be maintained as a 16-foot alley. If you want to put restrictions so that, you know, the -- you're restricted from putting fencing and shrubs and so forth in that additional two feet, I think that's entirely appropriate. But to put in grass Greet, Ijust -- it just won't happen. Like a lot of these things, you can put the restrictions in, but I -- if they don't make esthetic or economic sense, people aren't going to be encouraged to take advantage of this zone. And I really think that these -- this zone is important to the city. I think this is an important and a viable development option that needs to be promoted in the city. We are really proud of the ones that we have done and we encourage you to adopt these standards and just consider the comments that I have made here tonight. If we could Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 18 of 78 get those standards implemented, I would be wholeheartedly in support of this proposal. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions, Council? Thank you. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council members. I'm Dave Wilson. It's 104 Elk Horn Road, Sun Valley. And don't hold that against me, please. I'm one of the owners of the property that's coming up in the future and I -- just to kind of give you my qualifications, this last year I served as president of the National Association of Home Builders, representing some 235,000 home builders in this country, and I, like the previous gentleman, have seen a lot of the new urbanism that we are talking about here and one of the things we are trying to do in this country is provide work force housing, affordable housing, for all Americans to have a fair and decent home and one of the ways you accomplish that is with lot sizes and when we shrink these lot sizes down to create affordability to house policemen, firemen, school teachers in this country, we end up getting smaller lots and that's what you're going to see here coming down the road and the thing I want to speak to is the five foot setback on the alley. We think that's most appropriate, the build to five foot setback and what we are trying to accomplish there is we are trying to get people out of their cars in these traditional neighborhoods. We are trying to get -- not have -- if they want to have a trailer with snow machines or a boat or four cars, they need to go out into the rural areas, that the urban areas are people that have bicycles that want to walk to town or bike to town, walk to their coffee shop, and I think our development that you'll hear about is going to speak to that, but we really need that five-foot setback with an alley, so that we eliminate parking in the back and I know one of the Council members had a question about how to keep people from parking there. Well, what we have seen traditionally throughout this country is you stripe that alley as a fire lane. You just put big stripes across it, you write in big red letters fire lane, no parking, and it seems to work. And particularly if you bring those garages within even three feet of that alley, it does keep people from parking back there that people know that's an access. And, then, you provide a warm and favorable street on the front, so your guests park on the front of your units and so you don't see those garages and provide that opportunity. So, the one point of this ordinance I would request that you do consider is that five foot -- minimum five foot build to setback. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions, Council? Bird: Yeah, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Wilson, five foot setback with a garage? Wilson: Yes. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 19 of 78 L J Bird: I don't care how much you striped it, if I -- if that's my garage and I've got to run for about five minutes and I pull up there with my pickup that's 22-foot long and I'm not going to open the garage and drive in just to get back and we have a fire coming down there, how is the engine going to get through there? I don't care how many times you stripe it or put fire lane on it or anything else. I can take you throughout the city or any -- Boise city and show you fire lanes are drove on all the time. Wilson: Yeah. I think it's a careful consideration. I think the depth of these lots, if they are less than 150 feet -- I think the requirement for the fire department is 150 feet from access. So, if you have got 150 feet -- or less than from the front of a building -- and even from the back if an engine is ten feet wide and it's a 16 or 18 or 20 foot alley with a five foot --afire apparatus should be able to get by. I mean, you know, we can't stop people from speeding on the streets and you can't stop people from parking in handicapped spots and all those sort of things, but I think if you create the neighborhood, the neighborhood is going to -- I think, you know, if you had a strong neighbor that says, look, you're really not supposed to be parking back there, that somebody is going to -- you're probably not going to do it to make your neighbors mad. We can't solve all those problems. But I think what we can do is create a neighborhood that people want to live in and get them out of their cars. And, you're right; I mean we are trying to develop a neighborhood that doesn't have five cars per family. We are trying to get people out of their cars, so -- how you keep them out of there I don't have the answer. But I think stripping it helps. Bird: Well, I don't doubt it don't help. Keeps the honest people honest. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: You have mentioned a couple times you want to keep people out of their cars. I'm not sure how a development like this in Meridian, even though we have more jobs than we have ever in the past, you're going to keep people out of their cars. It doesn't make sense to me. Wilson: Well, Ithink -- and, again, I guess you will see our development coming down, but it's got commercial in the front with restaurants and other businesses, banking, we hope, so that people can walk in their neighborhood to those local businesses. They can walk downtown. It's about two miles. They can ride their bike downtown. So, if you create less -- if I only -- if I was able to sell you a house and you only had a two car garage, you're probably not going to buy there if you have three cars. You're probably not going to buy there if you want to keep your boat and your snow machines and whatever else -- your motorhome. You may keep that someplace else, but we are trying to provide a product and I think the one that's shown up here is very successful in Eagle to that and we are trying to attract a different sort of person. I guess it's -- we are an aging society. It's certainly people my age that want less. We don't want bigger homes, we want smaller homes, we want less stuff to take care of and less stuff to pay • Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 20 of 78 for, and on that Saturday or Friday -- I know my wife and I walk to town every Saturday and every Sunday for breakfast, so -- on our bike path. So, if you have got those types of amenities in a community neighborhood like this, I think people are going to use it. Now, if they want to be in their cars, they are going to be in their cars and they will probably live someplace else. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: What kind of trip capture do you anticipate in that kind of community? Wilson: I don't know. I think Jane Suggs can talk to that when we come forward. De Weerd: Anything further? Thank you. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony? Thank you. Yes. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Turnbull asked me to clarify something, because he forgot something in his presentation. That was on the street sections with the -- just a second. This figure here where we have the chicanes -- and, again, I do need to run this by ACRD. But, basically, what you're doing is taking a 29- foot street section and, then, necking down a 50-foot length of it, so that the fire department could set up a staging area to fight a fire. Right now as proposed those chicanes are 100 feet on center and I believe that Mr. Turnbull wanted to recommend a larger spacing; I think 150 feet on center, basically, so that you would have two within a 500-foot block. It may be a little less than 150 feet. I would have to figure that out. So, that would be -- that would coincide with the 500-foot block length, so you would have two within that block. It would stretch out the available parking area a little bit. Also there was a discussion raised about the questions of maybe townhouses should be treated differently and I think that will come up in the next hearing item as well. Not just related to the TNR standards, but related to the Unified Development Code in total and in concert with all the discussions we have had with Blueprint for Good Growth in trying to get compact development at -- to the arterials to facilitate bus development. I think that we need to take a look at our townhouses and how we treat them. Right now we treat them more like a single family house and if we want to get areas of density, without having to have multi-family apartments, I think we do need to revisit some of the townhouse things. So, in the next text amendment I may pull together a group and try to work on some of those townhouse issues, in concert with whatever Blueprint for Good Growth is coming out with. So, I will bring that forward to the next one. For now think that -- I'm not trying to backtrack and include it in this one, I'm just saying that that is an issue that I'm looking at that I think needs a little clarification for the city. Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 21 of 78 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. u Bird: Anna, Mr. Turnbull brought up about the six-foot setback for eaves of 25 feet, then, our R-8 zones don't have to be that. Was there a reason that we wanted to put the six-foot in here or there is a reason we don't have it in the R-8? Canning: Well, the building heights for the TNC is five feet taller. So, the total maximum building height is 40 feet, instead of 35 feet for the R-8 zone. So, it is a little taller. We got to discussing through the whole issue as part of the staff alternative group -- whatever we are calling that one, that one where the staffs met, the combined staffs met, and we knew there was concern about the four foot. We looked at some of the geometries of getting a ladder in there and that's where the six foot came from. But Mr. Turnbull is correct; it's more onerous than almost all the other districts that we have got. The R-4 only has afive-foot setback regardless of eave height, so -- Bird: Follow up, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: And I think you all know how I feel about the four foot setbacks anyway, because most of the eaves are two foot, so by the time you get out there, one of these days I have a feeling we are going to find out how a bunch of urbanized homes can go down real fast with a fire. Those vinyl windows and glass isn't going to stop very much flames. On that, I -- I don't know where the -- why we are -- you know, if we allow that other than the fact that maybe in TNR we are allowing narrower lots than we do in the R-8s -- Canning: Essentially, yes, because there is no minimum lot width requirement. Bird: That's what I thought. Thank you. Canning: And if Council would like to give some clarification to staff on what they'd like to do about the R-8 four foot setback, but ten foot easement requirement, I will take your direction and do whatever we need to do. Right now we do have a four foot setback in the R-8, but we have a ten foot easement required along the side lot line, so the ten foot kind of overrides the four foot right now. Essentially, it's five and five, so -- the five foot overrides the four foot right now. But we do need to get that cleaned up one of these days. De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor, I have just got astatement -- and I have to agree with Mr. Turnbull that I don't see why we need a six foot setback. If you're doing it with four and fives every place else, Idon't -- five foot isn't going to make a difference. In fact, the fire department don't have a ladder that's going to get 40 foot anyway. • ~ Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 22 of 78 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just had a question on my recollection on setbacks. At one point in time the setback was five foot per story. Has that been eliminated? Canning: Yes. Rountree: Okay. Canning: It's seven and a half for the R-2 district, but, otherwise, the R-4 district it's five feet. In the R-8 it's four feet. Sort of -- De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything else, Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, one of the things I also agree with Mr. Turnbull's comments, but I have seen myself is back to the alley issue, is the room to maneuver. The 20 foot alley provides enough room for cars to at least get in and get out of the garages without running over garbage cans or shrubbery or whatnot across the way, so -- but my comment -- that makes sense, a 20 foot alley with regards to that makes sense, in addition to some of the fire department concerns. Canning: Sir, just to clarify, you mean the 20 foot if there is a build to line? Borton: Correct. Correct. Canning: Okay. Borton: And I have seen problems with -- with that particular issue. One of the things that I hear and Mr. Wilson brought up and I wanted to ask your thoughts on it, is the discussion of back to the five foot build to in this type of new urbanism is creating affordable housing. I, for one, am not -- I don't buy it. There is too many other variables that go into what creates affordable housing and market demand and demand for community, et cetera, that impacts housing prices. I just wanted to hear your thoughts on whether or not this type of -- these changes, the TNR changes, the five foot build to, has some affordable housing benefits or whether or not that's just kind of a red herring issue with regards to whether or not it's good planning. Canning: My understanding of most traditional neighborhood residential or neo- traditional neighborhood developments is that they are geared toward amove-up class. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 23 of 78 • They are not entry level homes and typically are not affordable housing, unless the developer subsidizes a portion of the development. But I haven't heard of any affordable -- kind of what you would classically consider affordable homes. De Weerd: It all depends on your point of reference. Sun Valley prices, Meridian prices, I don't know. Borton: It came to my mind when I saw the wonderful picture of some of those in Eagle. I walked by and made the mistake of looking at the price on a couple of them and was shocked, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Sun Valley. Eagle. Versus Meridian. Okay. Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further public testimony? Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: In our summary from the staff, Anna, the staff had asked if we -- if we would continue this to May 2nd. I'd like to -- I think I know why and I'd like the explanation publicly. Canning: Yes, sir. I would like you to talk about all the issues tonight, if possible, so that I know exactly what I need to change. I was having a very difficult time keeping track of all the changes from the Planning and Zoning Commission through the group of staff and other changes, so I want to get all the issues resolved, go back and make a clean underline and single underline, single strikeout version, that can be adopted with the Findings for the actual resolution or actual ordinance that you adopt to enact these changes. I had not prepared that yet. So, that was the reason, primarily, that I wanted you to keep the Public Hearing open. I think that I have got some overlap there that I don't need, but I haven't had a chance to figure it out yet, because I haven't created a clean underline and strike out version. I think the fence stuff is really redundant between the TNR district and the general code. So, it's -- that's why I asked you to leave the Public Hearing open, is just in case I find some mistakes I made, in all honesty. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 24 of 78 Bird: Anna, my -- my main concern on this whole thing was life safety, fire, police safety. I think you have addressed that, evidently, between the staff and your group and everything. I don't know, has the fire deputy chief got any -- Canning: Yes, he does. He has a suggestion for the alley issue. Bird: Let's hear it. Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, the police chief may be aware of, you know, if we have an issue in terms of enforcement when we are dealing with private streets and what he suggested is that perhaps we can work with the homeowners association to incorporate into their CC&Rs that those are private streets and any vehicles that are public -- excuse me, public alleys, that any vehicles that are parked illegally within that fire way could be impounded and removed at the owner's expense and we would -- we stand with the police department as a way to -- we realize that signage is always an issue that seems to be overlooked and ignored in most instances, but this would allow us some sort of enforcement -- a form of enforcement to have vehicles removed when they are illegally parked in that alley. And if you have any other questions, probably the police chief is probably better informed on that issue, but it would be one way we could - - we could certainly try to keep the vehicles out of the alley. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Can Mr. Turnbull -- can we bring him back to answer this? I think that's a good idea, but I don't think it's practical. Maybe he can -- I don't think a homeowners association is going to -- De Weerd: Mr. Turnbull. Turnbull: Well, I don't know if -- what I think I heard Joe say was if these -- we are talking about public right of ways here, public alleys, and that you can, through your, I don't know, ordinances, make those so they are enforceable by the police department, rather than a homeowners association. So, I think that gives them more teeth, to where if they are public, instead of private, the fire department can cite them, tow them, and get them out of there. I must say that in all my travels where I have been to these developments that have the build to lines, I haven't seen any cars parked in the alleys. I'm sure it happens once in a blue moon, but I haven't seen it yet. De Weerd: We have pictures. Chief. Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, apparently we have got a little bit of some confusion here, because initially when we looked at these, my understanding was the traditional neighborhood alleyways, the alley access loadings were to be private. And, essentially, running down, as opposed to being public alleyways, they are a private Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 25 of 78 access for those residents that are using it, that they take the access off the public roadways. Part of the reason why I -- when I was just talking with Assistant Fire Chief Silva on it, is in most of our commercial areas that we have, those are open public access, but it's private properly for those fire lanes. The businesses have every access to be able to impound and remove vehicles blocking their fire lanes, as long as they are clearly posted. In this instance we are looking at homeowners being clearly warned that if they have a vehicle that's parked illegally out there via their CC&Rs, then, they are on notice that way or with additional postings as may be required, the homeowners association acting on behalf of the general property owners can have an impoundment take place, so long as it's properly noticed to them. We can still enforce on those fire lanes, both private and public as well, as can the fire department, either department can issue a citation and have the vehicles impounded as well with where we are at right now. But the question was is, well, how are we going to be able to enforce it. I don't look at it as just being police or fire, I also look at the homeowners in those type of developments also having some responsibility to help maintain, that's why the suggestion was made for the -- for the additional on the CC&Rs. But I guess part of the crux here is whether or not these are private or public alleys at this point. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Any other questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I don't have any questions, just a comment in terms keeping the hearing open. I believe that we need to do that. We have some outstanding in terms of issues that aren't resolved, amongst our staff, let alone with the Council. I, for one, want to see that resolved and questions that the chief just raised, the fire safety issues, the issues that Anna has with trying to maintain the new urbanism and some of the issues that are starting to crop up across the country with new urbanism and I'm not so sure that we might not want to visit that whole arena here in the near future, but definitely as it relates on our ordinances. We need to get them resolved, but we need to get them resolved to the satisfaction of life safety, the enforcement, the Planning and Zoning, as well as the development community. I don't know if we can reach consensus, but that's where I would like to go. De Weerd: Yes, Anna. Canning: If the Council could provide a little more information on what direction you would like staff to go. I mean I -- we have been trying to reach consensus and it's -- this is as close as we can come to consensus. The confusion over private versus public alleys -- alleys can be either. They can be privately owned. Now, most people come in with public alleys, but they can be privately owned. They are not private streets, but they can be privately owned, if they are -- so, I'm not -- we need some help and some guidance on where Council wants to go, because we are never going to come to a complete consensus on this. De Weerd: You have come a long way, though. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 26 of 78 Canning: I have got it down to five issues and from what I heard tonight, there is really only three left, so I think -- I think I have heard what I need to hear on the side yard setbacks. The alley setbacks I'm not quite sure which way you want to go. The street sections, the offset on those chicanes, if ACHD -- if they are okay with them. I haven't heard anything on that. Block length issue seems to have been resolved. And the alley right of way restrictions, I need some guidance on what you would like there, too. You can direct us to still go to work on it, but if you could give us some push as to which direction to go, that would be very helpful. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: What would help me is -- I have before me your outline of the five issues, as well as all of the other consensus issues. I have a recommendation from P&Z and I have an alternative proposal. I don't have before me a real clear statement that, in fact, the fire department is in agreement or disagreement with a particular item. I think they might be, but I'm not sure. So, I'm a little unclear as to what direction you have provided to Council. So, what do these alternative proposals mean? Are there still outstanding differences between police, fire, and Planning and Zoning? Are there differences between what staff is recommending and what the development community is asking, just to be clear as to what these mean? And you can tell me tonight, but I'm going to forget by the 2nd, so if you could get it in writing, so we would all have at least a record of it. Canning: Well, the only one that staff hasn't agreed to is the alley right of way restrictions. That's the only one where the fire department would like to see the word -- or grass Greet added as an example there. So, that's the only one where staff isn't in agreement. The other issues were brought up by the development community, although it appears that block length is resolved. De Weerd: Okay. So, Council, at this point staff needs to bring this back anyway. If, Anna, you could take the items that have been resolved tonight off of the list and just -- on the two remaining, just state what the planning staff position is and what public safety's position is, so that's clear to Council. Canning: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor, can I ask one question? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, you say the rear setback has been settled? Canning: Yes, sir. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 27 of 78 Bird: What is it? ~~ Canning: Well, the 18 feet and 20 feet has been settled, but the build to question has not been settled. So, that's what I need. Bird: That's what I was going to say. I didn't realize that had been settled. Canning: The 18 and 20 seems to have been settled, yes. Bird: Yeah. But the build to has not, the five foot. Canning: The staff recommendation removed -- the combined staff recommendation removed it. The development community is still raising that as an outstanding issue. Bird: If -- Canning: I will add a third component to this matrix that includes the development community. I understand now where I have to go, thank you, and I have got my direction I needed, so -- Bird: Well, just a clarification for me on the rear setback. If we go to the wide alleys -- I have got two questions. I don't see -- I don't see the five foot as being a real hazardous deal. And so, you know, that's something I think we need to work out, too, and have it down in writing what is recommended by who and how it will be taken care of. The grass Greet is very very expensive to put in and -- if you went down the whole alleyway. But I think if we keep the -- and, then, we also need to know if it's public or private. And if it's public, then, ACHD has control of it and they go -- they build to their standards, am not right? I'm getting a positive shake from the ACRD rep. Canning: And what -- yeah. We will address those issues. De Weerd: Yeah. Dean, note the shakes for the record. Rountree: Heard Gary's head rattle. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I like what Assistant Chief Silva brought up and I guess for my two bits I'd like to hear a little bit more about the viability of -- if you go with that 18-foot alleyway, the ability to impound vehicles, impact on law enforcement and enforcing that. I know that homeowners can be notified through their CC&Rs, but that's an additional burden. Could be a great one. You got to try and get the message out by impounding a lot of cars real early and make everybody upset to the point of making them realize that they are not supposed to park there. I'd like to hear more about that. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 28 of 78 Rountree: Madam Mayor, on that particular item I guess I have a question for Ted. If, in fact, there is an emergency situation and there is fire equipment in an alley and there is a car parked there, is the city liable for any damages that might be incurred to that vehicle because when they are moving hoses and ladders and everything else they rock and roll within an emergency situation, even if it's a medical emergency they are moving a lot of stuff and a lot of people, are we indemnified against that as a city? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilmember Rountree, I would be hesitant to comment on a potential liability situation, because it's limited only by the creativity of the lawyer filing the tort claim. But with that said, it's likely that the fire crews are going to do what's necessary to protect life and if that includes moving a vehicle out of the way and if there is damage, it will be addressed by our carrier. De Weerd: Nice avoiding. Bird: Typical lawyer. De Weerd: Is there any other information needed that staff needs to come back with? Bird: Madam Mayor, I think what Mr. Rountree stated is perfect. If we can just get the stuff in writing. Anna, I think we have got it down to about three issues now and you get with the staff and with the development community and let's get it solved once and for all and make it right for the majority. Canning: Will do. And I will come back with a clean ordinance version without all that other stuff we have right now. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Anna, in your notes you make reference to a May 2nd date. I know you have got -- you have to meet with ACRD to talk about the chicane -- chicanery. Does that give you enough time, do you think, to provide this information that we have discussed, meet with ACRD, get it to us in time for us to -- Canning: I think it does. If it doesn't, I could request continuance and the only repeat person that shows up to discuss these I can let him know that we are going to continue it, if that's the case. Borton: Okay. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 29 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I'd also add, for what it's worth, that I appreciate sometimes the slow grinding process, at least from what I have seen, and I, for one, appreciate disagreement and sometimes even within staff you can agree to disagree on certain items and if you can provide better results and a healthier product for the city, I have no problem with it. In fact, enjoy seeing disagreement in certain areas. So, I appreciate you and staff, everyone slugging through it. De Weerd: Yeah. And that's not -- just literally. Okay. I would go ahead and entertain a motion, then, on this item. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we continue the Public Hearing on Item 13 until May 2nd. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue Item 13 to May 2nd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 14: Continued Public Hearing from March 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 Cannon Creek Subdivision by JBS Enterprises, LLC -1845 West Franklin Road: Item 15: Continued Public Hearing from March 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 Cannon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Item 16: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: CUP 05-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for amixed-use development within 300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 -- oh, if there is anyone here for Item 24, 25 and 26, Keego Springs Subdivision, it has been continued to April 18th and we would apologize for any inconvenience. Okay. I will go ahead and open the continued public hearings from March 7th of AZ 05-056. Item 15, PP 05-058. And Item 16, CUP 05-015. Anna. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 30 of 78 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Harks Canyon Creek project. This item was continued from February 7th, largely at the request of the applicant. They wanted you to be able to hear the traditional neighborhood residential standards and to have some discussion about what way you wanted to go on those before hearing this project. The project does include annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and conditional use approval. The site is located along Franklin Road, west of Linder Road, and just west of the existing Harks Corner that you are all familiar with. It's a continuation of that project. The proposed development includes a C-C zone, community business district, for six acres of the site and TNR, traditional neighborhood residential, for 4.07 acres. The commercial properties are at the front and, then, the residential properties would be toward the back. The existing Unified Development Code now says that development standards for the TNR district will be approved as -- as approved by Council. So, you don't have to have resolved all the TNR standards that we talked about before to resolve this -- or to consider this issue. It's just there is a lot of flexibility right now in the way the zone is and so you are given that. Okay. The TNR district is for 4.07 acres of the site. And they have submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property, requesting 29 single family residential lots, seven commercial lots, and eight common lots. Those single family residential lots are for townhouse development. So, they'd have, basically, two attached walls, except on the ends. The applicant has also submitted a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use development within 300 feet of a residential district. The gross residential density is 9.84 units per acre. And at the Planning and Zoning Commission -- I think this has been resolved, but the applicant has had some concerns over the requirement for a private street on the southern portion of the property. Let me go -- explain what's going on here a little bit. These are the commercial properties. These are the townhouse properties. See if it looks easier to identify here. So, these are the townhomes. These are public streets coming in here and, essentially, ending here. And, then, another public street coming this way and this is a public street as well. There is a requirement for a private street application for this southern portion, because this is, essentially, a condo project or amulti-family project, similar to an apartment complex, just in the style in massing of the buildings. They are only requesting approval for the northern portion of this property at this time. They have submitted the conceptual site plan for the whole property. And you will see here on their plat that they haven't platted this southern portion yet. They are just leaving it open for further future development. I do have some elevations for the townhouses. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on January 5th. At that Public Hearing they moved unanimously to recommend approval. Jane Suggs spoke in favor of the application. No one opposed it. No one commented. And the key issues of discussion by the Commission were the location of the site in relation to industrial uses on Franklin Road. I can show you that vicinity map again. You can see that there is an industrial development on the north side of Franklin. The Lot 19, Block 1, the open space lot south of the site, which will be used for future development -- and I already discussed that with you. And Lot 5, Block 1 will be reconfigured from one lot to approximately five lots with -- the east-west portions will be service drives and north-south portions will be either public or private streets for future connection. And those are these little lots throughout here, so -- again, it was that Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 31 of 78 private street connection versus having an alley coming off of a private street or a public street. So, the public street needs to extend to -- to at least the alley and, then, a private street from that -- at a minimum from that point forward. The key Commission changes to staffs recommendation -- there was a Public Works condition 2.15 was changed, that all development improvements for each phase of this development, including, but not limited to sewer, fencing, micropaths, pressurized irrigation, and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. And, then, just a correction to the planning condition 1.11 that said Lot 22. It should read Lot 21. As I mentioned before, they did ask that this be continued, so that you could consider it having been informed of what the TNR standards -- where they were headed and as you heard, in that testimony the applicant does have some outstanding concerns with the setback issue from the alley and would like to see a build to line, instead of a setback line. You do have findings for approval before you tonight. And with that I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Anna, wasn't there also an issue on the developments that are on the west side, the dead end of those alleys and how services would be provided with garbage with that dead end? Canning: Yes, there was, and I -- the applicant -- I had forgotten how that was resolved, because it's not showing up. That's right. You have heard this before. I'm sorry. missed that. Sorry about that. De Weerd: Sorry. I have a foggy memory. I couldn't remember if it -- Canning: You're dealing with someone who locked their purse in the trunk of their car today, so -- De Weerd: I know. I did announce that before you got here. Canning: I got that feeling, because they all looked at me with pity in their eyes as I walked through the door, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for staff at this time, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Would the applicant's representative like to come forward? Suggs: Good evening again. Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street in Boise. I'm representing Harks Canyon Creek and you have already heard from one of the partners in the development of this particular project, David Wilson, and the other partner is here also, Larry Van Hees, who developed the Harks Corner property next door. Anna did a great job, of course, going over the project and so I'm not going to review the entire project again with you, but I'm just going to explain, as she did, why we are here. We do have a recommendation of approval from the staff and from the Planning and Zoning i Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 32 of 78 Commission. We were in the process of going through the approvals with you at our last meeting and there were some conditions being added and one of those conditions was that the alley of 20 feet behind properties, which will be a private alley, would be paved completely and we agreed to that condition. Also, the ACHD had already conditioned us to provide for the public streets -- a full width public street, 36 foot crawl section, that we had shown in a couple of locations -- if I can get this to work. We had shown in a couple of locations necking this down to a 29 foot section, but we have agreed to go to the 36 foot section. We will be doing the bulb outs here where we can, but a little bulb out. We have agreed to that. That was a condition I think everyone agreed to. We got called up on the discussion we had tonight, which is on the five foot setback versus a larger setback for the garages and the alley. Since that time and just today -- yesterday and today we have had some discussions with the fire department and I believe we have reached some consensus I think that's part of we take our chances here tonight to talk about this, because I believe in this particular situation you might see how we can make you comfortable with a 20 foot paved alley and a five foot build to on the garages and a lot of that has to do with the specifics of the property and that is that this block length is 300 feet, so that if -- even if the fire truck parked here, their hoses could go 150 feet into the alley. Also, we have breaks between here, so we have a ten foot break between these buildings, even though they are townhouse buildings, so those will be open. We can agree to make those open. And that those can be also used as access, so that there would be less than 150 feet to the backs of the units if you parked on the street even. I believe we have talked to the fire department and they feel like if we pave the 20 foot alley with the five foot build to for the apron for the garages, that in the circumstance where someone may park their truck or run inside and we think they might, hopefully, go inside the front door, but that there would still be room for a fire truck to get through and to find another location to park. We would be willing to stripe those alleys for a fire lane and put anything we need to in the CC&Rs to try to help the homeowners association, which would be professionally managed, to keep that from happening. We have also agreed, if the fire department agrees to this, too, but we have also agreed to sprinkle the buildings, provided -- I know. That's something we think -- I think we need to look at this, you know, again. I think you will start seeing that this is a possibility to provide the urban style of housing that we want to provide in Meridian. I do believe that -- I'm hearing from builders, because I work with builders and developers all over the valley, home prices are -- land prices used to be 20 percent of the price of the home. Now, they are 25 to 35 percent the price -- it's translated into the price of the home. So, even though you might not call the patty row project that I'm very proud of in Eagle to be affordable housing, building something larger and using more land would have been more expensive. So, yeah, I'm surprised at the price tag there. But I am seeing that land being what it is these days, that the more compact we can make these, the better. I own a small home with a one car garage. I use that garage and even store stuff in it and I think that's the market we are looking at, too. I love to walk to places. There are four, maybe five restaurants within walking distance here. Restaurants meaning there is a Subway, there is an Arctic Circle. There is a little bar on the corner right next door. There is a Mexican restaurant. I mean they are places that people can walk. We really can have people getting out of their cars in this particular community and actually going and using those Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 33 of 78 facilities and what's really a little village center now there at Harks Corner. This development will also afford an opportunity for people south of the canal and the creek, when this project is built out -- one of our commitments is to work with the irrigation district to improve access here. There is a little broken bridge here, but once we get some eyeballs back here, which means once we develop this area -- we don't want to do that now and that was part of our condition before is that with the neighbors is that we would improve that. That gives the whole neighborhood an opportunity to get out of their cars and walk through the neighborhood and even further south of that neighborhood, which Mr. Van Hees was involved in developing, is an elementary school. So, great opportunity to get the kids around. I think this is a great opportunity to kind of take a look at what we can do and the only hold up we see right now is that five foot build to. So, I'm hoping that you would see in your wisdom here to even try that on this project, given the opportunity to work with quality builders, people with proven reputations, and the added bonus of sprinkling. Any questions? De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Any questions from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Ms. Suggs, you brought up the issue -- or the idea or concept of sprinkling. Is that a commitment to do that or is that a consideration? Suggs: I'll leave it up to Joe to ask if he feels like that's a necessity for us to do that to get the five foot build to. My developers are willing to make that a condition. But only if it's something that we think that the fire department feels is necessary. I don't know that it is, but I -- De Weerd: I thought that was our ordinance. Silva: Yeah. Mayor and Council, that's the way we adopted the fire code when we adopted it, so that would have to be sprinkled. But they can -- if they separate them -- if they separate them as single family dwellings, which they could do under the residential code, then, they would not. Suggs: Okay. These are single family homes separated by fire walls, so they are not considered multi-family. They are a single family -- they will have lots. They will have. They are single family with common walls. De Weerd: I believe we suggested if they had shared walls that they needed to be sprinkled. Silva: Again, if they are separated per -- with a firewall per the residential code -- or per the building code, then, they are considered separate units. Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 34 of 78 De Weerd: I thought we discussed that. Unless that firewall goes clear up to the roof line. Bird: It does. It has to completely. De Weerd: Does it? Suggs: It will. That's the code. If you're going to put a firewall in and have it all the way to the roof line, it, then, is a separate unit and would not be typically required to be sprinkled, because we are seeing these all over the valley. But this is a negotiated thing. I think that these developers are willing to step out. I don't think it's necessary from the fire code. I think we have got lots of clear, but we want to do what we can to be the best we can be in the neighborhood and pave the way for those that will find this to be an alternative for design. De Weerd: Okay. So, Joe, what is the position of the fire department? Silva: Again, if they build them as -- with a firewall there, they are not required to be sprinklered. They can attach those units. This was something we debated at length and if that goes all the way to the roof deck, then, they can build them a separate units and they are not sprinklered. De Weerd: Okay. Suggs: Give you some safety feeling -- feeling of safety to feel like that that might be a place you can start going? I mean I don't want to open -- I have been informed there are others that don't want to open that door, because that is a cost, it's not something that adds to affordability. But we are -- we believe in the design. Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, that was something that the -- that in exchange for that five foot setback off the alley, that the developer had offered to do in this particular circumstance, so I want Council to understand that. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: And I know it's avery -- it's not a real expensive addition, but it is -- it is an extra expense. But without us having the TNRs down and them wanting it, I would -- not that it has to be a standard, because I believe a firewalled four-plex is going to have less jumping from facility to facility than these four foot setbacks with two foot eaves on each one of them and vinyl windows to hold out the deal. So, I would -- I have no problem with their five foot setback to build, as long as they sprinkle this time. I don't think it's something -- something that I feel has to be in the TNRs, but without us having passed that permanently tonight, if these developers are willing to step forward, I think it's a Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 35 of 78 great addition and it's something that maybe we would look at, but I -- I believe that that would be a reason we could -- that I could pass on it tonight with the five foot setback. De Weerd: Actually, Anna, when you come back with the zoning ordinance, that might even be a suggestion if they want to make that concession that they do sprinkle. So, you know, that's certainly something that can be considered in your comments. Suggs: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Borton. Borton: I do have one question. Ms. Suggs, in the February hearing there was a discussion on the stubbed alley on the western portion and Sanitary Service's ability to get in and out for garage pickup. Suggs: Right. We commented that that was less than 150 feet as far as going in and backing up or there would be a requirement for those units to push the garbage out to the side street, so that there could be a pad and we talked about a little pad -- putting a little pad here right at the corner, so they could bring the garbage out there. Borton: Is that the plan? Suggs: That could be the plan. We can make that a condition that those garbage cans be pushed to the public street and that the buildings be sprinkled, in addition to all the conditions that we have agreed to already. Borton: Okay. Suggs: We would agree to that. De Weerd: Thank you. Suggs: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. If there is anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application, please, come forward. Okay. Council, I don't see any public wanting to testify on this application. Is there anything further that you need from staff or the applicant? Okay. Bird: No. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 36 of 78 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we have no more further comment, I would move that we close AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-051. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Motion to close the public hearings on Items 14 through 16. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Council, do you want to have discussion or do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'll make a motion. I move that we approve AZ 05-056, the request for annexation and zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TNR. And 4.07 acres from RUT to C-C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 14. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 15. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I believe I'm right, but I want it clarified now. On the five foot setback, it's under the PP, how about -- what about the sprinkler, is that under the CUP? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, definitely the five foot setback condition would be under the preliminary plat. The second question was with regard to -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 37 of 78 Bird: The sprinkling. Baird: The sprinkling. I'm wondering if we shouldn't put that in a development agreement. Am I getting a nod over there? Bird: Then we will have to change our -- our annexation, then. Baird: The best way to do it is to have that. So, let's go back and reconsider Item 14 to add that before moving on to something. It's a little unusual, because it's sort of a compromise that shouldn't be all wrapped into one, but I think it's best to enforce the development agreement. Anna, you're holding the mike. Maybe you might want to comment. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do think that the sprinklers should go in the development agreement. I'm concerned that -- because the code is unique in that it says that any dimensional standards will be as set by Council, Idon't -- I don't know where that one is best located. We might want to add that one to the development agreement as well. So, the five foot build to setback, just to be safe, we could add it and the development agreement. Baird: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, I'd recommend we do it in both. In the development agreement you can establish, through the record you have made tonight, that this is specifically an accommodation you're making in the setback in exchange for the concession of putting in the fire sprinklers. You put that in the DA with the findings to support and, then, what would automatically flow from that would be allowing that five foot build to in the preliminary plat. Does that work? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Thank you. Yes. Bird: With your permission and the second's permission, I'd like to redo the motion on AZ 05-056. Rountree: Second seconds. Bird: Okay. To include my -- an addition to my original motion that we have a development agreement drawn up also that would include, for this one project, in exchange for the five foot setback at the alley for to build, setback, that five sprinkling systems will be installed within the residence. Rountree: And you got the five foot setback and -- Bird: I got the five foot setback and I got the -- oh. And also on the one unit with the short -- not drive-thru alleys -- would have pads for refuge pick up. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 38 of 78 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. And that would include to amend the findings? Bird: To amend the findings. Yes. We do not have findings -- you know, I mean we have findings, but not -- it's nothing like that. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Thank you. I think you all understand the motion, since everyone participated. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Bird: Madam Mayor, can I make a statement before we have roll call? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I don't want it in anyway for the public to take this that we have done the TNR with this kind of a setup. That is something that we will decide on the 2nd of May. Okay? Does the rest of the Council agree? Rountree: Oh, yeah. De Weerd: You're very clear, Mr. Bird. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Let's try the PP. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 05-058, with the addition of the to build at the alleyway a five foot setback. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 15 with the clarification as stated. Would that -- do we need the garbage pad as well on street side? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 39 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird, Item 16. Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we approve CUP 05-051 and we have not changed anything on that, so we probably should be able to approve the findings. Am I not right? Canning: Yes, sir. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to approve Item 16. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 17: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: 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 18: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: 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: Thank you. Okay. Items 17 and 18 are a continued Public Hearing on AZ 05-062 and PP 05-062. Canning: That's me. That's my cue. Sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Sharp Estates project. It was continued from your -- from your agenda, so I won't repeat everything like I did on Harks Corner. Sorry about that last one. You did continue it for -- in order to allow the applicant to hold another neighborhood meeting and to address transitional lot sizes along the northern boundary. And we do have a revised plat today and we can incorporate into the findings if the applicant could let us know what the date of that revised plat is, since my files are locked in the trunk of my car. So, again, that would help us. And, really, that was the major issue of discussion at the last one was from property owners along the north and the applicant has conducted that neighborhood meeting has presented this revised plat. And I'll answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Anna at this time? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian Ciry Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 40 of 78 Sargent: Yes. Ron Sargent, 1883 North Wildwood Street in Boise. Madam Mayor, Council members, as Anna said, we did have a -- we sent out 87 notices. We only had three people show up to the neighborhood meeting, but two of the participants at the neighborhood meeting were the two that had testified at the last hearing that we had here, and based on our discussions with them and the other neighbors, we did modify the plat by eliminating two of the lots on the north side, which they had requested, which were these lots here. So, they were -- instead of being 50-foot wide, they are a minimum of 60-foot wide across there and they felt that matched up better with their lots that they have along the south side of the Packard Estates that's to the north of us. We also agree that even though there is some of these that are being built as two story homes, we did agree that on these homes here that the only -- if we did build a two story, we'd just do a bonus room over the garage with the windows facing south to the street, so they wouldn't be facing back to the Packard Estates. So, we agreed to those conditions as well with the -- with the two homeowners that were to the north of us. I guess -- and, then, the -- a couple other comments. The one thing there was some concern about, there is a playground up here at Packard Estates, but on the smaller lots that we are proposing, our experience is the majority of our buyers tend to be down- sizers or people that are looking to have smaller homes, not low income housing, and we anticipate the majority of them in this subdivision will be likewise down-sizers or empty nesters that probably for the most part will not have children. If somebody's looking -- has a group of kids, they are probably going to be looking for something that has a larger lot size to it for a place for the kids to play. So, that's our experience and that's where our expectations are for the subdivision. I guess I'd stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: I have none at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Sargent: Okay. Thanks. De Weerd: Is there any Public Hearing on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I see you have done your homework very well. Thank you for meeting again with the neighbors. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Seeing no further comments, I'd like to extend my thank you as well for working with the neighbors. That's the kind of thing we like to have accomplished in Meridian and appreciate the time -- extra time you took. With that I move to close the public hearings on Item 17 and 18. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 41 of 78 Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on 17 and 18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 17, AZ 05-062. Canning: Sir, did you want to include the developer's commitment to those property owners in the development agreement or -- I just raise that, because this issue sometimes comes up, if they are not in our conditions of approval, but it's a commitment made at a Public Hearing. Rountree: Madam Mayor, Anna, yes. The record needs to reflect a commitment. If it's in a development agreement, that's probably the best vehicle. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Second. De Weerd: So, the second agrees to include the DA. Bird: Yes. You bet. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Item 18. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Careful. I move that we approve the preliminary plat 05-062 for Item 18. Bird: Second. Get a date on that. What's the new updated date? Meridian City Council • • April 4, 2006 Page 42 of 78 Rountree: With the updated preliminary plat as presented. Do you have a date? You got it, Will? Berg: We received it the 23rd. Rountree: As received by the city on the 23rd of -- Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Mr. Sargent, does 3/20 sound correct? Sargent: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. So, the plat date is 3/20. Rountree: Let my motion reflect the plat date of 3/20/06. De Weerd: Second agrees? Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 19: Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.55 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Una Mas by Una Mas, LLC - 3475 East Ustick Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 19 is also a continued Public Hearing from March 21st. AZ 05-061. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this item has been continued twice. The first time it was continued was to wait until the discussions were finalized about the Ada County Highway District property just west of this one. That has been delayed sometime further, so you did have a second hearing. The second -- at the second hearing you did request elevations from the applicant and he has provided those and as soon as I'm done talking to you I will put them on the overhead. So, with that I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Any questions for Anna, other than just seeing the elevations? Okay. Canning: Okay. I will do it. This is kind of a close-up look of some of the entrance details and, then, I have one of the whole building. Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 43 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment? Roseigh: John Roseigh, Hanson-Rice, representing Una Mas. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, last time we met you guys wanted to see elevations of what could possibly go there. What we have shown are other projects that we have done. These aren't necessarily representative of what we will put there, as we aren't -- the development group that we do, we don't do spec buildings, so they don't -- typically they don't just design a building, build a building, and, then, try and get somebody to come in. We try and do typically design build with acustom -- you know, we do a custom design for each client. So, this is one that's going up in Boise right now. The previous one was designed for a client who -- financing didn't go through, but I thought it still represented what the UDC -- you know, it fell with the -- you know, in and out of plain walls, it's -- you know, I think it represented what the UDC would like to, you know, put as far as stipulations on the project. We also did a color board just to show you kind of, you know, the quality of materials that we are going to put on there, you know, stone, brick, no efface, you know, stucco type of stuff. Tinted glass, you know, low E paint colors, whatever the client would like and what we can get approved. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, my only comment to Mr. Roseigh is that he probably doesn't have enough glass for Councilman Bird, but -- Bird: No. It's fine. Rountree: No. I -- just a comment. Thank you. I appreciate your effort and you're bringing forward the kinds of things that we like to see and it helps us make our decision. Roseigh: Thank you. I appreciate that. Rountree: Thanks, again, for your patience. Roseigh: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Baird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Baird. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as we are looking towards this, if you were inclined to approve it, I'm wondering that since we are not committing to a specific elevation, do you want the language in a development agreement that would commit them to the types of features that were just mentioned about the facade and the Meridian Ciry Council April 4, 2006 Page 44 of 78 articulation and the colors and the materials? Is that something that you'd like to see included in the DA? Rountree: Yes. Baird: So, legal would work with the planning department on that particular language based on the testimony here tonight. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Baird. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Gorton: Maybe a comment or a question of the applicant again with regard to what Mr. Baird had said. You know, building -- not doing spec jobs, just custom builds, what type of parameters or restrictions can you commit to on materials and things not knowing who is going to go there? Roseigh: What kind of restrictions? Gorton: Yeah. Like -- Roseigh: What would you like not to have on there? Gorton: Well, don't open the door for us -- Roseigh: Well, I mean, you know, we -- I think our goal is always to -- as an architect and as also someone who designs it, I always like to see materials that are going to last for a long time that are low maintenance that are not -- you know, that are not eye sores. Again, we try and -- I think anything that we do we try and do at a high quality of builders. We -- I think we can -- the Unified Development Code, you know, specifies how much glass and what materials can't be used. We can live with -- I have stated that before, that, you know, we can abide by the Unified Development Code. If there is particular materials that, you know, you want us to minimize, you know, we can definitely look at that. Most of the time, again, our clients are -- you know, we are the builders, as developers, when we specify a price for a client, the price usually -- I mean if somebody comes in and we put marble on the outside of it, we are not going to have a lot of those clients. But, you know, if we -- you know, we don't want to -- we don't want to put up a -- we don't want to put up a metal building, you know, engineered metal building on that site either. I mean we want to do -- De Weerd: And you couldn't either. Roseigh: Well -- we can do an engineered building. Engineered metal building with a, you know, structural frame, of course, but -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 45 of 78 De Weerd: So, yes, we definitely want to tie it to the things that we have seen tonight. Roseigh: Well, yeah, we don't have a problem with tying it to the type of materials and the roof lines and -- I mean I think all of that is in the Unified Development Code as it is anyway. You know, we don't want to be stuck -- we don't want to be tied to that footprint, that building, either one that we have seen. I mean if -- if we have a client that comes in and wants something different than that, then, we'd like the option and the latitude to be able to design something through a development agreement to have, you know, staff look at it and approve it. We don't have a problem with that. We just don't want to be -- I don't want to have to build that building on that site. Maybe something similar to it, but, you know, if -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Would a statement like a class A office building that kind of gets you a parameter of what it could be. Roseigh: Well, this is -- that's what this particular project is. Bird: And I know that's what that is right there. Roseigh: But, you know, if -- some of the clients that we have been talking -- we are in discussions with clients and we have -- we have got some people who are looking at, you know, more of the, you know, out-patient doc -- you know, a doctor's and dentist office, it's going to be a little bit different than a class A office building. We are in discussions with, you know, other projects that are not -- who aren't going to be able to spend that much money as more, you know, services, day care type of deal. You know, we want to do a child day care on the site. It's a potential, so -- De Weerd: I guess, Mr. Baird, the question would be if they say something similar in style and materials as has been presented to us, if staff does not feel that that is the case, then, the applicant can certainly appeal it to Council at that time. Is that -- would that be the process? Baird: That's correct, Madam Mayor. We'd like to have it drafted such that that wouldn't be necessary and maybe we -- since Anna is the one who has to answer those questions and administer that, maybe I'd look to you. There has been some comments that this is already addressed in the UDC. Is it even necessary to go down this road that we are discussing? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the design guidelines in the UDC are very minimal. It talks about modulations, over 20 percent of the facade of the building, more than -- having at least two roof planes. I see one, two, three, four, five roof planes Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 46 of 78 one, two, three, four, five, six modulations. On the previous photo I saw where both of them I see a kind of a more vertical style construction, rather than some of the offices we see with the kind of more residential style. So, those are the kinds of things I would be looking for to be consistent. If it only had five instead of six modulations, I'd probably -- oh, yeah, that looks fine. You know, if it has -- if it's showing three different kinds of materials, I'd look for at least three different kinds of materials in whatever they submitted. So, the elevations do help just in the -- kind of the giving a vision for the complexity of the architecture. If they came in with a building that looked like Lowe's, I would say this isn't what Council bought into, and I wouldn't accept that one. So, I think that these representations -- we can use these and determine if it's consistent, without being exactly the same. I think we have been fairly successful if we have got something to work with. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Does that work for you? Roseigh: That does work for me. I mean I do want to -- I do want to find -- I want to clarify, though, when you say that, you know, the residential style office building, are you saying that that would be okay? I have got one right there. Canning: It's not similar to what you have shown, so if you want to include that one -- if you want to show that to Council, then, you should. Roseigh: Well, that's what I'm going to do. Here is another one that we have done for a professional -- for a professional office. It's a little bit different. It was awhile ago, but it's along the same lines of -- I mean a lot of the residential style doctor's office, you know, dentist office that are going up in -- in the valley. Again, I'm not saying that this -- De Weerd: Turn around with that, just to show the audience. Bird: That at least don't look like a four bedroom house. Roseigh: Six. Bird: About right. Roseigh: Again, it's -- I mean I don't think we want to -- I mean we don't want to be tied to just those types. I mean we want to have the flexibility and the latitude to be able to service any client that comes to us that is willing -- that wants to put a building up there and be able to bring that to -- through a development agreement to staff for their review. We definitely want that flexibility and so -- De Weerd: Okay. Roseigh: -- we appreciate it. Thank you. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 47 of 78 De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council -- is there any testimony on this application? Seeing none -- Rountree: Madam Mayor, hearing no further testimony, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item 19. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Again, I thank you, the applicant, for their effort and patience. I'm convinced by their presentation that we have the quality that we would want and anticipate in an entryway corridor. And with that I move that we approve Item 19 with a development agreement that's consistent with the explanation made by City Attorney Baird. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve and a second by Mr. Borton. Any comment? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Yeah. Just to the applicant to let him know that I also agree with and echo Councilman Rountree's comments. Delays are frustrating, I understand, and appreciate the additional effort and additional information and additional commitments to provide a quality product at this location. Appreciate it. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 20: Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-064 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 116.81 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road: Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 48 of 78 Item 21: Continued Public Hearing for Preliminary Plat approval 116.81 acres in a proposed by Tuscany Development, In of South Stoddard Road: ~~ from March 21, 2006: PP 05-0641 Request of 321 building lots and 34 common lots on R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision c. -south of West Overland Road and west Item 22: Public Hearing: VAR 05-026 Request fora Variance to exceed maximum block lengths in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of Overland Road, east of Linder Road and west of Stoddard Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 20, 21, and 22 are AZ 05-064, PP 05-064, and VAR 05-036. These are continued public hearings from March 21st. Those public hearings were only opened and continued, so there was no presentation at the time. Canning: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Bear Creek West project. It's located west of Stoddard Road. Here is Stoddard Road. And south of Overland Road. And you can see the blue outline extends for almost the full half mile. De Weerd: Anna, I'm sorry to interrupt you. Just -- if there is anyone here for Items 24, 25, and 26, they have been continued, so -- to 4/18. Just another announcement, just in case anyone is here for that. Okay. There you go, Anna. Canning: This project includes annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and a variance application. You can see it's largely vacant at this time. A couple of existing houses. The highlights of the proposed development are that it's 116.81 acres and they are asking for R-8 zoning. The preliminary plat approval would be for 320 single family residential lots and 34 common lots. The gross density is 2.74. The net density is 3.52. And it is designated as medium density residential on the Comprehensive Plan. There is -- this covers so many pages, it's such a large plat, that it's -- I wanted to point out a couple important features. There is a collector road coming into it. As you can see here, comes right through this -- about the middle of the western end of the property. You will see a large vacant lot here and also here. This was -- or this is a future middle school site. And they did a property boundary adjustment in the county to create that parcel. So, it's not included with this application. But the collector road does come along the boundary of the middle school site almost the entire southwesterly portion of the property. You will see the Ridenbaugh Canal, how this nestles up into that. And I'll let Mrs. McKay go over the design of the development for you. But I did want to point out that there was that middle school site adjoining the project. And that would lead to the other kind of unusual issue is that in the past when we have talked about schools and particularly middle schools and elementary schools in proximity to developments, the concern about sidewalks and how kids will get to that school, becomes an important issue. So, there is an unusual development agreement provision included with your recommendation today and that's that there be five foot sidewalks and street buffers be Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 49 of 78 installed along South Stoddard Road and Kodiak Drive with each phase prior to occupancy of new dwelling units, so that they would get all those -- they would get those improvements to the school site. Okay. The Commission has recommended approval. They heard the item on January 19th and February 16th, 2006. Mrs. McKay spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition, although there were several folks commenting. Those included Don Webber, Neil Bowl, Chuck Rough, I'm guessing. James Prather. Alan Bradshaw. And Jan Young. The key issues of the discussion by the Commission were the lot sizes on the perimeter of the subdivision. The impact of the subdivision on the existing church to the north. And that's right here. That is within the city. And vice-versa, the impact of the church on those properties. The key Commission changes to staffs initial recommendation -- I see here that they deleted condition 3.2. I'm sorry, I did not catch that and I didn't look up what that talked about. They modified condition 1.3.6 to reference the Ridenbaugh Canal. They also incorporated changes from the January 19th a-mail from Becky McKay to Don Webber and, then, those were incorporated into the conditions of approval, but also the applicant submitted a revised plat that incorporated all those changes into the plat as well. And those changes included moving Elias Drive south ten feet and increased the depth of the lots adjoining the church facility to 150 and 155 feet in depth, adjusting the lot lines, reduced the number of lots that adjoin the church parcel from three to two. This still shows three, so I'm wondering if this is the old plat. The two lots adjoining the church property will be restricted to single story homes. The two foot berm with a six foot high obscuring fence will be installed along the north boundary of the Bear Creek West property. The developer will install a landscape buffer on the north side of the two lots which adjoin the church facility. The developer shall disclose purchase agreements for lots which adjoin the church, just so they know that outdoor activities take place at the church. These activities are approved, are preexisting, and should in no way be considered a nuisance. This language shall also be included in the covenants of the subdivision. The church does sit way at the south side of the property, so it would be fairly close to the adjoining properties. I did want to point out -- I'm sorry, this is not the most recent version of the plat. It does -- the correct date should be -- we have received it March 10th, 2006. So, I apologize, that there are just two lots shown in this area. I did contact Mrs. McKay today and asked her why it was that we didn't have a stub street along this northern property boundary. She indicated that it was at the request of ACRD. ACHD, even though our Comprehensive Plan called for -- calls for a residential development in this whole area north of this property, felt that there were likely to not be residential uses up there and, therefore, did not want a stub street and that's why we are not seeing a stub street here. I talked to Becky, she is -- she said the applicant would not be opposed to extending that street. She felt that the neighbors may still have some concerns about putting that stub street in, but given that our Comprehensive Plan does show the entire area as residential, it does not seem wise to include a stub street, because we are not going to get one from the school property, which is just to the east. So, is this really our only opportunity to have any interconnectivity with those properties north of here. Mrs. McKay also told me that to her knowledge the church has optioned the properties to the west. So, a stub street may not be desired going in that direction, because if the church does expand in that direction, then, there would be no need for a stub street. So, I apologized to Mrs. Meridian Ciry Council April 4, 2006 Page 50 of 78 C~ McKay a couple different times about presenting that at the last minute. We did have pretty good and positive discussion about it. She said I hadn't done that to her in awhile, so she wasn't too upset with me, but I apologize to Council that that discussion was not included in the staff report. I would like you to consider it tonight, though. You do have findings for approval of all the applications. One does include a variance for this block length that is in question. If this street were extended as a stub street, they would still require a variance to block length, because there is no break in that block. With that I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Okay. McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, Suite -- or 150 East Aikens, Suite B -- I don't know where I'm from -- Eagle. 83616. I'm representing the applicant on this particular application. If I could, I'd like to set my boards up there. Bear with me. It's been a long and brutal day at my office, so I feel a little weathered. I'd like to kind of go through a little bit of the design of this particular project for the Council. As you're aware, this is -- and my little thing is not working right. This particular piece of property is approximately 116 acres in size. On the east side of Stoddard Road is Bear Creek Subdivision and your Bear Creek community park that's approximately 18.23 acres is located just adjoining Stoddard Road in this location here. This particular piece of property was made up of multiple parcels. The Meridian School District approached my clients and asked if they would be willing to sell 40 acres of this site for a future school site. They anticipate, according to Wendell Bigham, that the school would be constructed within five to seven years. They determine what they needed from a site plan perspective and, then, we kind of fit the subdivision around them, keeping in mind that they would be generating a substantial amount of traffic with the middle school and we needed to accommodate that with some type of a collector system. Stoddard Road is a collector and we intersected here, which is at Kodiak Drive, which is directly across from the existing Bear Creek Subdivision. The collector roadway will run along the middle school boundary and, then, exit out here and intersect here at Linder Road. The school district's architect kind of gave me a -- just a hand schematic to work with when we came up with our collector layout, kind of delineating what their access would be and as you can kind of see, this is a representation. As you can see, the collector roadway kind of angling and looping in there and, then, the school would set there and take its access entirely on the collector road. De Weerd: Becky, can you give that to Anna to put up on the screen? McKay: I sure can. The school district did go through the county, as Anna indicated, for a one time division, so it was a legal division of the property. I do believe it's their intent to get it annexed, from what Wendell told me. From there we -- we were left with what you see here, with the Ridenbaugh Canal on our southern boundary, Eggers Subdivision and another county sub located here. Ariel Estates is directly across Linder from us, which was a county five acre subdivision. What we wanted to create here was something that took advantage of the topography. When we had a colored drawing it really doesn't show it, but when we put up the preliminary plat, this particular parcel has ~ i Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 51 of 78 a substantial amount of elevation. From this location here down to the collector roadway, there is a drop of 35 feet and it's like about a five to six percent slope. From the north boundary down to the collector there is a drop of approximately 15 feet. So, we do have quite a bit of elevation. The highest point is, obviously, up here along the Ridenbaugh Canal. We -- in our design, when we are dealing with elevation, we have to intersect that elevation perpendicular, so that we don't have lots on one side that are high and lots on the other side of the street that are low. So, that kind of was one of the driving forces of this design. So, I came up with an idea that we would centralize the pool, restroom changing facility right here, this is about 2.8 acres, and that would be our focal point and try to focus as much of the traffic to that location. So, we kind of have a collector roadway here within a collector. And this would, therefore, gather and disseminate this traffic throughout the project. We have a parking facility. This is a pool. This would be changing rooms. And, then, we have play equipment and gazebo, picnic area, located right here. One of the other things that we tried to accomplish was getting some type of linkage and good pedestrian interconnectivity. You show on your - - on your parks plan amulti-use pathway running along the Ridenbaugh Canal. So, we have, obviously, shown that pathway. It would come in here and, then, would extend. We have got pedestrian micropath interconnectivity here and, then, back over here. Now, one thing that the neighbors were concerned about is at this point the pathway would stop, because it goes off of our property. Our boundary is right here. So, what I did is I turned the pathway and brought it internally. We also wanted to connect some of these pocket parks. We will have playground equipment here, here, and here. We have tried to give it nice even spacing and, then, all of these pathways would interconnect all the way through the project and lead from one green space to the other. This here is an existing home that will remain on the property. It does front on Linder. One change that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the staff had us make is we took this cul-de-sac and we bent it down, so that their access on Linder Road could be eliminated and they could take access internally. This colored drawing does not reflect that, but what's of record does. We tried to make sure that we had differing lot sizes. kind of like to go through those, because I think that's important to this project. We -- our smallest lot is 5,100 square feet and so 5,100 to 6,999 square feet are located -- oh, oh, Will, Ithink I -- the smallest lots are located right at this area. These are 5,100 square feet to 6,999 square feet. So, our distribution -- I know the Council has been asking questions, you know, what percentage of the differing lot sizes do you propose. About 13.75 percent would be between 5,100 and 6,999 square feet. Between 7,000 and 8,999 we have about 26.875 percent. Between 9,000 and 10,999 we have 28.75 percent. From 11,000 and up we have 30 percent. So, if you look at what our lot distribution is, almost 60 percent is 9,000 square foot and up. So, I think we have done a really good job of trying to get a good even break in lot sizes and trying to supply different types of homes and lots for different people. Are density in this -- as Anna indicated, we are asking for a step down. This is a medium density designated area, three to eight. We are at 2.74 dwelling units per acre gross, 3.52 net. So, you know, this is on the low end. One of the things that drove our density down is, obviously, the collector. And, then, trying to keep larger lots in this area here, because of the Eggers Subdivision and our other larger lots are located here along Stoddard. This is anticipated to be approximately a four phase project. The first phase would be this pod Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 52 of 78 here and the collector, clubhouse pool area here, and this collector here, all the way out to Linder and, then, a portion of this. Then, the second, the third, this would be the fourth phase. We did provide a traffic study. It was reviewed by Ada County Highway District. The Commission did approve it and they indicated that we will have to add a right turn and decel lane in here -- or left turn and right turn lane here and at the Stoddard Road. One of the things that was brought up was the change of classifications of Linder. It was designated a collector, I guess a couple weeks ago went to an arterial. They had originally asked us for only 35 feet from center line. After talking with Andrea, it was determined that we probably ought to anticipate the change. I show 48 feet from center line. Mr. Johnson has agreed to donate that to Ada County Highway District and that will, obviously, help facilitate the upgrade of that arterial. As far as transportation improvements in this area, 75 percent of the traffic will go northbound up to Overland Road via Stoddard and, then, probably eastbound from there. The section from Meridian Road all the way to Linder is supposed to take place in 2007. The Overland Road, Meridian Road intersection is going to be seven lanes. Linder and Overland will be five. Stoddard will be three. And Stoddard will also be signalized. And that is all targeted for 2007. So, we are seeing a substantial amount of system upgrade out in this vicinity. There is also a light I believe they are installing this spring at Victory and Meridian Road to also help get that traffic moving out there. As far as our buffers, your ordinance only required 25 feet along Linder. We have allocated 35 feet in width. Stoddard you required 20, we have allocated 30. So, we went beyond. We have approximately 16.38 acres of open space within this project, which us roughly around 14 percent. If we take out our roadway buffers, we are sitting at roughly 12 percent, I believe. We are asking for an R-8 zone, but yet not, obviously, taking advantage of that density. It was necessary in order to get that type of lot distribution. We do meet all of the requirements under the R-8 zoning designation. We have reviewed the staff report. We are in agreement with all of staffs conditions. The only thing that I think came about that I question was we did have a comment from the police department on traffic calming for the collector. When we have these continuous collectors they are circuitous, I think the response was about cut-through traffic. Collectors typically don't -- you know, we have cut-through traffic on local streets through neighborhoods, but not on collectors. I don't think it's the desire of the highway district or the city to put speed bumps or something on collectors that are carrying higher volumes of traffic at a little bit higher speed. So, I wanted to bring that to your attention. Secondly, we do show pedestrian friendly crossings that would -- should slow the traffic down, something like the colored pavers to facilitate getting those kids across the collector roadway safety to the middle school. One of the things that was brought up at the Planning and Zoning Commission was the Christian Family Matters Church facility is located up here on our north boundary. They have an enclosed facility, but they also have outdoor activities. They were concerned about the noise and impact on the development. I came up with -- I think Anna listed all those items and they are in your staff report. I think I came up with I believe six different things to try to mitigate the impact on the church and to protect them from anyone in the future who purchases a home here or a lot or whatever, so that people could not consider them a nuisance. Let's see. I will be working with the neighbors. I need to go on the record -- we do have a ditch that is a service ditch that goes beyond our boundaries, heads up to the north. I Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 53 of 78 will have to be working with those neighbors on that fence -- or that ditch and the fence and berm combination that we will be proposing there. Since that is our last phase, I told them that we do have some time. I have walked the ditch with the church members, Mr. Webber. There is also Mr. Johnson, who lives here. He has asked that we coordinate with him also. So, I'm not sure exactly how we are going to pipe that as far as what location, but we will have to coordinate with them. Anna brought up the issue of the stub street. I brought that up with the highway district in our pre-application conferences. I always meet with them before we solidify a plan with just a rough concept to get their input. It was their belief that this stub street was not necessary. They thought that the uses up here would probably lean more towards a commercial nature and didn't want to see that go through. Mr. Johnson -- De Weerd: Becky, will you, please, summarize. McKay: Yes, ma'am. Mr. Johnson is here tonight and I'd like him to speak about the stub street, because it impacts him probably the most. Do you have any questions? De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for Becky at this time? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Becky. Okay. I have several people who have signed up. When I read your name and indicate the box you noted, if you would like to provide testimony, please, come up at that time. Susan Wildwood is neutral. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Wildwood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Susan Wildwood. I'm an attorney and I'm here on behalf of Christian Family Matters, Incorporated. We would like to say thank you very much to the developer, to Becky, for the memo that she sent in, for those matters going on the record. We have had some discussions this evening for one additional request we have. When my clients talked to me a couple of weeks ago about the project and the work that Becky had done, I listed an additional concern and that would be that even though in the original sales agreement there would be a disclosure with regard to Christian Family Matters Outdoor Bible Fellowship. It's been my experience it's not the first purchaser, but it's subsequent purchasers who come in that may not have notice with regard to the activities. The developer has talked about putting a fence and a berm, so once the trees grow up it's not necessarily the case that those neighbors -- the second or third purchasers, are going to be able to see what's going on over the fence. We suggested, and Becky and Mr. Johnson have agreed, to include a plat note on the final plat that would say that this is Christian Family Matters Outdoor Bible Fellowship. Our only concern -- and it's jointly shared -- is that we may not get Mr. Priester's approval of that note. So, we are going to make our best run at -- and we are requesting that that be a condition as follows: That we -- if we can get the plat note approved by Mr. Priester, that's going to be our preference. Our fall back will be I will work with Becky and Mr. Johnson as far as CC&R information goes, so that we could have those in the CC&Rs, but we did want to make • Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 54 of 78 that request and we had talked about it outside, we think that that's a way of accomplishing everything they are talking about. We really appreciated the fact that they are meeting with us, going to work as far as piping the ditch, walking those property lines, and working through those issues. So, for -- on behalf of Christian Family Matters that's all I have and I would be happy to stand for any questions. De Weerd: All right. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Wildwood: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Don Webber is neutral. Okay. Luke Lance against. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Lance: Absolutely. Luke Lance, speaking in cooperation with Alan Lance at 1370 Eggers Place. Madam Mayor, Council members, I would like to take this opportunity to express my concern about the Bear Creek West Subdivision. We are firm believers that you need to develop new subdivisions into their surroundings. With the exclusion of the existing Bear Creek Subdivision, most of the surrounding area is built out to one or fewer households per acre. The proposed development that passed Planning and Zoning is scheduled to be a staggering eight houses per acre. The existing Bear Creek is not even developed this dense. With proposed 321 homes, there is one outlet for the over 642 estimated new vehicles. The Ten Mile interchange is still at least two years away from completion and we are all aware that the interchange at Meridian and 84 is badly in need of a redesign. I'm not here today in direct opposition of development, that's not realistic. I'm here today in opposition of the density proposed for the new development. While sitting in a Planning and Zoning meeting I listened to the presentation given by Mr. Bigham of the Meridian School District and what he had to say was frightening. Even more frightening was the fact that it was given no noticeable consideration by the Commission. In our letter to the Commission I addressed several issues, including the safety of the Ridenbaugh Canal, emergency response times, sewer capacity, fresh water capacity, and other concerns. We received no response to our letter, which is not acceptable. I have a copy of this letter available for Council's review upon request. We also have never been contacted by the developer and this is just embarrassing. In all the meetings I have been attending lately, in every other instance the developer has worked with the neighboring property owners to make the development as painless as possible. It is apparent that greed is driving this development and the primary beneficiary will be the developer. The bottom line is there are several issues that need to be addressed prior to granting these requests. The failure to address these issues would be a great disservice to the long time residents Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 55 of 78 and property owners in the area. I appreciate the opportunity to address this body and hope that our concerns will be taken into consideration. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Denny Johnson. Signed up neutral. Johnson: My name is Denny Johnson. I live at 1335 West Overland. De Weerd: Thank you. You can pull that up if you would like. Thank you. Johnson: I'm on the northeast corner of this development, this parcel here, and, then, this one as well. My major concern has kind of shifted tonight, because of the discussion with the cutout here coming in my properly. I'm very much opposed to that for several reasons. My buildings, my home and my outbuildings, are on the south end of my property, originally set up pretty open back there with my shop and my -- my equipment storage, tack room, et cetera, is open to the public if there is a cutout put in there. It totally changes my property. Totally changes my privacy. I believe it also greatly decreases the value of my property in the event that a road is required to continue onto Overland Road. For those reasons I'd ask the Council to consider not requiring astub -- road stub onto that property. I do also feel that there is -- you know, there is -- if it is required, there is other places that it can be stubbed out all the way to the west, even to the church property there. So, in either location, you know, I would be equally opposed to it. Other consideration and concerns that I have, you know, as has been mentioned, the traffic situation is difficult and bad now in the mornings that traffic is backed up to Linder and beyond most mornings. With the addition of -- the gentleman said 650 vehicles every morning, it's hard to imagine what that would create there. I was at a meeting -- Council meeting earlier in the year where an employee of the fire department states that right now it's difficult getting their vehicles into these properties at high traffic hours of the day. It would only add to that. There has been the consideration for the church property there that allowed for a reduction in lot size behind them, that R-8 property there, which had the effect of adding to the density to my property there. I don't know exactly how all that happened. I was not here at that time and didn't petition directly to the developer for that. The original plat, as you see it here, shows three lots south of the church. The new plat, which I don't see anywhere here, widens those parcels south of the church there to two lots and increases the lots behind my property there by an additional lot. I guess I -- one of the considerations for that was that their buildings and their church activity is on the south end of their property. The same situation exists for me. My house and my outbuildings and all the activities that I have around the place are on the south end of my property as well. I think that's about all I have. I do have some concerns about the berm size and the fence that they will put back there, but Becky McKay did indicate to us that that's down the road and we can discuss that at a later date. So, thank you for the opportunity. Any questions? Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 56 of 78 De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Any questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Okay. I have R.L. Riley. Riley: Good evening. Dick Riley, 2707 South Linder Road. I guess the main thing I'd like to talk about here is a little arrogance. As you look around the room and see the consultants and the developers who are here, their heads are down, they are looking at things, not paying attention, as if it's a foregone conclusion, and I feel like since this -- the very first notification came out; I have really been attentive to this. I have only seen one. And the last few meetings there haven't been any notifications. I noticed that there was a notification on the board out there. I went by today, looked at it, and one of neighbors came up and, hey, do you know there is a meeting tonight to talk about this some more? And that's the way I found out about it. Earlier in this meeting they were talking about very small lots, people who are empty nesters want small places to live and that's great. What we are talking about here is bumping up to homes that are existing and people have purchased and invested in property that are very large lots and I think what we need to look at here is expanding some of the perimeter lots in this development to half acre, spreading it out, so that the transition -- not just a butt up against Ridenbaugh Canal and having low density in there, what I would consider low density. I moved out of low density. I knew where I was moving. I knew what was going to happen with the roads. I'm not trying to stop the development, I'm just saying that we really need to take consideration the fact that removing and bumping up against five acre lots, ten acre lots -- and I can guarantee you that the taxes I'm paying on my lots are a hell of a lot more than those people are going to be paying right there individually. Traffic is going to increase. I understand that. In our very first meeting I was assured by most means that all development was going to stay east and slowly work its way to Linder. Linder is not going to have a light for a long time, as we talked about. Overland Road is backed up clear to Linder in the mornings. I have lived there at my present property for three years. When I first moved in there, before Bear Creek One was done, you could drive right up about almost to the stop light. Now, in the mornings we are backed clear down to Linder. They are going to take care of that when they expand out to Linder, but until that light comes in I don't think that we should put some -- well, I think we should put some restrictions on the development being to the east of the subdivision. Interest rates are starting to go up. What happens when interest rates rise, big houses, big developments, those houses fall, the pricing and sales. So, what do you do, you go to smaller lots, the patio homes. And that was a big shift. Today I was sitting back there and went, wow, when did this change? It's just not been very consistent. And Ijust -- I just feel like I'm getting hoodwinked here a little bit, that we need to really consider the people who have invested their time and effort and want to live the rural lifestyle or as best we can and now we are going to put this development in and not too long from now the property on the other side of the street is going to be in the same situation and we are going to have a lot of houses, a lot of cars, and I really think you should take a look at transitioning. De Weerd: Thank you. Riley: Any questions? Meridian City Council ~ t April 4, 2006 Page 57 of 78 Rountree: I have none. Bird: Mr. Riley, where do you live? Riley: Linder Road up in Ariel Estates. Bird: That's across from Linder? Riley: Yeah. Bird: Across from there. Riley: I'm up here. Bird: Yeah. Okay. Riley: And did I hear her say that it's an arterial now? ACRD? This is now five lanes? Linder is going to be five lanes? Is that correct? Did somebody say that? De Weerd: Yes, I would believe so. Riley: From Overland to Victory? De Weerd: I'm sure probably at the ultimate, at build out, especially once they get an overpass there. Riley: Just maybe a small pet peeve and I don't know if it's here, but I heard there was a representative from ACHD here, is that -- they are here? Great. You know, when they do little cutouts for subdivisions and they take their 15 feet and put their new pavement in and all that, you get a motorcycle rider going down those roads and they put the pavement in, it's a horrible job. It really is. You guys really need to get some guys out there to take a look at it. It sucks. It really does. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. I don't think it's always ACHD's issue. We also have Ross Nichols signed up against. Nichols: Ross Nichols, 1520 West Victory Road down here. The last statement -- the last statement just about took everything I had to say, but that -- it does bother me and know we can't stop it and I know you guys you want to suck in everything clear out to Lake Hazel and beyond, get a big entity here, if you will, but I think personally, with this one here, if they don't have the roads done, this traffic situation is bad out there right now. It is bad. And I truly believe -- I know we can't stop it, but somebody ought to stop and say let's get the ACRD bit guy out there and get something done with the roads before we do anymore. We are in a subdivision up above, we have covenants, we have acreages, we have animals, and, you know, everybody wants to move out of town, be Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 58 of 78 out in the country, and one thing that really upsets me the most about them, the first thing they do is build a damn big box around the yard, I might just as well stayed in town. I see all that great land going to waste and it's just confusing the situation with -- the situation and these types of things, it's a bummer and it's gotten bad with the Bear Creek so far, and it looks to me like it's going to get a lot worse. I know you don't have any questions for me, but thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. That is all that signed up to testify. Is there anyone else that would like to testify? J. Johnson: My name is Jeanette Johnson and I live at 1335 West Overland Road and it is these two pieces of property. Ten acres. Our home is located on the south side of the east five acres. South end. And I feel that there is need for appropriate transition between property of that size acreage and moving into 320 some homes in a subdivision. We have lived on that property for 17 years. We have raised four children there. We are expecting our first grandchild in the fall. We want to live on that property on our ten acres. I know that the plans say that it will probably be residential homes, but for me it's our home that we plan to stay on for a long time and so I feel like there are some important considerations to be made. I think one story homes that would touch the property line of ours would be appropriate. I believe that lot size and number is important and I believe that it's important not to put a stub street that would bring traffic into the back of our property, our backyard. We were told tonight that -- excuse me -- that if they put a stub street in, that they are not allowed to put a fence where that stub street is, so it would be open right onto our property and it seems to me it would be inviting people to come onto our property from that subdivision. So, again, I want to request that appropriate decisions be made to transition from the idea of putting in the subdivision to the properties and the homes that already exist. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions, Council? Thank you. Hello. Prather: Good evening. James Prather. 2595 South Linder, Meridian. De Weerd: Okay. Prather: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmen. Not to reiterate, but as a matter of point, I live right -- just two up from this -- I live right here. I have been in the waiting room and no one's talked to me. And this is my business. And I would have enjoyed and appreciated just some dialogue, because my concern is -- I think this is a good project. And we have some issues with density and we have issues with ingress- egress, traffic, I understand that, as each development would. But what I am concerned with -- and this is what I would like to say with emphasis, is with respect to transition from one use to another has been -- has already been spoken several times by other -- Mr. Lance and Mr. Riley and others, is what consideration is being given from the Council to those who are already in the neighborhood? We have spent a great deal of time, energy, certainly money in making this our home. My thought is could there be a little better transition coming up from the southern part as it reaches -- if I can just show Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 59 of 78 you -- what is on the southerly border right in this -- right along here and, then, coming up here, to preserve what we have put so much into. Now, I'm not asking like for like. I'm not saying an acre for an acre or five acres to five acres, but I think along that southerly border asking for half acre lots is not too much for the developer to give. Especially in light of the few lots that he will give up, he can put inside -- inside internally. It's already been spoken today and represented that they are on the low end of the density. I think they can make up whatever they lost. This is what I have done in the past. They can make up whatever they lose in the south and put it inside. But to ask for 9,000 square foot lots, maybe up to -- I think there is a couple at 15, maybe one at 17, all I'm asking for is 22,000 square foot lots. So, in consideration, I would ask the board to give us as much consideration in the neighborhood as you're giving the developer. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Bradshaw: Madam Mayor, Councilmen, my name is Alan Bradshaw. I live at 2730 South Linder Road and I live in Eggers Subdivision and I have a lot right there where the elbow is and I live in a lot beside it and forgive me if I'm redundant, but the lot size is an issue and I look at one subdivision that I don't think was mentioned by the young lady that represents the developer, is Aspine Cove Subdivision. That subdivision was well thought out, well planned. Most of us were -- probably weren't around when they plotted that and set that up. Some of you may have been. But that was well done, well thought out, and all of us have probably driven through that subdivision and thought, wow, what a thing to be proud of, what a subdivision, what a community, an area to be proud of that really enhances Meridian. And so just consider the lot sizes. They are all one acre lots in Eggers and, then, five acres across the street. And my last point would be that Ijust -- I'm not sure how they are going to fit 320 families in that swimming pool. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Okay. Would the developer's representative like to come up for wrap-up remarks? If you will, please, restate your name for the record. McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. I will just kind of go through these as quickly as possible and I have new batteries now. Mrs. Wildwood asked us to include that note stating -- recognizing the existence of the church facility with the outdoor activities and so forth. We did agree to that, obviously, subject to the Ada County engineer's approval, because he's very particular on what is allowed on a plat and what is not and it is governed by state law and so I just don't want to get crossways with him. Mr. Lance talked about the density in this particular subdivision. As the Council well knows, the densities continue to go up, up, and up as land prices, lot prices, home prices, escalate, improvement costs escalate. This particular subdivision is on the really low end with the 2.74 dwelling units per acre. The traffic impact. Obviously, this will impact traffic. Luckily there are improvements that are planned in this vicinity that will add additional capacity and help alleviate some of the problems. And, hopefully, ITD will support the Council and the Mayor in getting the Ten Mile interchange and that Locust Grove overpass installed as soon as possible. As far as the schools are Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 60 of 78 concerned, we were sensitive concerning the schools. Obviously, we worked with the school district to provide them a middle school site that they desperately needed south of the interstate. They will also benefit from us extending the sewer and the water to this area and building the collector. It was brought up about sewer and water capacity. Your Black Cat Trunk is coming across the freeway this fall is the plan. It's going to be a 36 inch trunk. It will go through the property to the west. I believe JUB Engineers, your staff, and that particular developer are looking at a particular route. When it comes to Overland Road, it will be picked up, pulled through, all the way down this collector here and, then, that will allow that lift station that was very contentious a few years ago, to come off line and, then, that sewer will extend in a southeasterly fashion to help alleviate some of the sewer capacity issues that have plagued the area south of the freeway and to the east. As far as the Ridenbaugh Canal, we will have to fence along the Ridenbaugh. Mr. Johnson indicated that he would be consistent with what he did at Bear Creek and go with like a wrought iron fencing. The pathway would, obviously, be on the inside of that fence, so that we would not have any ditch hazard. The issue was brought up with me with the neighbors. We did have a neighborhood meeting, as required. We held it here at the Council chambers. We had quite a few people. We do only notify those that are within 300 feet and those that, obviously, sometime the neighbors will tell their adjoining neighbor about the meeting, but we did have a good turnout and I think we were here for about two and a half hours taking into consideration comments and concerns. Mr. Johnson on this stub street. You know, we try to guess these stub streets. Sometimes uses and designations change and we are wrong. Sometimes we look back and wish that we would have put them in. You just never know. Obviously, Denny Johnson is opposed to the stub street at that location. His home, his shop, is located to the rear of his lot. So, the impact of that stub street would, obviously, be upon him. I gave him the pros and the cons of the stub street. The reduction in number of lots. We reduced the number of lots next to the church from three to two. We did do some shifting around this way and around that way to minimize the number of lots next to the church. We did go from I think five next to Denny Johnson to six. I will be glad to look at that and try to shift further around that bend and minimize the lots that we back up to him as much as possible. I did shift this street south another ten feet to get 145 and 150 depth right here. I can also try to shift this corner a little bit more to try to get better separation. The developer's agreed that he will build a berm between two and three feet, plus six foot vinyl fence and the neighbors want the vinyl fencing. So, we are trying to work with them on those issues and the ditch. Concerning Mr. Riley and the transition along this southern boundary. We have the Ridenbaugh Canal here. We didn't just accept that -- can I just finish? Oh, I'm sorry. We didn't just accept that the Ridenbaugh would be a natural buffer, we did look at trying to place our largest lots along this southern boundary. And if I could, just to kind of demonstrate -- just to demonstrate the sizes of these particular parcels, this is 13.3, 11.8, 12.4, 14.2, 13.2. This one is 11,720. This is 143 foot depth. This is 164 feet in depth. This is 134, 161. I have got 17,000, 16, 13, 12, 17, 16, 14, 13, 19, 12, 13, and 19 and 16 here. All of my largest lots and my deepest lots are located there. I did look at where their homes were located. I looked at those distances. I brought an aerial photo I can submit for the record in trying to figure out what our distances would be. Some of these homes are 225 feet from the rear of their home to the rear of our lot line. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 61 of 76 Some are 170, 170, 180. This particular home located across Linder is 235 feet. The closest home to us is the one located right here in this little triangular area next to Linder and the Ridenbaugh Canal where we are 130 feet. I made great effort, but, obviously, you know, we can't match acre for acre. And when we are bringing sewer that type of distance, we have to bring water from Overland all the way down Linder to loop this system; we have to have a density that will support central services, as you well know. I think that this is a good project. We have spent about over a year looking at this project, meeting with the neighborhood -- I have walked the ditches with the church. I have talked to Mr. Webber on the phone. I spent all the previous time of this -- or the earlier time in this meeting talking to the neighbors, discussing issues, seeing where we could find some middle ground. Anytime we are changing the character of an area we are going to get resistance. This particular project is a good project. It is low density when we look at the scheme of things and what we are seeing out there in this urban residential type development. We have got good open space and good amenities. And I think this is a project that Council should be able to support. It's phased in. Everybody always thinks that you're going to have 320 homes in here immediately. It takes a few years for projects to build out, as you well know. This is a good project. Thank you. De Weerd: Council, questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Assuming you get the affirmative, what's the phasing? I know you can't give a specific time line and have indicated which ones would be in sequence, but, you know, about when, based on the current market situation? McKay: Based on the current market situation, my understanding is we would go into design and the first phase would be constructed this year. Based on how long it's taking for plans to process through agencies and so forth, I would say the subdivision would start construction early fall, would be the best case. Then, we would be going up against the winter trying to pave. If we got paved in this 2006 year, then, they would find home start -- would start going up in -- sometime in 2007. It usually takes us nine months to a year to have homes going up. And the reason that we are extending that collector all the way through was that sewer is going to have to go down that roadway and that's what made the most sense. Plus, we get the road in there, then, if the school accelerates their schedule, that roadway is there. It will also provide another interconnection between Stoddard and Linder. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Any other questions? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 62 of 78 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Becky, your comments about the concerns and issues with providing water and sewer and some of the transition issues have been discussed, at least on the southern portion and eastern portion. Are the concerns from your perspective of an engineering nature or economic, meaning, you know, if lot sizes and densities decreased on the southern portion or eastern portion, is it an economic issue as to whether or not those are changed or an engineering issue, meaning you need this specific density? McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, it's an economic issue. Density is always considered an economic issue, because you have to have a certain amount of density to support bringing the central facilities, building continuous collectors and recreational facilities and, obviously, making it pencil. If you're talking about enlarging these and, then, decreasing the size within -- I think is what you're trying to get to. When we laid this out we had a specific target of a percentage distribution of lots and from what has been successful at Bear Creek, the -- that's what they wanted to try to mirror here, the mixture. We have -- the smallest lots are located here and, then, they get larger as we go this way, as we go south and as we go east. And this particular distribution of lots has not changed, sir. I think there was talk about things have changed and this is identical to what we have always shown everyone from the very beginning when it was a hand sketch at the neighborhood meeting. In fact, I even dropped lots in here and made these bigger. If we were talking a 17,000 square foot lot or a 22,000 square foot lot, it's going to have a very large expensive home on it. I mean, you know, you're kind of cutting hairs. If I had 5,000 or 6,000 or 7,000 or even eight or nine right through here, I would think that the Council would have a concern. You know, Becky, these are acre lots and, you know, these lots you have got here are 100 feet deep or 110, you know, we think you need a transition. We felt that we had done a good transition here. It's not that often that we do lots that are 17, 16, 15, 14 thousand square foot with central sewer and, you know, central water in today's market. They are just so expensive. Your 8,000 square foot lots are going for over 100,000 apiece. So, we are having, you know, a tough time trying to keep that market affordable. Borton: Okay. De Weerd: I guess, Becky, we have had these transition areas and, you know, I agree that you can have a mixture, but there is nothing wrong with a half acre lot in the city limits and I know staff gets sick of me saying that, but as a transition -- and we have seen it along other city densities, excuse me, backing up to our county rural areas. That is how they start transitioning and building the higher densities towards the center of the subdivisions. So, it isn°t unheard of and it's becoming more common, because we are growing out to some of those county subdivisions and they do want to see transitions and I think we have seen some successful transitioning going on, so -- Meridian Ciry Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 63 of 78 McKay: Yes, Madam Mayor, I don't disagree with you that transitioning is important. I have always been a proponent of that. I think it -- the thing we have to be careful is that these lots aren't priced completely out of the marketplace. A half acre lot with central sewer and water, I mean you don't see very much of them. The price on that, a couple hundred thousand dollars. I mean acre lots are going for almost 400,000 dollars. We are seeing some of that in different areas. So, you know, if you got stuck with a bunch of half acre lots here, you know, can the market absorb those, is there a market there that can pay 200, 250? I guess that's -- that's my question. I just want to make sure that we have got something that's economically feasible for the marketplace, because it's just gone -- you know; it's skyrocketed further than we have ever thought it would be. So, that's -- I just want to keep that in mind. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Becky, I, too, feel along the lines of the Mayor, that I -- I have some real concerns up on the north end with the gentleman and his wife that have the ground up there. wish -- I hope you can give him some larger lots. When you get up in the 18, 19 thousand square foot -- 22,000 is a half acre. You know, I never have figured out how R-4 a quarter acre is an 8,000 square foot lot. It isn't a quarter. I would like to see maybe a couple of those lots get eliminated and get in a little larger along there, getting in the 18 to 20 thousand range. And I know it has to pencil out, but, you know, I'm not the one that went out there and paid the farmer millions of dollars. When you buy ground you got to consider that. And I will tell you that in my opinion Meridian don't have a lot of locations where you're going to see million dollar -- million and a half homes. We don't have the location. Anyway, I -- and I understand the transition for the people to -- you know, they have been out there on their one acre to five acre lots and enjoying it. But in the reverse of that, some developer is going to come to them and they are going to have like we had come back to us today, people that complained all the time on R-4 wanting to put an R-8 on their existing property when a developer went to it, so -- but I'd like to see if you couldn't get those lots along the south end and definitely up on the north end a little larger. McKay: Okay. Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, I will be glad to try to shift those around and work with Mr. Johnson. He was correct that it was to his detriment that we reduced the number next to the church. It did add one additional lot. I had those wider. I think I have got the room that I can shift around a little further. I would be glad to do that and try to reduce the number of lots backing up to him. I guess what the Council needs to tell me is -- you know, we have talked about 22,000, 17,000, 18,000, 20,000. If the Council is wanting to set some type of a minimum here, that just, you know, keep it within reason. I feel that 22 is way too big. That's abig -- big lot. That's a big yard. But what you feel comfortable with, if you ask us to adjust around and set a minimum there along that perimeter, then, obviously, that's your prerogative and we will abide by it. u Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 64 of 78 Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. • Bird: You know, Becky, you have always -- you have always been very fair about transitions. What do you think's fair? McKay: I think anytime -- Bird: I don't think 11, 12 thousand square foot is fair. McKay: No, sir. Absolutely not. I think when -- you know, when we are getting up into that 16, 17 thousand square feet, that's a pretty big lot. Pretty deep. Pretty wide. Can accommodate a very large home. You know, they, obviously, want to have something, you know, that's comparable in value, so I would say, you know, that 16, 17 thousand is a big lot. Bird: It is a big lot. McKay: But, like Isaid -- I mean that's to be determined by the Council. Bird: I could live with a minimum like that myself. De Weerd: Any other questions for Becky? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council? Rountree: Another comment? De Weerd: I'm sorry, sir. Okay. Bird: I don't -- just wanted you to recognize him, that he put his hand up. De Weerd: Okay. Anna, did you have something? Canning: Just one quick comment. The comment was made that you can't put a solid fence across a stub road. I'm not sure that that's completely correct. We have done it in the past. The trick is just in the setback of the fence. The fence needs to be rebuilt, so that it's staggered back once the road is put through. So, I just wanted to make sure that that was correct information to you. De Weerd: I'm sorry that once the wrap up is done -- unless Council would like to take additional testimony. Okay. • • Meridian Ciry Council April 4, 2006 Page 65 of 78 Rountree: Madam Mayor, if there is no further questions, I move that we close the Public Hearing for Items 21, 22 and 23. Bird: Second. Rountree: Excuse me. 20, 21, and 22. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the public hearings on Items 20 through 22. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: My concerns really haven't changed and I understand the economics of it, trying to make this thing pencil out, but I still have the concerns raised by many of the neighbors here, recognized by Mrs. McKay and by staff and Council about the transition issues and I agree with Councilman Bird about issues on the north. My particular concern addresses the south and the east. Those lots to the south are an acre -- it was my understanding are about an acre, so south of the Ridenbaugh and to the east I think some portions are five acres. I just -- I just have a problem with that type of transition as presently presented with this existing plat. I don't think it's adequate. I think there was some -- some requests for specifics. Perhaps, for what it's worth, I -- those are full acre lots to the south, perhaps a 22,000 or maybe 20,000 square feet on the southern border properties -- close to a half an acre and creating some transition as you move north. I understand it's difficult for the developer to perhaps make that adjustment. It's difficult for the homeowners to the south to see anything probably less than an acre or less than a few acres north of the Ridenbaugh Canal, but there is some compromise done as we develop and everyone knows it and perhaps when everyone's equally unhappy maybe that's when you know you got the right result. For what it's worth that's my concern with the existing conditions. I don't know if -- it sounds like the applicant might be willing to come back with some amendments at least to the north in light of Councilman Bird's discussion. Those property lines might be shifted. So, I don't know if this is something that might come back with some changes. Those are my thoughts. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Certainly this whole idea and concept of transition is not new. We have dealt with it numerous times and usually, probably, as Councilman Borton indicates, to no one's necessary satisfaction, other than we think we have done a good job. I detect a ! ~ Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 66 of 78 willingness on the part of the applicant to take a look at a minimum size lot requirement on the south side and a willingness to do some lot line movement on the north side as parcel abuts larger subdivision or acreages, however you want to describe them, in the county. I don't know what that magic number is. I think a half an acre is probably higher than we have required in the past. I'm trying to recall what we did off of Locust Grove not too many months ago, but probably prior to Joe being on the Council, but it was a very similar situation. De Weerd: Off of Eagle or Locust Grove? Rountree: Eagle or Locust Grove. I can't remember. Bird: It was Locust Grove. Rountree: In Locust Grove. I'm willing to consider a reasonable recommendation that Council might have in terms of the square footage for the lots on the south and I don't know that we necessarily need to establish that minimum size on the north, but just take a look at possibly reducing a lot or two. Canning: Are you looking for square footages for Kingsbridge? Is that the one that you were thinking of? Rountree: That's the one. Yeah. De Weerd: That's the one I thought of. Canning: That one started off with I think 12,000 square foot lots and they went up to 17 and, then, I think they had two one acre parcels eventually. But those -- those did come in at a much higher -- they were shown as low density on the Comp Plan and they started off with an R-3 zoning designation. Rountree: Right. Having said that, if we can come to some number and direction that we can provide the applicant, I would rescind my motion to close the hearing and move to reopen the hearings and continuing the hearings until such time as the applicant can provide that information to us, so -- Bird: Is that a motion? Rountree: No. But I can make it such if somebody can come up with a magic number. The one I wrote down was 17,000 as a minimum. I have got everything from five to 21, so -- Bird: A minimum of 17? Rountree: Minimum of -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 67 of 78 Bird: On the south and east or just the south? Rountree: Just the south. Bird: I would agree with that, Councilman Rountree. And I know that -- I'm sure that Becky can work out with Mr. Thompson or -- what we need there and I surely think we need to have something done that way. I would second a motion, if you want to make it, to reopen this and let's let them have a shot and we can set a parameter of what we want for a minimum. De Weerd: Okay. So, do I have a motion to reopen the Public Hearing? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we reopen the public hearings for Items 20, 21 and 22 and continue those hearings with the direction to the applicant that the Council would like to see a redesign of the southern portion of the preliminary plat to indicate a minimum 17,000 square foot per lot, again, on the south side and on the north side that the applicant would work with Mr. Johnson to reduce back to a minimum of five lots that border that homeowner and that property owner's ten acres and to reschedule the hearing for the 18th or 25th? 25th? April 25th. April 25th. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Just remember you guys are doing it to yourself. Okay. So, I do have a motion to continue this to 4/25. Any -- no. No discussion. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to make an obvious point even more clear, though, so that is -- the applicant is not to include a stub street on the northern property, is -- Rountree: Correct. Canning: Okay. Item 23: Public Hearing: VAC 06-003 Request for a Vacation of a drainage easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 by Creekside, Inc. - 2484 East Garber Drive: De Weerd: No. Okay. Okay. Item 23 is Public Hearing VAC 06-003. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- as soon as my PowerPoint catches up with my page down. This is a vacation request for Champion Park Subdivision No. 3. It's Lots 2 and 3, Block 18. They had to do a property boundary adjustment to Meridian Ciry Council April 4, 2006 Page 68 of 78 accommodate some -- some -- it's getting late. Here we go. Sorry. Had to do a property boundary adjustment to accommodate a couple houses and, then, they need to now shift the side yard easement that was underneath the former lot line. Staff is recommending approval of the vacation, with the understanding that a new easement needs to be recorded in its place. And with that I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Is Becky the applicant? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there is only one condition of approval and that condition being that they record a new side yard easement. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Did Gary Smith name these streets? De Weerd: No. Bird: That's Borah coaches. De Weerd: Don Hutt did and he is a graduate from Borah High. Bird: I knew who did. Rountree: No applicant, no testimony? Bird: I guess everything -- is she --? De Weerd: Okay. Canning: By Creekside, Inc. I don't know who that is. I suspect the applicant was probably a builder. Bird: There is no issues, is there, Anna? Canning: No. And there is only one condition and that's -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: You have asked for public testimony and nobody is -- I move we close AZ -- or VAC 06-003. • Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 69 of 78 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 23. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve VAC 06-003 with staff report. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 23. If there is no further discussion, roll call vote. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 27: Public Hearing: AZ 06-002 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 0.43 acres from RUT to L-O (Limited Office District) for Strada Bellissima Subdivision ®utparcel by Strada Bellissima, LLC - 3015 South Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 24 through 26 were moved to the beginning of our agenda, so I will open the Public Hearing on Item 27, AZ 06-002, with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this project is called Strada Bellissima Subdivision Outparcel. Kind of hard to see the blue outline next to the purple, but that's -- the property in question is this one right here. It is located at 3015 South Meridian Road and this is just an annexation and zoning request. The site is surrounded on three sides by land zoned L-O as part of the Strada Bellissima application. And when this came through we asked the applicant specifically when they came through with the lot design and how the buildings would be placed in this southern property, we asked them specifically to accommodate this outparcel in their design. They did do that. It was probably about a year ago. And so we are confident this outparcel will be completely integrated into the Strada Bellissima project. I was thankful that the applicants at Pinnacle and Pinnacle were -- worked with us on this outparcel and it's very satisfying. This one little piece of property is very satisfying to see it come in and know that we have planned for it and that it will be completely integrated into the fabric of Strada Bellissima. The Commission did recommend approval. They heard the item on March 2nd, 2006. Chris Hobbs spoke in favor of the application. No one Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 70 of 78 • opposed it or commented. There were no key issues of discussion or key changes to staff recommendation and to staffs knowledge there are no outstanding issues. You do have Findings for approval before you tonight. There is a development agreement recommendation and that's just that the lot not take direct access to Victory Road. And as I said before, the design of this little office project will accommodate internal access. De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: With that I will answer any questions De Weerd: Any questions, Council? Is the applicant here? It was a good guess. Hobbs: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council members. My name is Chris Hobbs with Pinnacle Engineers, 12552 West Executive Drive, Boise. And we are in agreement with staff comments and the conditions as they exist and I'm just here to answer any questions that you might have. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: No. De Weerd: Okay. Hobbs: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Thank you. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close Public Hearing AZ 06-002. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve Item 27. Mr. Berg, roll call. Oh, I'm sorry. Closing the Public Hearing. I'm thinking of 6:45 a.m. Sorry about that. All those in favor of closing the Public Hearing on this item, please, say aye. Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I'm sorry. Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 71 of 78 :~ Bird: I move we approve AZ 06-002, request for annexation for Strada Bellissima -- De Weerd: Bellissima. Bird: I'm not even going to -- Subdivision Outparcel and to include staff and applicant's comments and pass the Findings and Conclusions of Law. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Thank you. I have a motion to approve now, Item 27. Roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 28: Public Hearing: Amendments to the Pawnbroker Ordinance: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 28 is a Public Hearing for Pawnbroker Ordinance. Who is giving the introduction to this? Mr. Chief, is that you? Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess this one falls to me, as, apparently, we had initiated this in conjunction with the Leads Online format that we brought before the Council at the start of the budget year. To make this short, sweet, and simple at this point, I've had a chance to review all the comments that were received in from our licensed pawnbrokers at this time, as well as the city clerk. I do agree that there are a number of revisions that we need to look at and start initiating at this time before we move much further on this. Four of those specifically would include the time of renewal, changing it to the calendar year, as opposed to the time of licensing. That was a request specifically by our clerk's office. Also, number two would be to provide an exemption for transactions of gold and silver bullion and coin, as those seem to be problematic for both of our licensed pawnbrokers at this time, considering that the old ordinance exempted those items out and we put additional times onto those at this point. Also, need to revisit our records section under 3-5-6, specifically subsection at A, C, and D, the written records, retention of records, and transmission of records, I think we need to clarify a little bit of language and work with them as well on that. And, then, number four, in order to help move this along, I was thinking we need to meet with them and come up with a better working method to -- to help them to be able to describe the music CDs, DVDs, videos, and records, that type of material on there so it's not so cumbersome. There seems to be a lot of confusion at this time. I have had a chance to talk with both of them this evening, they seem to be open to that. And at this point I would recommend, if we could, possibly continuing this Public Hearing for at least two weeks, so we could get this done. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 72 of 78 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would agree with everything the chief said. And is there any way, chief, that we'd continue this -- that we could have the ordinance prepared with the legal staff -- yourself and legal staff and the applicants and the clerk, so that we can bring the ordinance revision at that time forward, too? Musser: That's what I'm looking to do, Councilman Bird. I would like to have everything done -- if I need to go over and kidnap counsel and have him over there with us to work on it. I think we can get it done up. I've already spent some time looking at what we could possibly do with some rewording changes to get it in there and I hope I haven't added more to the plate of our counselor at this point, but there are a couple of items that I did find in reference to the comments that came in that were of concern to me, but perhaps Council has some additional comment as well on it. Baird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Baird. Baird: Members of the Council, as you know, we are all pretty swamped right now, but fortunately for this issue, our capable Assistant City Attorney Emily Cain has been working on this and we will do what we can to make her available and I think having her meet with you and the interested parties would be a very good idea. I think she's got a good grasp on it and can work with you, but I would advocate for at least three weeks before we bring back a new draft, just to allow the meetings to happen and the drafting and the letting the 25th. De Weerd: And since we don't want anything until May 2nd anyway. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing from the experts, I would move -- De Weerd: Mr. Bird, there are people out here. Baird: They have waited patiently. Bird: Oh, I'm sorry. De Weerd: They certainly are not here because they enjoy listening to us talk. Rountree: Oh, they didn't? Bird: Aren't they here to -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 73 of 78 De Weerd: I don't think so. It's an assumption. Bird: Sorry. I apologize. De Weerd: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? I see several. Sir. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Stewart: Yes. My name us Terry Stewart. I live at 5867 West Columbia in Nampa, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Stewart: My comment -- I agree with what Mr. Musser has said and -- he's taken away several of my comments on the deal. De Weerd: Good job, chief. Stewart: He diffused the situation before it got out. He must be doing his job. The only really thing I have is the time frame on how long it's going to take us to get to be proficient with these computers that he's going to force us to buy and that kind of stuff, because we are not particularly computer literate. The other thing is on CDs and DVDs, I require now that they be in the original cases. I don't take in singles and that kind of thing. I'd like to see some kind of provision in the ordinance that we do that. People in cars have a tendency to put them in folders that type of thing. If they are not in the original cases most people don't take them. Something may be addressed on that fact. Guns. The only thing I have there is that most guns have manufacturers, models, serial numbers and types of guns and the calibers. That's what I required for our logs in our FBI and ATF forms and I think they are wanting us to require a -- the finish of the guns, which, you know, that's just another item that has to be taken care of, but if that's what they require, that's what they require. That's all I have today. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Counsel, Mr. Baird, do you have the numbers of the people here so you can make sure Emily contacts them? Detective Taylor, do you have anything you would like to add? I know you're probably here for this item as well. Taylor: I do. My name is Mark Taylor, I'm with the Meridian Police Department. I have kind of headed up the Leads Online program. Madam Mayor, City Council Members. This is an important program from my standpoint. The majority of the crimes that I work are property crimes and this has been a very beneficial program for us to use. To date -- starting to use the program about last July -- we have been able to recover approximately 40,000 dollars worth of stolen merchandise through this program. I have been able to identify suspects and the property that's been pawned and the majority of the pawn shops are in Boise. Currently -- and I understand Mr. Stewart's comment in relation to the guns. Any information available in reference to weapons is Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 74 of 78 important to us in this program. For example, I was tracking a weapon not too long ago, which was a pistol that was nickel plated. I was able to add that information into the program and specifically look for a nickel plated .357 Magnum. So, that narrowed my search down. In reference to the program from the pawnbroker's standpoint the program is very easy to access, it's very user friendly, and there is one screen that they go to specifically that's called ticket assistance and it's very self-explanatory and they are able to add the information of the person who is pawning the item, which includes their name and date of birth and Social Security number and drivers license ID, all that good stuff. And at the bottom portion of that, then, they are able to put in the description of the item that's being pawned or multiple items. And, then, it's just a click on an icon and it sends that information directly to the company that manages the system. The benefits of this is that we have that information in the system within 24 hours after it's pawned and from my vantage point it's important for us to be able to access that information as soon as we get the report, which is usually two to three days from time that the patrol officer has taken that report, so we can immediately access it. And the other advantage if the item hasn't been pawned at that point, then, I can flag that information by a report number and it will run -- automatically run a daily check on that -- on that item that I'm looking for and it will flag me if it's located an item. So, from my vantage point it's a huge time saving for us and for the victims that are involved in these crimes. It gives us a little better chance of recovering that property for them. In agreement I was able to review the ordinance and there were some changes that I recommended as well and I think that they will be beneficial for the city, as well as the merchants that are involved in this. That's all I have. Do you have any questions? De Weerd: Detective, do I understand that you will be providing training? Taylor: I can. And I will be happy to go to the pawnbrokers and show them how to set up the program. I work closely with the employee at Leads Online, her name is Ashley. I speak with her occasionally and they are very willing to help anytime there is a question. They are very quick in response. And if you do have a question, you'll get a little icon on the server and it will -- it's a contact button and they will respond to that and every time I have ever called I have been able to get help with the program. So, they are very good to work with. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: And don't get my comments misconstrued here. I think -- I see your side of this issue. I am a bit. concerned about the other crime that can occur because of this and not knowing what goes on in a pawn situation, because it's been 45 years since have pawned anything. I observed the process in Boise just to get a sense of what's happening and you have indicated some of the types of information that's required. It's pretty extensive, to and including a fingerprint, thumb print. So, I think there is some Meridian City Council ~ • April 4, 2006 Page 75 of 78 other victims that could fall prey to this process that are unknowing and have really no way of being notified if, in fact, the private provider of this -- somebody gets into their data base and steals my name, my Social Security number, my address, my driver's license number, and my thumb print. And I just caution that this identify theft thing has got a lot of people paranoid and I'm not saying it's because I'm paranoid, but I can see that we've all had it drummed into our heads recently, we don't give our vital statistics out to just anybody and Idon't -- I don't know, is there some protection in the system for me as the consumer of a pawnbrokerage? Taylor: Mr. Rountree, your point's well taken and I have covered some of those questions along with Ashley that works for Leads Online. It's a very secure website. It's open to law enforcement only. I'm not going to say that it couldn't be hacked into, as well as our bank account information or anything else. I mean it's a risk that we take. I feel pretty secure with the website. I know that they have taken a lot of provisions to make that a secure site and open only to law enforcement. Passwords are changed on a continual basis. I have to renew my password about once a month and there are times that I forget my password. If that happens there is also an icon I have to click on. They will send that directly to my a-mail and only my a-mail. And there is no phone call. There is no verbalization of that password over the phone. There, again, the electronic age, I'll stand by the program as far as I can in knowing what I know about it and I feel good about it. The thumb print was, actually, one of the items that we requested to be eliminated out of the ordinance, so that we didn't have to go the extra step. That also was a concern with our merchants here in town, so -- Rountree: I guess my general observation is it seemed to me that the process was a significant deterrent to a criminal with any degree of intelligence. Taylor: Right. Rountree: You're going to catch some really stupid people -- Taylor: Oh, yeah. And believe me -- Rountree: Which is probably most of them, but -- Taylor: And, granted, surprisingly enough, I'm working -- I told the chief tonight that I'm watch a particular individual that lives here in town right now and I have watched this gentleman over the past 45 days now pawn 82 items, all construction-related tools, as well as a construction trailer, so -- but I can't catch him -- Rountree: And he's never driven a nail, that's what you're telling us? Taylor: Exactly. Exactly. So, the program has some wonderful uses and tools available to us in law enforcement. And the good part is most bad buys aren't familiar that we have this tool and we don't readily advertise it. So, I think it will be a real benefit to us in the future, so -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 76 of 78 Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comments? Watson: My name is Paul Watson. I live at 424 West Broadway Avenue here in Meridian. Madam Mayor, City Council. I agree with Mr. Musser that there are things that we got to work out. It's going to take some time. I don't think any of us are trying to be negative. None of us want to condone theft, okay? Everybody has their privacy. Because someone pawns does not mean they are a thief, okay? And we are willing to work with whatever we do. If you have no questions, that's the only comment I have. De Weerd: Okay. Watson: After being here all this time I had to -- De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Thanks for you patience. De Weerd: We wanted you to have your day at City Council. Okay. Mr. Berg. Berg: Madam Mayor, I just have a process question. We amended the ordinance to make -- establish the fee by the City Council and I presume it's by a resolution, but we already have a fee in the ordinance. I was just curious if we have to do a Public Hearing for that fee or if we can just establish it with a resolution, because we are just transferring it out of the ordinance onto a fee schedule. Baird: Madam Mayor and Mr. Clerk, has the fee changed? Has the amount changed? Berg: Madam Mayor, we haven't really figured out that we wanted to change the fee. I don't know what the other processes are, which I need to talk to the police department to see if there is more costs involved with -- Baird: Okay. I can tell you what the rule is and if it's a new fee or if it's more than a five percent change, we would have to advertise it for a Public Hearing pursuant to state statute. But if it's just going from one place on our records to another, then, you wouldn't have to do that. Berg: And, Madam Mayor, I guess that was my point. Then we probably need to prepare a resolution to set -- put that on a fee schedule when we do the ordinance? Baird: Sure. Berg: So that we don't drop it and have no fee at all. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 77 of 78 Baird: We will make that happen. Berg: Okay. Thank you. Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, two additional points. First off, I do want to comment in reference to thefts and some of the bad things that we usually associate pawnbrokers with. That's not necessarily the case with both of our pawnbrokers that we have here in town. They have been very reputable, very easy to work with, and run good businesses and I have been associated with both of them for quite awhile here in town. So, I do want to go on record with that and provide that information to you. The mere fact is, though, is that we have some other less reputable folks and we don't know what we may have in the future, which forces us to have the ordinance and to continue to work to keep it as efficient as possible through the mechanism that we have. Additionally on the data base that we have, where this is a data base that is collecting vital information, they are bound by federal statute to do immediate reporting to those people if they do lose that data base or have it impacted by somebody that's able to get into it and remove the information on it, similar to a financial transaction data base with any type of bank or a lending institution, that type of thing. Any of those are required to have it. So, that would be the only protection to my knowledge at this point is by federal statute on that, if that helps with that question as well. Rountree: Thanks, Bill. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Okay motion. Council -- Keith, now I would entertain that Bird: You would? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Well, I think I'm going to give them a little more time, because I'm afraid that we -- De Weerd: Even the 2nd is -- Bird: So, I think I would move that we continue the Public Hearing for the amendment of the pawnbroker ordinance to May 2nd, 2006. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Thank you. It's been moved to continue to May 2nd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 78 of 78 u De Weerd: Council, just a couple items very quickly. We do have a tour with the Ada County Commissioners on Friday, April 7th. We ask you to join them for lunch if you have an interest. Certainly you're welcome to join on the tour. It leaves at 10:00 a.m. from City Hall. We will be sending a mailer out on the south Meridian, north Kuna area informational meeting that is April 12th at 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at Mary McFearsan Elementary School. So, I had e-mailed this out to you guys. Just a heads up. I know that Sharon and Will had gotten information out to you about a letter we got from Harks Corner about our beer and wine license and that was just an FYI to all of you. And that's all I have, so -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we leave, everybody coming to the prayer breakfast in the morning? Borton: You're getting us on the record. Bird: Huh? Borton: You're getting us on the record. Rountree: No, I'm not. Bird: You're not? I can't believe that. You got to be at the statehouse. I move that we adjourn. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:10 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) .-~1~ MAYOR TA DE WEERD ,,,~~s~e~~~,,, ~-"~ ..-~ ATTFSTE i~•~ _ ~~~ IIZ~IAM G ~~ ~r ~r A ~, /~~~ a~"~ _ `~ tl~j~ • ~'a vat e,,. "x+377 ~ ~0 P~ya "2,4 ~,~g+~ 0.'a ~~1~GfGdoB8009540~`e ~~/ ® 6 DATE APPROVED k BERG JR.UCI March 31,2046 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING Apra) 4, 2046 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of February 2], 2~b Pre-Council Meeting AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubec meetings shah become property of the City of Merldbn. March 31,2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-B REQUEST Approve Minutes of February 28, Zt~b City Council and Kuna Gity Council Special 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 SCHQOL 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: bTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubec meetings shad becc~tna property of the City of Meridian. March 31;2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-C REQUEST Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CI1Y WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CfTY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRR{GAT{ON: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials present®d at pubNc m~-eiings shaA bec~ne property of the CHy of Meridian. March 31, 2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPtICANT ITEM NO. S-D REQUEST Approve Minutes of March 21,2006 City Council Regular Meeting AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at publk meetings shNl become properly of the City of Meridkm. March 31, 200b MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-E REQUEST Approve Minutes of March 23, 20Qb City Council Special 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 GOUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO PQWER: US WEST: IMERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubik rneetin~s shall become Property of the City of Meridiara March 31, 200b MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S•F REQUEST Approve New Beer and Wine License for Chicago Connection by Joy Kegley at 1935 South Eagle Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER; COMMENTS See attached Con#acted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: MaterMls presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. March 31, 2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-G REQUEST Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer -Phase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See a#tached CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo To: William Berg, Jr.; Tara Green From: Clint Dolsby, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady, P.E., City Engineer Date: 03/23/2006 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 28, 2006 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the March 28 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Black Cat Trunk Sewer -Phase 4 Concept. JUB Engineers, Inc. has submitted a task order, scope of work, and budget for the engineering services. They propose to complete the work for $3,847. This is an extension of the agreement between the City of Meridian and JUB Engineers, Inc. approved by City Council on the 28~' of January, 2003 for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer and Lift Station Project. This project provides a concept design of the Black Cat Trunk Sewer from Overland Road to Victory Road. The intent is to provide a conceptual plan and profile of the Black Cat Trunk to facilitate design of the trunk and upstream collection sewers. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Black Cat Trunk Sewer -Phase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers, Inc. for $3,847 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. • Page 1 ~`j (f J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 S. Beachwood Avenue, Suite 201 • Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 • Telephone (208) 376-7330 • FAX (208) 323-9336 AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES - No.5 CLIENT: City of Meridian PROJECT NAME: Misc. Wastewater Projects 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 Additional Services: Add Task 040 -Black Cat Trunk Sewer Phase 4 Conce t as described in Attachment 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 ifi applicable, the billing rates established in the initial Agreement for Engineering Services. Other Basis for Payment: _ On a lump sum basis as listed on Attachment A. . Dated this day of 2006 City of Meridian Print or Type Client Name By: Client or Representative Signature Tammy de Weerd. Mayor Print or Type Name and Title J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. By: Project epr to ' e Signatu Phillip H. Krichbaum. P.E.. Project MQr. Print or Type Name and Title J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ~ ~ Attachment `A' - f0-05-025 ADDENDUM N0.5 CITY OF MERIDIAN ,MISCELLANEOUS WASTEWATER PROJECTS BLACK CAT TRUNK SEWER: PHASE 4 CONCEPT Section 1 - Proiect Overview This project provides a concept design of the Black Cat Trunk Sewer from Overland Road to Victory Road as shown on the attached Exhibit 1. The intent is to provide a conceptual plan and profile of the Black Cat trunk to facilitate future design of the trunk and upstream collection sewers. Section Z -Items to be Provided by the City 1. Copies of pertinent record drawings (i.e. Bear Creek Subdivision and Lift Station) and other existing facilities that need to served by the trunk sewer in this reach. 2. Provide copies of all easements of record that may exist for the future extension of the trunk sewer through the Bear Creek Subdivision. Section 3 - Supplemental Survey and Concept Design 1. Supplemental Field Survey and Base Map. A. Field topographic survey shall be done to supplement the COMPASS base mapping. This survey will include: 1) Centerline Overland Road profile from the end of Phase 3 to Linder Road; 2) Spot elevations critical drain crossings and structure crossings. 3) Invert elevations of upstream facilities in Bear Creek Subdivision. 4) Centerline profile of Meridian and Victory roads along the alignment to diversion structure 7. B. Abase map will be prepared using the latest available COMPASS base mapping and supplemental topographic information. Parcel boundaries and subdivisions will be used from Ada County GIS base mapping. Landowner information of record wilt be shown along the route. 2. Concept Trunk Sewer Routing and Profile A. JUB will design a concept routing plan and profile taken with the following considerations:1)GeneraI requirements set forth in the master plan, 2) Master plan depths, 3) Interception of the Bear Creek Lift Station, 3} Maintaining trunk depths to serve each side of the Purdam Drain while minimizing overall depths, and 4) Routing along parcel boundaries, 5) Minimizing easement acquisition. JUB will prepare preliminary plan and profile of the concept design for overview with the City. JUB wilt incorporate City comments and make final revisions as necessary and prepare final deliverables. B. Deliverables: 1. Prepare a conceptual plan and profile roll plot at 1"=50'. Misc. Wastewater Services -Authorization for Additional Services No. S Page ~ J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Attachment 'A' - 10-05-025 2. Provide electronic copy of the base map and concept design in AutoCadd format. ... r Section 4 -Basis of Fees The CITY shall pay J-U-B on for its services and reimbursable expenses. Refer to Exhibit 2 for a detailed breakdown of the fee estimate. Task 040 -Black Cat Trunk Sewer Phase 4 -Concept Design Task 3.1 through 3.2 on a lump sum price of .................................................$3,847 1\Boisefiles\Public\Projectb1anagecaV'HRUO-05-025-Meridian Ivfisc. tVW Pruj«1e\IO-o5-025-Advtin\Contracta end Billing\AddNa.S -Bleclc Cat Tnmlc Phase 4 Conceptdoc Misc. Wastewater Services -Authorization for Additional Services No.S Page 2 ~ ~ N ~ r'~C) m ~ m < o ~ m < o ~ m ~ c ~ ~~ 7C m m ° ~ ~ ~ m '- ~®w ~p ~ 0 ' ? ~v m 7 o~ ' ~ a A ,~ to rt m 3 m ~ ° ~ '~ esi ' c~~ O C ~ y ~ .o ~ o ~ ~ m S ~ moo a'm D 07C ~ y ~ ~ m ~ ~ p y.:>... ~ C ~..~ o ~ x m m 3 ' ~ a m ~ ~ ~~ ~ m, ~_ m ~° Z ~ m ~ ° " a y m a a ~ W m '~ ~ -~ ~ n N c ~ ~ ~ m '~ °~ c ~`7 z m y ~ a ,.,~ m _ ~ -1 ~ g -i ~ o ~ r n ~ j m r ~ ~ r ~ C C 7 c ~ ~ ~ v ~ m 1 n ~ A ~' ~ y ~' ~ c ~ ~ i . 0 0 C a ~m ° ~` ~ o ~ . O ~ , 3 -~ `m 0 0 o 'c. '~ ~~ o om~ n N a ~' ~° 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ~~~ m~ ~ ~ ~ m 0 0 ~ ~ ' ' ` N O O V O ((~ O O ~ m ~ ~ m (71 OI t11 OI (71 !Ti UI 01 ~ ~ i C 3 o 0 0 ~ C 0 o ~i~ V m O phi ~ A S ~ f~ S ~ V Zm ~' 6 .Z N O p et .wi m G O O ! m A ~ P~ 0 0 ° ~ c~ii o 0 3 ~ C `fl n a r- o o ° ° ~ m 1 tf ! ~ N ~~ a g m~ m *~ '" ~ = v ~ S N ^ ai `~ w r ~ C ' O O G1 N f A t V o f ~ A f ~ H f V NNfl N m C j' A 7 C ~ ~' w N ~ x O W O O ( O U 1 la N yr -i O y ~ p V ~ ~ V N tttp llflll~ March 31,2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-H REQUEST Agreement for Consultant Services for Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See a#tached 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 Cffy of Meridian. i • ~ECE~\/ emo MAR 2 3 X006 City ®f Meridian City Clert~ C-ffice To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Jon Mills, Staff Engineer CC: Len Grady; Mark David; File Date: March 23, 2006 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for March 28, 2006 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the March 28 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill As outlined in the attached Scope of Services, concerns have been raised regarding the possible violation of the National Flood Insurance Program by the Creek Side Arbour apartments, a parcel on Five Mile Creek upstream of the Fairview Crossing. At this point we seek approval of only Task 1-Evaluation of Current Conditions fora "not-to-exceed" amount of $29,000.00. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approve the agreement for consultant services for Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill for $29,000.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. • Page 1 • ~t1~11Hi-~t~6. STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESS/OA1~4L SERI/ICES This AGREEMENT is between CH2M HILL INC., (°ENGINEER°). and City of Meridian (°OWNER°) for a PROJECT generally described as: Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES ENGINEER will perform the Scope of Services set forth in Attachment A. ARTICLE 2. COMPENSATION OWNER will compensate ENGINEER as cet forth in Attachment B. Work performed under this AGREEMENT may be performed using labor from affiliated companies of ENGINEER. Such labor will be bill~f to OWNER underthe same tilting terms applicable to ENGINEER's employees. ARTICLE 3. TERMS OF PAYMENT f OWNER will pay ENGINEER as follows: 3.1 invoices 'and Time of Payment ENGWEER will issue monthly Invoices pursuant to Attachment B. lnvoic~ are due and payab~ witirin 30 days of receipt. 3.2 Intent 3.2.1 OWNER will be charged interest at the rate of 1-1/2°k per month, or that permitted by law ff lesser, on ail past-due amounts starting 30 days after receipt of invoice. Payments will first be credited to irterest and then. to principal. 3.2.2 In the event of a disputed bififng, only the disputed portion will be withheld from payment, and OWNER shall pay the undisputed portion. OWNER will exercise reasonableness in disputing any btA or potion. thereof. No interest wr71 accrue on any disputed portion of the billing until mutuaAy resolved. 3.2.3 ff OWNER fails in make payment in fuq within 30 days of the date due for any undisputed billing, ENGWEER may, after giving 7 days' written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this AGREEMENT until paid in full, including interest In the event of suspension of servtcess, ENGINEER wifi have no debility to OW NER for delays or damages caused by OWNER because of suer suspension. ARTICLE 4.OBUGATIONS OF ENGINEER 4.1 Standard of Cage The standard of care applicable to ENGINEER'S SeMces wid be the degree of skill and difigence normally employed by professional engineers or consultants performing the same or s[milar Services at the time said services are perfomred. ENGINEER avill reperforrrr any services not meeting this standard without-additional compensation. Fo~aa gee • t~nsEO uos 4.2 Subsurface Investi~tlcns In soils, foundation, groundwater, and other subsurface investigations, the actual characteristics may vary signffirantiy beiween suocesstve test poirrts and sample intervals and at locations other than where observations, exploration, and investigations have been made. Because of the inherent uncertainties in• subsurface evaluations, changed or unantidpated underground oondfiions may occur that could affect total PROJECT cost and/or execution. These conditions and cost/®xecution effects are not the respor~lbiiity of ENGINEER. 4.3 ENGINEER'S Personnel at Construction Site 4.3.1 The presence or duties of ENGINEEF2's personnel at a construction site, whether as onstie representatives or otherwise, do riot make ENGINEER or ENGINEER'S personnel in anyway responsible for those duties that belong to OWNER and/or the construction Contractors or other entities, and do not relieve the construction contractors or any other entity of their obligations, duties, and responsibilities, including, but not limited to, all construction methods, means, techniques, sequences, and procedures necessary for coordinating arrt~ completing all portions of the construction work in accordance with the construction Contract Documents and any health or safety precautions required by such construction work. 4.3.2 ENGINEER anti ENGINEER'S personnel have no authority to exercise any control over any construction contractor or other entity or their employees in connection with their work or any health or safety precautions and have no duty for inspecting, noting, observing, correcting, or reporting on health or safety deficiencies of the construction contractor(s) or other entity or any other persons at the site except ENGINEER`S own personnel. 4.3.3 The presence of ENGINEER'S penronnel at a construction site is for the purpose of providing to OWNER a greater degree of confidence that the completed construction work will conform generally to the construction documents and that the integrity of the design concept as reflected in'the construction documents has been implemented and pre~rved by the construction contractor(s). ENGINEER neither guarantees the performance of the construction contractors) nor assumes responsibility for construction contractor's failure to ~rforrrr work in aex;or~rrce with the construction documents. For this AGREEMENT only, construction sites include places of manufadtrre for materials incorporated Into the construction work, and conslructon contractors include manufacturers of materials incorporated into the construction work. 4.4 Opinions of Cost, Financial Cortsideratlons, and Schedules In providing opinions of oust, finandal analyses, economic feasibGity projections, and schedules for the PROJECT, ENGINEER has no control over cost or price of labor and materials; unknown or latent conditions of existing equipment or structures that may affect operation or maintenance costs; competitive bidding procedures and market conditions; time or quality of perfomiartce by operating per~nnel or third parties; and other economtc and operational factors that may materially affect the ultimate PROJECT cost or schedule. Therefore, ENGINEER makes no warranty that OWNER's actual PROJECT costs, finandal aspects, economic feasibility, or schedules will not vary from ENGINEER's opinions, analy~s, projections, or estimates. If OWNER wishes greater assurance as to any element of PROJECT ~ feasibr7ity, or schedule, OWNER will employ an independent test estimator, cmriractor, or other appropriate advisor. 4.5 Construction Progress Payments Recommendations by ENGINEER to OWNER for periodic construction progre~ payments to the construction contractor(s) wG! be based on ENGINEER's knowledge, information, and belief from selective sampling that the work has progressed to the point indicated. Such recommendations do not represent that continuous or detaGed examinations have bean made by ENGINEER to ascertain that the constnucfion contractors) have completed the work in exact accorclance with the constnucton documents; that the final work will be acceptable in all respects; that ENGINEER has made an examination to ascertain how or for what purpose the construction contractor(s) have used the moneys paki; that title M any of the work, materials, or equipment has passed to OWNER free and clear of liens, claims, security interests, or encumbrances; or that there are not other matters at issue between OWNER and the construction contractors that affect the amount that should be paid. 4.6 Record Drawings Record drawings, 8required, will be prepared, in part, on the basis of information compiled and furnished by others, and may not always represent the exact location, type of various components, or exact manner in which the PROJECT was finally constructed. ENGINEER is not responsible for any errors or omissions in the information from others that is incorporated into the record drawings. 4.7 Acxess to ENGINEER'S Acxounting Records ENGINEER will maintain accounting records, in accordance with generally acxspted acxounting principles. These n3cords wtll tie available to OWNER during ENGIN.EER's normal business hours for a period of 1 year after ENGINEER'S final invoice for examination to the extent required to verify the direct costs (excluding established or standard allowancx~s and rates) incun~ed hereunder. OWNER may only. audit FOR69 3~ t~EO gyros accounting r~:ords applicable to a cost reimbursable type compensation. 4.8 ENGlNEER's Insurance ENGINEER will maintain throughout this AGREEMENT the following insurance: (a) Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the state where the work is performed. (b) Comprehensive automobile and vehicle liability insurance covering claims for injuries to members of the public and/or damages to property of others arising from use of motor vehicles, including onsite and offsite operations, and owned, nonowned, or hired vehicles, with $1,000,000 combined single IimiLa. (c) Commercial general liability insurance covering claims for injuries to members of the public or damage to property of others arising out of any covered negGgerit act or om'~ssion of ENGINEER or of any of Its employees, agents, or subcontractors, with $1,000,000 per occurrence and in the aggregate. (d) Professional liability insurance of $1,000,000 per occurrence and In the aggregate. (e) OWNER will be named as an additional insured with respect to ENGINEER's IfabitFties hereunder in insurance coverages identified in items (b) and (c) and ENGINEER waNes subrogation against OWNER as to said policies, ARTICLE 5.OBLIGATiONS OF OWNER 5.1 OWNER-Furnished Data OWNER will provide to ENGINEER all data in OWNER's possession relating to ENGINEER's services on the PROJECT. ENGINEER will reasonably rely upon the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the information provided by OWNER. 5.2 Access to Fadlities and Property OWNER will malts its facil'iti'es accessible to ENGINEER as required for ENGINEER's performance of its services and will provide labor and safety equipment as required by ENGINEER for such access. OWNER an71 perform, at no coat to ENGINEER, such tests of equipment, machinery, pipelines, and other components of OWNER's facilities as may be required in connection with ENGINEER'S servic~ss. 5.3 Advertisements, Permits,'and Access Unless otherwise agreed to in the Scope of Services, OWNER will obtain, arrange, and pay for all advertisements for bids; permits and licenses required by local, state, or federal authorities; and land, easemerrts, rights-of-way, and access necessary for ENGiNEER's services or PROJECT construction. 5.4 Timelg Review OWNER will examine ENGINEER's studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specfications, proposals, and other documents; obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor, accountant, auditor, bond and finandal advisors, and other consutiarrts as OWNER deems appropriate; and render in writing decisions requires by OWNER in a timely manner. 5.5 Prompt Notice OWNER will give prompt written notice to ENGINEER whenever OWNER observes or becomes aware of any development that affects the scope or timirul of ENGWEER's Services, or of any defect in the work of ENGINEER or construction contractors. 5.8 Asbestos or Hazardous Substances 5.6.1 tf asbestos or hazardous substances in any form are encourrter~ or suspected, ENGINEER will stop its own work in the affected portions of the PROJECT to permit testlng and evacuation. 5.8.2 if asbestos is suspected, ENGINEER will, if requested, manage the asbestos remediation activities using a qualified subrmntractor at an addfional fee and contract terms to be negotiated. 5.6.3 If hazardous substances other than asbestos are suspected, ENGINEER will, if requested, conduct tests to determine the extent of the problem and will pertorm the necessary studies and recommend the necessary remedial measures at an additional fee and contract terms to be negotiated. 5.6.4 Client recognizes that CH2M HILL assumes no risk andlor liability for a waste or hazardous waste site originated by other than CH2M HILL. 5.7 Contractor Indemnfftcatlon and Claims 5.7.1 OWNER agrees to include in all construction contacts the provisions of Article 4.3, ENGINEERSs Personnel at Construction Site, and provisions providing contractor indertrniflc~tion of OWNER and ENGINEER for contrador's negggence. 5.72 OWNER shati require construcion contractor(s) to name OWNER and ENGINEER as additional Insureds on the contractor's general liability insurance policy. 5.7.3 OWNER agrees to include the following clause in all contracts with construction contractors, and equipment or materials suppliers: °Contractors, subcontractors, and equipment and material suppliers on the PROJECT, or their sureties, shall maintain no direct action against ENGINEER, ENGINEER' officers, employees, affiliated corporations, and subcontractors for any claim arising out of, in connection with, or resulting from the engineering sen-ic~s performed. OWNER will be the only beneficiary of any undertaking by ENGINEER." 5.8 OWNER's Insurance 5.8.1 OWNER will maintain properly insurance on all pre-erasting physical facilities as~ciated in any way with the PROJECT. 5.62 OWNER wi0 provide for a waiver of subrogation as to a0 OWNER-carried pro~rty damage Insurance, during construction and thereafter, in favor of ENGINEER, ENGINEERSs officers,.employees, affiliates, and subcontractors. 5.8.3 OWNER will provide (or have the construction contractor(s) provide) a Builders Risk All Risk insurance policy for the full replacement value of all PROJECT work including the value of all onstte OWNER-furnished equipmentand/or materials associated with ENGINEERS services. Such policy will include coverage for toss due to defeds in materials and workmanship and errors in design, and will provide a waiver of subrogation as th ENGINEER and the construction contractors) (or OWNER), and their respective officers, empbyees, agents, affiliates, and ' subcontractors. OWNER will provide ENGINEER a copy of such policy. 5.9 Litigatlon Assistanos The Scope of Services does not include costs of ENGINEER for required or requested assistance to support, prepare, docwnerrt, bring, defend, or assist in litigation undertaken or defended by OWNER. All such Services required or requested of ENGINEER by ' OWNER, except for suits or claims between the parties to this AGREEMENT, will tm reimbursed as mutually agreed. 5.10 Changes OWNER may make or approve changes within the general Scope of Services in this AGREEMENT. ff such changes affect ENGINEERS oust of or time required for perfommance of the services, an equitable adjustment will be made through an amendment to fitris AGREEMENT. ARTICLE 6. GENERAL LEGAL PR01/1SIONS 6.1 Authortzatton to Proceed Execution of this AGREEMENT by OWNER wUl be authorization for ENGINEER to proceed with the work, unless otherwise provided for in this AGREEMENT. 8.Z Reuse of PROJECT Docurrmrrts All reports, drawings, spedfications, documents, and other deliverables of ENGINEER, whether in hard copy or in etedronic form, are instruments of service for this PROJECT, whether the PROJECT is completed or not OWNER agrees to indemnity ENGINEER and ENGINEER' officers, employees, subcontractors, and affiliat~i corporations iron all claims, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, litigation expenses and attorney's fees arising out of or related to the unauthorized reuse, change or alteration of these PROJECT documents. 8.3 Force Mature ENGINEER is not responsible for damages or delay in performance caused by ads of God, strikes, lockouts, accidents, or other events beyond the control of ENGINEER. In any such event, ENGINEER'S contract price and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. 6.4 Limitation of Liability 6.4.1 To the maximum extent permitted by law, ENGINEERS liability for OWNER's damages will not, in lice aggregate, exceed $1,000,000. 6.42 This article takes precedence over any confiiding article of this AGREEMENT or any document Incorporated into tt or referenced by tt. 6.4.3 This limttation of liability wtil apply whether ENGINEER' liability arises under breach of contractor waranty; tort< including negligence; strict liability; statutory liability, or any other cause of action, and shall include ENGINEER' officers, affiliated corporations, employees, and subcontractors. 8.5 Termination 6.5.1 This AGREEMENT may be terminated for convencence on 30 days' written notice, or for cause if either parljr fails substantially to perform through no faun of the other and does not commence con action of such nonperfomrance within 5 days of written notice and diligently complete the correction thereafter. FOR~9 ~ REVISED 1/08 l~ 8.5.2 On termination, ENGINEER wiU tie paid for all authorized services performed up to the terminatbn date plus termination expenses, such as, but not limited to, reassignment of personnel, subcontract termination costs, and related closeout costs. 6.6 Suspanslon, Delay, or Interruption of Work OWNER may suspend, delay, or fnthmipt the Services of ENGINEER for the convenience of OWNER. In such event, ENGINEER's contract price and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. 6J No Third-Party Beneficiaries This AGREEMENT gives no rights or benefits to anyone other than OWNER and ENGINEER and has no third- party beneficiaries. 6.8 Indemnification 8.8.1 ENGINEER agrees to indemnify OWNER for any claims, damages, lasses, and costs, including, but not limited to, attorney's fees and litigation costs, arising out of dolma by third parties for property damage or bodily injury, including death, to the proportionate extent caused by the negQgence or willful misconduct of ENGINEER, ENGINEER'S employees, affiliated corporations, and subcontractors in mnnedion with the PROJECT. 6.8.2 OWNER agrees to indemnidy ENGINEER from any claims, damages, losses, and costs, including, but not limited to, attorney's fees and litigation costs, arising out of claims by third parties for property damage or bodily injury, inducting death, to the proportionate extent caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of OWNER, or its employees or contractors in connection with the PROJECT. 6.9 Assignment This is a bilateral personal Services AGREEMENT. Neither party shah have the power to or will assign any of the duties or rights or any claim arising out of or related to this AGREEMENT, whether arising in tort, contract or otherwise, without the written consent of the other party. Any unauthorized assignment is void and unenforceable. These conditions and the entire' AGREEMENT are binding on the heirs, sucxessors, and assigns of the parties hereto. 6.10 Consequential Damages To the maximum extent permitted by law, ENGINEER and ENGINEER'S affiliated corporations, officers, employees, and subcontractors shall not be liable for OWNER'S special, indirect, or consequential damages, whether such damages arise out of breach of contract or warranty, tort including negligence, strict or statutory liability, or any other cause of action. in order to protect ENGINEER against indirect liability or third-party proceedings, QWNER will indemnify ENGINEER for any such damages. 6.11 Waiver OWNER waives all claims against ENGINEER, Including those for eetent defects, that are not brought within 2 years of substaritial completion of the fadllt)r designed or final payment to ENGINEER, whichever is earper. 6.12 JurlsdiGtion The substantive law of the state of the PROJECT site shall govern the validity of this AGREEMENT, its interpretation and pertormance, and any other claims related to it. 6.13 Severabiltty and Survival 6,13.1 If any of the Provisions contained in this AGREEMENT are held for any reason to be Invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the enforceability of the remaining provisdons shall not be impaired thereby. 8.132 Limitations of liability, indemnities, and other express represer~lations shall survive termination of this AGREEMENT for any cause. 8.14 Materials and Samples Any items, substances, materials, or samples removed from the PROJECT site for besting, analysis, or other evaluation will be returned to the PROJECT site within 60 days of PROJECT close-0ut unless geed to otherwise. OWNER recognizes and agrees that ENGINEER is acting as a bailee and at no time assumes title to said items, substanoes, materials, or samples. 6.15 Engineer's Deliverables Engineer's deliverables; including record drawings, are limited to the sealed and signed hard copies. Computer- generated drawing files furnished by ENGINEER are for OWNER or others' convenience. Any conclusions or hrformation derived or obtained from these files will be at user's sole risk. 6.16 Dispute Resolution The parties will use thetr best efforts to resolve amicably any dispute, including use of aRemative dispute resolution options. 6.17 Ownership of Work Product and Inventions All of the work product of the ENGINEER in executing this PROJECT shall remain the property of ENGINEER. OWNER shall receive a perpetual, royaKy--free, non- transferable, non-exclusive license to use the deliverables for the purpose for which they were intended. Any inventions, pa#ents, copyrights, computer software, or other intellectual properly developed during the course of, or as a result of, the PROJECT shall remain the property ofthe ENGINEER. ARTICLE 7. ATTACHMENTS, SCHEDULES, AND SIGNATURES This AGREEMENT, including its attachments and schedules, constitutes the entire AGREEMENT, supersedes all prior written or oral understandings, and may only be changed by a written amendment executed by both parties. The following attachments and schedules are hereby made a part of this AGREEMENT: Attachment A-Scope of Services Attachment B-Compensation cocoa yea REVISED V~ • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute below: For OWNER, Cily of Meridian dated this day of 20 Signature Signature Name (printed) Name Title Title For ENGINEER, CH2M HILL INC., dated this day of - Signature Name (printed) Title 20 Signature Name (printed) Title wRnA 398 REVISED iPo8 5 Aftachment A -Scope of Services Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance Introduction 'This scope of services (SOS) is being presented to the City of Meridian (OWNER) by C~i2M HILL (ENGINEER) to assist in resolving concerns regarding an encroachment issue on a regulatory floodway within the city limits. Based upon correspondence received from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to the OWNER on August 11, 2005 and January 31, 2006; a parcel west of Five Mile Creek and upstream of the Fairview Avenue crossing maybe in violation of the National Flood Insurance Program (NF11') regulations. FEIVIA is concerned that several buildings in the Ciseek Side Arbour Apartment complex aze located in the regulatory floodway of Five Mile Creek. ENGIlVEERR has prepared. this SOS to advise and assist the OWNER in. resolving the concerns expressed by FEMA. Because of the unknowns associated with this project, ENGINEERR, at the request of the City Engineer, has developed a phased approach in this SOS. Tasks 1, 2 and 3 described in this SOS aze what ENGINEER expects will be necessary (based on experience) to address and close out the issue with FEMA. However, as these tasks are completed, new information may become available based on model analysis and/or conversations with FEMA that could significantly change the scope and magnitude of the work As such, only Task 1 includes significant detail and an associated fee estimate at this stage of the process. Based upon the information learned and conclusions reached during Task 1, INGIl~TEER will modify the scope of Tasks 2 and 3 and develop associated budgets for these tasks, as necessary, at a later date. It is envisioned that these tasks will be added via OWNER approved amendments to this original AGREIIVID.~1T. Task 1-Evaluation of Currant Conditions The goal of Task 1 is to collect the resources necessary #o better define the scope and extent of the problem and potential solutions. Task 1 will include initial consultation with FEMA and the Idaho State Floodplain Coordinator, acquisition of existing data and hydrologic models and review of reports accompanying those models. Sutitask 1.1-Agency Coordirrratlun The first subtask involves notifying FEMA that the OWNER has retained ENGINEER to help them add=ess and resolve FEMA's concerns. This task will also include discussions with FEMA and the State Floodplain Coordinator to clarify the key issues of concern and identify all options available to the OWNER to resolve the problem, including opportunities to avoid the need for mitigation measures. A memorandum describing the results of this consultation will be prepazed and delivered to the OWNER Initial consultation will be completed within a week following the notice to proceed (1V'TP) from the OWNER, provided agency schedules allow it..A meeting will be held with the OWNER to discuss the agency consultation results and upcoming tasks. ENGIlVEER has estimated that 24 to 30 man hours of labor are required for this subtask. Deliverable: • Agency consultation results memorandum C~ C~ Subtask 1.2 - Data/ModeUReport Acquisition a~ Review 1~-ssuming the agency consultation still indicates that specific actions are required {as alluded to in the letters received by the OWNER from FEMA to date), ENGINEER will contact the necessary parties to assemble existing hydrology, topographic, mapping, and other data, as available. This step would be coordinated with the OWNER's GIS staff to avoid duplication of effort and gather the information as quickly as possible. At this time, ENGINEER is aware of the following resources we would attempt to gather: • The hydraulic model (exact software unknown) and associated report developed by the FEMA contractor that was used to set the regulatory floodway. • Five Mile Creek modeling study report funded by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Mt'. Kevin Coupon, a member of our project team, was the project manager for this effort.) • The hydraulic model (MII~ 11) developed as part of the Reclamation funded study. • LiDAR data collected for Ada County including that in the vicinity of the project site by Reclamation. ENGINEER would review these models and reports to better understand each of the model assumptions and timing of events relative to the construction of the apartment complex. For example, what channel roughness values were used in the vicinity of the project site, are the topographic data input for the Reclamation and FEMA models the same, and what was the date of the base map (i.e., pre- or post~onstruction) used for elevations in the model? ENGINEER has estimated that 30 to 36 man hours of labor are required for this subtask. Deliverables: • A short memo (3 pages) listing the resources acquired and the key assumptions and model inputs. Sulrtask 1.3 -Hydraulic Modeling Following review of 'the models and associated data, ENGINEIIZ will setup and nm the more appropriate of the two models to evaluate model sensitivity and validate base assumption validity. The choice of models would be determined based on experience of the project team, input from FEMA, and input from the OWNER. To develop solutions; it is necessary to understand the hydraulic conditions both before and after the construction of the Creek Side Arbour Apartment complex. We assume that either the existing NNIIICCE-11 model or FEMA model will only need. to be revised and updated to describe changes in conditions due to construction of the apartments. The development of an entirely new hydraulic model is not included in the current scope or budget. In addition, we assume that the FEMA model is either a HEC-RAS or MII~ 11 model. If this is not the cam; some changes maybe necessary to this scope and budget. Finally, based upon the results of Subtask 12, additional survey data maybe required to better descn'be existing conditions; than survey work is not included in the current scope and budget. Initial model runs would focus on characterization of nomnal -and flood stream flows through the project location. Flow, topographic, and channel conditions would be used to determine floodway boundaries as they existed prior to construction of the apartments in the floodway at the project location to the extent possible. Fill volume, modified channel geometry, and site-specific conditions • would be used to model any changes in the floodway due to the development. Results from this analysis would be compared to the FEMA floodway boundary. A short memo that stwnmaries the change in hydraulic conditions (from before to after} based on modeling analysis (and additional field data collection, if appropriate}, implications on the floodway boundaries, and potential mitigation options from a hydraulic perspective (e.g., increase channel conveyance to offset lost conveyance) would be prepared for the OWNER's review. Development of specific mitigation options beyond a hydraulic perspective (e.g., Land acquisition to create a larger channel or floodplain) and conceptual level planning would be postponed until Task 1.4 following the OWNER's review of the modeling memo and a meeting to discuss the modeling results with the ENGINEER team. ENGIl~TEER has estimated that 84 to 96 man hours of labor are required for this subtask. Deliverables: A short memo (5 pages) describing the hydraulic modeling results, implications, and potential options from a hydraulic perspective. (Output from the model nuns would be included as appendices.) A short memo (1-3 pages) to FEMA written an behalf of the OWNER to provide a progress update. Su6task 1.4 - Conc®ptual Mi13~tfon Alt®n~ves ~velop~M ENGINEER will work with the OWNER to identify and develop conceptual mitigation alternatives which will be explored in greater detail in Task 2 We assume that up to three conceptual mitigation alternatives would be developed for the OWNER. This step would include conceptual level detail on alternatives such as changing the channel cross section shape, creating a new channel alignment, or creating floodplain habitat. This step would require additional hydraulic modeling to evaluate the costs and benefits of the alternatives. At this stage, the OWl~TER's input will be very important, and we will work with the OWNER to identify the best altemative to be chosen as the preferred alternative. The report submitted to the OWNER would si~mmari~e the key points of each of the three previously-submitted memos and outline up to three conceptual mitigation alternatives and order of magnitude level costs. ENGIlVEIIZ has estimated that 56 to 64 man hours of labor are required for this subtask. Deliverables: Five copies of the draft report (10-15 pages) to the OWNER for review. Five copies of the final report (10-15 pages) to the OWNEIL Schedale Due to the nature of this work and the need for involvement of federal and state governmental agencies in its completion, no firm schedule can be established for this work.. Consultant will update the OWNER monthly on the estimated completion of individual tasks and will work diligently towards task completion. Project Management Consultant shall set up internal accounting files and project number for this work. Consultant's project manager shall coordinate and review work activities of the project team. Consultant shall prepare and submit invoices to the OWNER on a monthly basis. ENGIl~TEEIt has estimated that 16 to 20 man hours of labor are required for this subtask Project Budget Due to the undefined nature of the work, the Consultant will invoice on a per diem plus expenses basis with anot-to-exceed amount of $29,0 for Task 1 as defined above. Time and expenses will be charged as detailed in Exhibit B. Engineer will make reasonable efforts to complete the work within the budget and will keep OWNER informed of progress towazd that end so that the budget or work effort can be adjusted if found necessary. INGINEEIZ is not obligated to incur costs beyond the indicated budgets, as maybe adjusted, nor is OWNER obligated to pay ENGINEER beyond these limits. A more detailed scope and budget specifics for Tasks 2 and 3, as described below, will be negotiated with the OWNER after the completion of Task 1 and will be added as amendments to this AGRI~MENT' at a later date. Task 2 -Develop Mitigation Alteratives The conceptual mitigation alternatives developed in Subtask Z.4 will be more fully developed for presentation to FEMA. lip to 2pre-design conceptual drawings un~l be prepared for each alternative, as appropriate. ENGIlVEER will facilitate a meeting between the OWNER and FEMA to discuss the analytical results, identify a preferred alternative, and define the path forward. A PowerPoint presentation wz71 be prepared to present modeling results and the alternatives to FEMA. ENGIlVEER wall coordinate and arrange for the meeting. The overall goal of than Task is to discuss the findings and preferred sdufion alternative(s) with FEMA to gain their endorsement of the alternative before design and implementation begins (Task 3). Deliverables: • Conceptual designs for all alternatives • PowerPoint presentatian • Meeting with FEMA Task 3 -Design and Implementation The conceptual mitigation alternative chosen by the OWNER, in consultation with FENYA, unZl be fully developed with design drawing and specafzcations prepared for the OWNER Bad documents wr71 be prepared as part of this Task and the project will be bid and awarded. Depending on the availability and expertise of OWNER staff and FEIVIA requirements, ENGIlVEER staff wall assist the OWNER with the management and aaersaght of the construction activities. Deliverables: Construction drawings and spe~ons Bid Phase Assistance (Addenda, Clarafzcations, Bid Tab Summaries) Service During Construction (RFI/SubmittaI review and comment, field observation, on-call technical assistance, Record Drawing modifications, etc...). Assumptions: • Any required land acquisition and associated negotiation handled by OWNER Staff • Impacted Land Owner/Resident correspondence and coordination handled by OWNER Staff: .~ Attacf~ment B -Compensation Regulatory Floodway Encroachment Assistance March 2006 Kevin Coupon (sub) FEMA Specialist $161/hr Denny Mengel Project Lead/Sr. Technologist $1501hr Craig Anderson Project Coordinator/Manager $140/hr Steve Clayton Sr. Technologist -Stream $140/hr Restoration/Modeling Jeff Barry/Gloria Beattie Hydraulic Modeler $110ihr Jenny Kindig Data Analyst $g2/hr Melaney Scott Accountant $72/hr Sara Burrows Administrative Assistant $65/hr NOTES: 1. ENGINEER's Service Center charges (ComputedCommunication and Health & Safety hourly charges} are included in the per diem rates listed above. 2. The per diem rates listed above will be escalated 4% per year far any work required in calendar year 2007or beyond. 3. if the use of staff not listed in the per diem schedule becomes necessary, the per diem cost for this staff will be calculated at a rate of 2.15 times salary costs and will include Service Confer charges 4. ENGINEER's Salary Costs, when the bass of compensation, are the amount of wages or salaries paid ENGINEFJ4's employees for work directly performed on the Project plus a percentage applied fo all such wages or salaries to coverall payroll elated taxes, payments, premiums, and benefits. 5. Din3d Expenses (beyond Service Center charges) such as transportation, meals and lodging will be billed at direct cosf without mark-up. Items such as vehicles, laborafory testing and analysis and field equipment will be billed out at ENGlNEER's current standard rate charges. Subcontracting services will be billed at direct cost plus 10% exwwerr a vaooc March 31, 2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 5-I REQUEST Contract for Streetlight Maintenance with Power Plus, Inc. AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: e Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the Coy of Meridian. COMMENTS See attached ~~ • Memo To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., StafF Engineer CC: File Date: March 28, 2006 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for April 4, 2006 City Council Meeting City ®f Ti~deridia~ City cle~~ ®ffice The Public Works Department respec~ully requests the followring item be placid on the April 4 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, fior Counal's consideration: Contract with Power Plus. Inc. for Streetlight Maintenance In order to mainthin and repair standard °shoe box" type str~eetiights, the City of Meridian employs the services of Idaho Power to replace light bulbs, Gean glassware, and replace photocells which are standard to Idaho Power street light units. The City depends on a Contractor to perform all other maintenance and repair work. A request for proposals to handle this maintenance and repair work was advertised with proposals due March 16. Alloway Electric, Lea Electric, and Power Plus, Inc submitted proposals. Proposals were evaluated independerrtly by iwo staff engineers. Power Plus, Inc. scared highest on both evaluations. This contract is for one year with options for finro one- yearextensions. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approve the contract with Power Plus, Inc. for maintenanos and repair of streetlights for one year with options for two one-year extensions, and authorize the Mayor to sign k. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me ~ you have any questions regarding this item. ~~ r • Page 1 STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONTRACTOR THIS AGREEMENT is dated the day of in the year 2006 by and between City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho (hereinafter called OWNER) and Power Plus, Inc. (hereinafter called CONTRACTOR). OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: Article 1 WORK The CONTRACTOR will complete all Work as specified or indicated in the Agreement. The WORK is generally descn~bed as follows: The Work includes the maintenance and repair of standard "shoebox" type streetlights in the City of Meridian. The Project for which the Work under the Agreement is described as follows: Maintenance and Repair of Streetlights All replacement materials and workmanship will meet the City of Meridian Standard Specifications, Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction, and electrical codes as applicable. ' Article 2 ENGINEER The City of Meridian Public Works Department will be the ENGINEER The City of Meridian Public Works Deparhment is to act as OWNER's representative, assume all duties and responsibilities and have the rights and authority assigned to ENGINEER in the Contract Documents in connection with completion of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Article 3 CONTRACT T1ME. This contract will be effective beginning on the date of execution by the Mayor of the City of Meridian and ending on the same date the following year. If agreed by the Owner and Contractor, the contract maybe extended for an additional year up to two times. Therefore, the maximum life of the Contract is three years. Article 4 CONTRACT PRICE. Prices quoted in the Contractor's proposal for specific repairs and hourly rates for manpower and equipment will remain for the life of the Contract. Article 5 PAYMENT PROCEDURES. The Contractor will submit invoices for work done to: Karrie Glenn City of Meridian Public Works 660 E Watertower, Suite 200 Meirdian, ID 83642 Payments. Upon completion and acceptance of the Work, payment will be made in full within thirty (30) days. Article 6 CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIONS. 3/27/2006 Page 1 of 3 i • In order to induce the OWNER to enter into the Agreement, the CONTRACTOR makes ,the following representations: 6.1 The CONTRACTOR has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of the Work, site, locality, and all local conditions and Laws and Regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress, performance or famishing of the Work. Article 7 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The Contract Documents, which comprise the entire agreement between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR concerning the Work, consist of the following: 7.1 This Agreement. 7.2 Exhibits to this Agreement - NA 7.3 Owner's Request for Proposals and Contractor's Proposal 7.4 2005 Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction 7.5 City of Meridian Standard Specifications and Drawings - 2002 7.6 Documentation submitted by Contractor prior to Notice of Awazd. 7.7 The documents listed in paragraph 8.2 above are attached to this Agreement (except as expressly noted otherwise above). ~.~~ 1 1CD GL:ncrs7 C~mdilioris There are no Contract Documents other than those listed above in this Article 8. The Contract Documents may only b'e amended, modified or supplemented by written Change Order. Article S NIISCELLANEOUS. 8.1 No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interest in the Contract Documents will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be bound; and specifically but without limitation moneys that may become due and moneys that are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction maybe limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. 8.2 OWNER and CONTRACTOR each binds itself,. its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect of all covenants and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. Article 9 OTHER PROVISIONS. None 3/27/2006 Page 2 of 3 U IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and CONTRACTOR have signed this Agreement in triplicate. One counterpart each has been delivered to OWNER, CONTRACTOR and ENGINEER All portions of the Contract Documents have been signed or identified by OWNER and CONTRACTOR or by ENGINEER on their behalf. The Agreement will be effective on Owner CITY OF MERIDIAN By: Name: Tammy deWeerd. Mayor Approved by City Council: [CORPORATE SEAL] 2006. Contractor ~~~~~l~s By. `~ Name: ~/~j~CyF ~"' ~`~r~~ ~ Attest Attest William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk Address for giving notices Address for giving notices 33 East Idaho Ave. ~d~ i7/ i ~ Meridian, ID 83642 ~ %~y ~ `~7~~ Public Works License No, ~~___~~ ~ ~ ~` O.D ) * (if CONTRACTOR is a corporation, attach evidence of authority to sign if other than President signing) 3/27/2006 Page 3 of 3 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF STREETLIGHTS Request for Proposals for On-Call Electrical Maintenance and Repair Work of Streetlights February 27, 2006 Proposals to be submitted to: City of Meridian Public Works Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 200 Proposals Due: March 16, 2006, 5:00 P.M. • MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF STREETLIGHT'S Background Information 'The City of Meridian employs the services of Idaho Power to replace light bulbs, clean glassware, and replace photocells which are standard to Idaho Power street light units. When a work order is initiated, Idaho Power is initially called to respond. The City depends on the Contractor to perform all other maintenance and repair work. The City has about 3000 streetlights. The city is responsible from maintenance of all standard, "shoebox" type lights, not ornamental or historic type lights. In 2005, approximately 35 work orders for streetlight maintenance and repair were processed. Of these, about 30 required work from the Contractor. Contractor Selection Criteria 1. Previous experience on projects of similar nature. (30%) 2. Contractor's price to perform specific repairs and maintenance tasks on streetlights. (25%) 3. Contractor's plan to respond to orders and to complete maintenance and repairs in a timely manner. (25%) 4. Location and availability of qualified personnel and equipment. (20%) 5. The proposals will be evaluated and ranked by the City of Meridian Public Works Department and a recommendation of one contractor made to the City Council for award of the contract. MAIl~TTENANCE AND REPAIR OF STREET LIGHTS PRICES List of firm, fixed prices at which the following services will be performed. These prices will remain throughout the life of the contract. "Normal business hours are from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, except for federal and state holidays. Price Item Normal Nights & Sundays & Business Saturdays Holidays Hours Replace 100W ballast on 15' pole $80.00 $97.00 $117.00 Replace 100W ballast on 20' pole $95.00 $112.00 $132.00 Replace 100W ballast on 25' pole $95.00 $112.00 $132.00 Replace 100W ballast on 30' pole $95.00 $112.00 $132.00 Replace 100W ballast on 35' pole $95.00 $112.00 $132.00 Replace 100W ballast on 40' pole $95.00 $112.00 $132.00 List of hourly rates for labor, overhead, profit, and other costs, for the life of the contact. Rate Normal Nights & Sundays & Business Sat~days Holidays Hours Apprentice $40.00 $48.00 $60.00 Journeyman $45.00 $60.00 $77.00 Foreman $52.00 $66.00 $84.00 Overhead and Profit 12% 12% 12% Other N/A N/A N/A EQUIPMENT Schedule of Specialized Equipment and associated cost for use on repair projects if not included in hourly rate or personnel, overhead, or profit. Equipment Owned by Contractor? Hourly Rate (dollars) Bucket Truck Yes $35.00 w/o operator Flatbed Truck Yes $25.00 w/o operator Flatbed Trailer Yes $10.00 Dump Truck Yes $65.00 w/ operator Backhoe Yes $80.00 w/ operator Trencher Yes $35.00 Line Locator Yes $15.00 Fault Finder Yes $15.00 Other specialized equipment N/A N/A • March 31, 2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-J REQUEST Contract for Removal of Pine Avenue Check Valve with Star Construction 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. • Memo Ta Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: File Date: March 28, 2006 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for April 4, 2006 City Councll Meeting M~F~ ~ 2Qg~ City Crf Meridian City C'leri~ ®ffice The Public Works Department respec~ully requests the following item be placed on the April 4 City Councll agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Contract with Star Construction for removal of Pine Avenue Check Valve This contract is for the removal of a check valve an Pine Avenue. Removing this valve is needed to make adjustments th pressure zones to improve water service. This work was not competitively bid because it is less than $5,000. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that C"rty Council approve the Contract with Star Construction to remove the Pine Avenue Check Valve for a cost not to exceed $4,691 and authorize the Mayor to sign it~ Thank you for your consideration. Please corrtact me if you have any questions regarcling any of these items. U RECETVEI • Page 1 • • STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ON THE BASIS OF A STIPULATED PRICE THIS AGREEMENT is dated. the day of in the year 2006 by and between City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho (hereinafter called OWNER) and Star Construction, Inc. (hereinafter called CONTRACTOR). ' OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth; agree as follows: Article 1 WORK The CONTRACTOR will complete all Work as specified or indicated in the Agreement. The WORK is generally described as follows: The Project includes all labor, materials, and permit fees required to remove and dispose of the check valve and vault located approximately 550 feet east of the intersection of Pine Avenue and Nola. Street. This project also includes the removal of one gate valve and installation of 10 inch pipe where the check valve assembly was. The Project for which the Work under the Agreement is described as follows: Pine Avenue Check Valve Removal All replacement materials and workmanship will meet the City of Meridian Standard Specifications and Drawings. The Contractor should become familiar with the specifications. Detailed Description of Work - The work is descnbed in Figure 1. Article 2 ENGINEER The City of Meridian Public Works Department will be the ENGINEER The City of Meridian Public Works Department is to act as OWNER's representative, assume all duties and responsibilities and have the rights and authority assigned to ENGINEER in the Contract Documents in connection with completion of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Article 3 CONTRACT TIME. The Work will be completed within forty five (45) calender days from the date when the Contract Time commences to run. Time is of the essence. Article 4 CONTRACT PRICE. OWNER will pay CONTRACTOR for completion of the Work in current funds as follows: $4691 Article 5 PAYMENT PROCEDURES. The CONTRACTOR will submit an Application for Payment upon completion of the Work Applications for Payment must be submitted to the Public Works Department _ Payments. The OWNER will make progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of CONTRACTOR's Application for Payment as recommended by the Public Works Department, on or about the 15'~ day of each month during construction for Applications submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the 1st day of that month. All progress payments will be on the basis of the progress of the work measured by the schedule of 3/22/2006 Page 1 of 3 C~ values established in Article 4. The OWNER may retain up to 5% of the amount of the payment until final completion and acceptance of all Work covered by this Agreement. Upon completion and acceptance of the Work, payment will be made in full, including retained percentages, less authorized deductions, within thirty (30) days. Article 6 INTEREST. All moneys not paid when due will bear interest at 12% per annum or the maximum rate allowed by law at the place of Project, whichever is less. Article 7 CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIONS. In order to induce the OWNER to enter into the Agreement, the CONTRACTOR makes the following representations: 7.1 The CONTRACTOR has familiarized itself with the nature and extent of the Work, site, locality, and a111ocal conditions and Laws and Regulations that in any manner may affect cost, progress, performance or furnishing of the Work. 7.2 The CONTRACTOR has studied carefully all drawings of physical conditions. 7.3 The CONTRACTOR has given Public Works Department written notice of all conflicts, en ors or discrepancies that he has discovered and the written resolution thereof by ENGINEER is acceptable to CONTRACTOR Article 8 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The Contract Documents, which comprise the entire agreement between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR concerning the Work, consist of the following: 8.1 This Agreement. 8.2 Exhibits to this Agreement - N/A. 8.3 Drawings of existing check valve. 8.4 CONTRACTOR'S Quote. 8.5 2005 Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction, including Division 100, except as superseded by the - Information For Bidders, contained herein. 8.6 Revisions to the Standard Specifications and Special Provisions. 8.7 Documentation submitted by CONTRACTOR prior to Notice of Award. 8.8 The documents listed in paragraph 8.2 above are attached to this Agreement (except as expressly noted otherwise above). 8.9 City of Meridian Standard Specifications & Drawings - 2002 8.10 E7CD General Conditions There are no Contract Documents other than those listed above in this Article 8. The Contract Documents may only be amended, modified or supplemented by written Change Order. 3/22/2006 Page 2 of 3 • ! • • Article 9 MISCELLANEOUS. 9.1 No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interest in the Contract Documents will be binding on another party hereto without tl~e written consent of the party sought to be bound; and specifically but without limitation moneys that may become due and moneys that are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of this restriction maybe limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. 9.2 OWNER and CONTRACTOR each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect of all covenants and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. Article 10 OTHER PROVISIONS. None 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and CONTRACTOR have signed this Agreement in triplicate. One counterpart each has been delivered to OWNER, CONTRACTOR and ENGINEER All portions of the Contract Documents have been signed or identified by OWNER and CONTRACTOR or by ENGINEER on their behalf. The Agreement will be effective on Owner CITY OF MERIDIAN By: Name: Tammv deWeerd. Mayor 2006. Contracto % /~' Ti~Gt rGa/t/ By: Name: G! G- ~ ~~/.21~Ilst/(r-C-~ Approved by City Council: [CORPORATE SEAL] Attest William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk [CORPORATE SEAL] Attest ~~'_~~,(,~} ~ f'L~ Address for giving notices 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian. ID 83642 Address for giving notices ~~ .~C'''~ /~7 Public Works License No. * (if CONTRACTOR is a corporation, attach evidence of authority to sign if other than President signing) 3/22/2006 Page 3 of 3 03/21!'2006 17:46 208286 STAR CUNSTRUC~ PAGE 01 i STAR CC)~TSTRUC'~~Ol~", ~..~.C. P.~..~rx 157 Star, Ip •3669 } bus: (~08~ 286-9198 ,Aanc~l -Cell: 867 7!?82 Fa~c: (208) 286-7947 IM •~~l ~~ ~~~~ Atm: Rader ~1f11~~~.~..~ A1~td"~~ ~ ~Z.I ~I'oltl: _ AaU'lIrmin~e ~.....r--_ - --- ~. .. r' - ~ RE: ~'~~:i~~!!'~ [fin + ~ 37~larar ...~ ..~,,~ ~': ~1~1,~R~L7 * Urgent © For Your R~Oi~r ~ Rcply ASAFS(~, Plt~e C,o~aen~ ~ I~y1e, pleas Iet me know your intcntions as soon as you can, so that T c~qt pt`epate ifyotx elect me tq do the work. . ~~ ~;~~ ~ ~y /./ ~l _ ~'~~~~.~~ ~ ~~ D f ~~~ ~.,D~1. 03~21~2006 17:46 208286 STAR CONSTRUC~ PAGE 02 ,~.,t,..e~.+ a~+Fw~ v-._~_~. STAN. ~ONS'.~'~~T~T~Q~, ~.~.~. P.Q~ Box lg7 Star, .~ 53669 Bus: (208) 286-9198 ,Auci1- Cep. 867-7052 Fay: (24S) .286-947 Ptapost~ S~mittad To; ~it~ of M~dt~an Pit 8845116 F;Qx 89&9331 Imo: I~ucrh 20, 2006 . Sfree~: 680 fi,liVato~mwer Lr~tt~, 5t~1e 200 Job Nanta: Pine A+v~t~ halve ~9, $t~e and ,~ f:ode: M~dCi~an. ID 83642 Job T.oc~on; Pine ~v~e Aticalt~ocx/F.nRinoer: Dato of Plans: 03!16/06 ~vituort~: ~" ~ 2.0 c~ G We s and fog; f~V ~~f ~rF II~/~ ~~ / t~~~ ~ ~R7WR~ ~ JL ~ GYM ~ ~ S-~1~ a~ of'O~ ~ N[~i~Mi a~M~q l4~ ~. +.a~~V ~ W7 YYNF ~b+dt tea dlpdd~[esa~i lmuoradv~area.~.+sAirs~oanditiom~a~~tl,aw~asf~baar~L ' .. Wt hereby td ~ lat~or d4ld metsis'Is ~- coanp1~e in dert+r~ Wkh tbC ~4ge ~eaific'dQiotlp, ~aa' the smolt c~: ~~p ~/ ~ . ••^ - y,• ~ t0 be a-ede 8s lG1IflIiM~ As pear eontxsct ~ upon oolnplr~ioa egad as saao4thly progress paid bq tttc troth of the m~ fdIIa~a~ag Arty beck tbat would a8'oot/dect+eseG t~s pxapnsaV mtacstnlC ~ be bq Star C'am, L.L.C., oz BRey will be oda+ed i¢aalid. Alt ~iia4 is weed to 6c as - A11 watlc to ba a~ a wasmoaddce mm~na' aamMmgto iuodand prate. Aqy aiGe~ia~ a davigi~n Coen alwve spiona uwatvitl~ a~ee'a ooau, w~l be d atldy ul~mt writta~t onkrs. ~ wHl tieaome ea esln~ e~ and ~ e Al< oorttiogeot upaa or delays t+ey~nd auP ooatnwt. oac ~vadras am f(uliy b7' ai '. C 3oeut~oe coo+atuotion list+ility , I401E: Tim propose[ ~ be wit~8rawn b3' ua ifnoa adapted v- ~nen days. A+dLorized Si~-aaaa . Aooegirance of Propw3al The above ,~irioes, moms a~ oaadidotts ato eari~Crflty and are bs~g aac~eprted, Yoa a~ a~tiz~ to do t>~ wozlc sped. Pmt t~l be ~ma~cic as otrtlin®fl above. Aoc ~ d: op v ~ - ~. 0321/2006 17:46 2082867 STAR CCINSTRUC PAGE 03 S T,~.~. CONST~~CJCTYON, L.L.C. P.O. Bv~ x,57 Staz-, ~A 83669 Bus: (208) 286-9198 ~ .A,~.ci.~ - Ce~l~: {208) 567-7082 ~ Fay: (208) 286-7947 t~ c: -~ -- ~~ , . ti~ r' _:~ '- ~ . L 1 ~- t. gyp. , ~ ~~ ~ ~- ~! ~ -~ L. .~. 'l, j ._. ~ ~ 1 .m ~•. 't ~. _ - _ c- ,' .. . .. _. _ .. ! Xl ~ _ _. __ ~~ - - - ~, ~~ ~ -~ ,~ • March 31, 2006 MI 05-008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Lynn Brown ITEM NO. 5-K REQUEST Addendum to Development Agreement -Request to Modify the approved Development Agreement for Cedar Springs Professional Center -northeast comer of Venable Lane and West 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: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Addendum to Qevelopment Agmt ~~~ ~ Date: ~ ~ Phone: c~ [r~-~~~~ ~ ~ ~ l S~ C~~ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meddlan. .~ cirv of lei ~ • ~ -, eY1G~1G~"YI ~3'~ ~ 1DAH0 tiF c t~,~ e~Rfb"TREASURE VN~Y SINCF 1903 MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Keith Bird Joseph W. Borton Charles M. Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS City Attorney/HR 703 Main Street 898-5506 (City Attorney) 898-5503 (HR) Fax 884-8723 Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234/fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 W. Bower Street 888-3579 /fax 898-5501 Planning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/fax 888-6844 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888-6678/fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500/fax 895-9557 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211/fax 887-1297 - Wastewater 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N.W. 8th Street 888-5242/fax 884-1159 C~ RECEIVED MAC ~ ~ 20 City Of Meridial, City Clerk ®flice January 24, 2006 Lynn A. Brown 355 South 3`~ Street Boise, ID 83702 Re: Addendum to Development Agreement -Cedar Springs Professional Center MI 05-008 Dear Mr. Brown, Enclosed please find the original Addendum to the Development Agreement for Cedar Springs Professional Center, which is ready for your review and signatures of the appropriate parties. Please sign where indicated and return to the City of Meridian City Clerk's Office for placement on the next available City Counal Agenda for approval. Please call me if you have any questions at 208-888-4433. Tara Green Deputy City Clerk enc. CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK -FAX 888-4218 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING -FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE -FAX 884-8119 Printed on recycled paper ~° ~ ADA COUNTY RECORQER J.~ NAVARRO AMOUNT .00 42 . ~ BOISE IQANO 04/06/06 02:1 QEPUTY ~cld Allen RECORDEQ -REQUEST OF ~I I I' II I~ ~ ~I I I~ I' I I I I'~"I"I ~'~ I I'I~ City of Meridian 1 ~'~~~~~~$ SEC®NII ADg-ENl)iJM T® 4.1 "USES PERIVIITTED BY TIIIS AGREEEMENT'" ®F TIIE I)EVEI..®PIVIENT AG12EElVIENT" (CASE NO. A~-00-019 F®I~ NE`V CASE N®.1VII 05-008) PAIITIES: 1. City of Meridian 2. Lynn A. Brown, Developer 3. Robert W. Montgomery, Owner The following is an addendum to that certain DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, entered into on the 6a' day of May, 2002, and that certain First Addendum to Development Agreement dated the 28~' day of April, 2005. This addendum is made and entered into this 2 ~' ~~ day of ~Ghr , 2006, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, hereafter called "CITY', and LYNN A. BROWN, whose address is 355 S. 3'~ Street, Boise, Idaho 83702, hereinafter called "DEVELOPER" and Robert W. Montgomery, whose address is 12 Varsity Circle, Rancho Mirage, California 92270, hereinafter called "OWNER". OWNER and/or DEVELOPER agree to be bound by the terms of the original Development Agreement (instrument # 102067381), and the First Addendum to Development Agreement (instrument #105058639) on the land described in Exhibit "A", except as specifically regarding new land uses and hours of operation. 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", and the terms of the First Addendum to the Development Agreement, exhibit "C", or those City ordinances in effect at that time any subsequent conditional use application is filed, whichever are more restrictive. 2. That a Convenience Store use and 24-hour operation will be allowed only on Lot 1, Block 25 of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 6, and shall not apply to all five lots. 3. That "Owner" and/or "Developer" agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian and the "Property" shall be subject to de-annexation of the "Owner" and/or "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 second 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 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI-OS-008 CEDAR SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL CENTER) PAGE 1 OF 5 s • second addendum shall be binding on the "Owners" 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 bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. "City" agrees, upon written request of "Owner" or "Developer", 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" and/or "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" and/or "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. SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI-OS-008 CEDAR SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL CENTER) PAGE 2 OF 5 • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and Made it effective as hereinabove provided. D /~~/ A. Brown OWNER BY: Robert W. Montgom CITY OF MERIDIAN BY /~.Im Mayor T Weerd „¢, ~~~„, 1 Council: ~' ~~'®~/ A~ Sao Attest: ~ ~\ ~~ ~~~°~ :~ ffi. William G. Berg, Jr., Ci Cl = ~ ~~~y~ ' ~. o~ 4 a~ 6ptjff~D'~rf bdP89d$~4aa~~®,4 SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI-OS-008 CEDAR SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL CENTER) PAGE 3 OF 5 ~~ w ®Av O.l ..~„ ®~ C7 STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Ada, ) On this day of ~~ ~~ ~ , 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary ublic in and for said State, personally appeared Lynn A. Brown, known or identified to me to be the person who executed this agreement, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official !'day and year in this certificate first above written. ._ ~~'~; • :_ ~ir .~=: ~Y 1G •~ P UB~ ~~- O ~o~~~ T8 OF ~9,'~~0 STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Ada, ) My Commission 'l~F On this day of ,-1,~'~t ~~1-' 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Not Public in and for said State, personally appeared Robert W. Montgomery, known or identified to me to be the person who executed this agreement, and acknowledged to me that they 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. e,',o®a~ruee~eA~~. ~i S ~i .~` ~~}o l0 ''. 7f ~ ~~i • ~S '~UBL~G ~~~~~si~8 OF 1~ ~.''~p Nota~'ubl~cf fo aho Residing at: ~( My Commission Expires: SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI-OS-008 CEDAR SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL CENTER) PAGE 4 OF 5 • STATE OF IDAHO ) ss County of Ada ) On this ~~ day of _ ,~pY1 ~ , 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. ~®®®OlOOI ~~ ~®® i~ ~e~• ® ~ ,~' ~ ~ r • ~ ~ a 0 . ; ® e ~ ® ~ i o t ® ~a i ~ ~`~ ~~a ,~qV ®a~ ®~~~A Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: _C~ ~d ~ ~ ~~+ L ~ Commission expires: OQ-~ ~>( ~ SECOND ADDENDUM TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MI-OS-008 CEDAR SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL CENTER) PAGE 5 OF 5 EXHIBIT A Lem criPt3o_ n Of Prope~rt A parcel of land being a portion of the SE ~/4, Section 36, T.4N., R.1 W., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a found 1/z" irvn pin marking the Southwest corner of said SE ~/4, Section 36 (South I/4 corner), THE REAL POINT ®F BEGINNING; thence South 89°19'43" East 462.63 feet (formerly South 890'51" East), along the Southerly line of said SE'/a, Section 36, and along the center line of Ust3ck Road, to a set 5/8" imn pin and cap marking the most Southwesterly corner of those lands excepted from Parcel 1, as it is described in Quitclaim Deed Instrument No. 99123670, Records of Ada County, Idaho, from which corner a found 3-1/4" Ada County Engineer Aluminum Cap, monumenting the Southeast corner of said Section 36 bears South 89°19'43" East, 2,199.57 feet, as shown on that certain Record of Survey No. 4958, recorded April 2I, 2000, as Instrument No. 100030102, Records of Ada County, Idaho; thence leaving said Southerly Iine and said center line North 00°28'24" East, 258.01 feet along the Southerly extension of a an existing North-South fence line, to a slight angle point in said fence line; thence North OI°18'10" East, 105.78 feet along said fence line; thence North O1°59'18" East, 79.41 feet to an angle point in said fence; thence South 88°35'37" East, 4.11 feet along an East-West fence Iine to a found 5/8 inch iron pin and cap PLS 8248, being an angle point in the Westerly boundary of said excepted lands from Parcel 1 of Instrument No. 99123670; - _. thence continuing South 88°35'37" East, 129.61 feet along a dog in said Westerly boundary of those excepted lands, to a found i/z" iron p~~ thence North 01°25'10" East, 886.69 feet (formerly North Ol°24'08" East, 886.62 feet), along said Westerly.Iine of those excepted lands, to a set 518" iron pin and cap, marking the Northwest corner of said excepted lands, being a point on the Southerly line of the N i/s, SE '/4, Section 36, from which poinnt a found 1/a" iron pin marking the SE 1/I6 corner of said Section 36, bears South 89°14'39A East, 52.99 feet (formerly South 89°15'45" East); thence South 89°14'39 East, 1,596.37 feet (formerly South 89°15'45" East, 1,596.29 feet), along said Southerly line, to a found 5/8" iron pin marking the Northeast corner of a parcel of land, as it is described in Book 181 of Deeds at page 67, Records of Ada County, Idaho; thence South 00°51'23" West, 200.59 feet (formerly South 00°50'16" West), to a found S/8" iron pin marking the Southeast corner of said parcel of land Book 181, page d7; thence South 89°10'45" East, 435.10 feet (formerly South 89°12'23" East, 435.18 feet), to a found 5/8" iron pin marking a point on the Westerly right-of way of Meridian Road; thence continuing South 89°10'45" East, 25.00 feet to a point on the Easterly line of said SE1/4, Section 36, also bring the centerline of Meridian Road; thence North 00°51'23" East, 1,526.16 feet (formerly North 00°50'16" East) along said Easterly line and said centerline, to a found 5/8" iron pin and cap marking the NE corner of said SE 1/a, Section 36 (East 1/4 corner); thence North 89°09'38" West, 25.00 feet (formerly North 89°10'42" West) along the Northerly line of said SE'/4, Section 36 to a set 5/8" iron pin and cap on said Westerly right-of-way of Meridian Road; thence continuing North 89°09'38" West, 2,655.40 feet along said Northerly line, to the Northwest corner of said SE '/4, Section 36 (Center '/., corner), from which corner a set S/8" iron pin and cap (a witness corner}, bears South 00°27'49" West, 15.b0 feet; thence South 00°27'49" West, 2,657.96 feet (formerly South 00°26'40" West), along the Westerly line of said SE'/4, Section 36 to the REAL POINT' OF BEGINNING; Containing an area of 100.71 acres, more or less. ® o e .... ~ :: R~CORDE~•REQ EST Of aen ccr~~rr R~co~tii~ t •~. 0~~'EJ Fd,AVAR~F~ '~^a~~..~u~.ftn ~~~~u FE£ E - J1~~7JtUV Lil 1 Y DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PARTIES: I . City of Meridian 2. Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, Owner/Developer . THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreements}, is made and entered into this day of 2d-_ , ~p 2.-, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal co oration of the State of Idaho, hereafter called SCITYS, and HOWELL-MURDOCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, hereinafter called "OWNER"/"DEVELOPERS, whose address is 4822 N. Rosepoint Way, Suite C, Boise, Idaho 83713. RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS, "Owners" are the sole owners, 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 sProperty"; and 1.2 WHEREAS, I.C. §67-651 lA, Idaho Code, provides that cities may, by ordinance, require or permit as a condition of re-zoning that the "OwnersS or SDeveloper" make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject "Property"; and 1.3 WHEREAS, SCityS has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment of Ordinance I 1-15- 12 and I I -16-4 A, which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and/or re-zoning of land; and 1.4 WHEREAS, SOwnerss and "Developers have submitted an application for annexation and zoning of the "Property"s described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of (R-4) Low Density Residential District, (Municipal Code of the City of Meridian); and DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-oo-019) - 1 • 1.5 WHEREAS, "Owners" and "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 fiL Zoning Commission, and subsequently before the City Council, include responses of government subdivisions providing services within the City of Meridian planxung jurisdiction, and received further testimony and comment; and 1.7 WHEREAS, City Council, the day of , 2002, 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, the "Findings" require the "Owners" and "Developer" enter into a development agreement before the City Council takes final action on annexation and zoning designation; and 1.9 "OWI~dERS" and "DEVELOPER° deem 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" requixes the "Owners" and "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 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-00-019) - 2 the "City" in the proceedings for annexation and zoning 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 I2. 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. DEFIl~TITIONS: 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 cleaz context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise: 3.I "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 8342. 3.2 "OWNER"/"DEVELOPER": means and refers to Howell- Murdoch Development Corporation, whose address is 4822 N. Rosepoint Way, Suite C, 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-00-019) - 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 Section 11-7-2 C which are herein specified as follows: Construction and development of 264 building lots and 3d other tots for a residential subdivlsion. ,Development shall be consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Lane Use Map which designates the property as Single Family Residential. 4.2 1Vo change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. 5. DEVELOPMENT IN CONDITIONAL USE; "Owners" and "Developer" are not required to submit to "City" an application for conditional use permit. 6. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: A. "Owners" and "Developer" shall develop the "Property" in accordance with the following special conditions: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff, originally provided in their Memorandum dated February l5, 2001, as follows: 1. That the Applicant shall provide a minimum of five percent {5010} common open space within the legal description boundaries. This requirement was adopted as part of the new Landscape Ordinance. But since the subject applications were submitted prior to City Council adoption of the Landscape Ordinance, they DEVELOPMEN'T' AGREEMENT (AZ-oo-019) - 4 a r _ - are technically exempt from the standards in that ordinance. However, if deemed to be in its best interest, the City can impose higher standards than are currently adopted as ordinance as conditions of annexation for any development requesting annexation into the City. 2. The open space shall be exclusive of all street rights-of--way and street buffers, except for right-of--way specifically dedicated for landscaping within a subdivision. Stormwater detention facilities must be designed in accordance with Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance in order to count toward the open space requirement. Open space may be active or passive in its intended use, and must be accessible by all residents of the subdivision. Common open space shall be suitably improved for its intended use. At a minimum, common open space lots shall include one (I } deciduous shade uee per eight thousand (8,000) square feet and lawn, either seed or sod. 3. There is 5.16% useable open space, and the stormwater facilities shall be designed to the standards of Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance. The 5.16R/o includes the 35-foot buffer along Meridian Raad, the 25-foot buffer along Ustick Road, and the 2S-foot Settlers ln-igation common lots along the north property line. ' 4. Due to the single-family uses abutting the east boundary of Lot 34, Black 1 {proposed as future office use), a minimum 20-foot planting strip, in accordance with City Ordinance 12-4-7.A., is required along the west property line of this lot. 5. A detached sidewall~ with a minimum 5-foot-wide planter strip between the curb and sidewalk shall be required along the Meridian Road frontage. b. That no subdivision infrastructure improvements can begin until the White Drain Sewer Trunk's easements ai~e finalized by the City and the trunk construction schedule is finalized with the civil contractor that is awarded the bid. ~EVEr.oP~NT AG~~r~r {.4z-oaai9> - s ~- 7. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 8. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall 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. 9. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential azeas and in accordance with City Ordinance Sections 11-I3-4.C. and 12-5-2.M. 10. Two-hundred-fifty- and 100-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at. street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 1 I. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91} for all off-street parking areas in the proposed future commercial lots. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 12. Off-street pazlcing shall be provided in the proposed future commercial lots in accordance with the City of Meridian Ordinance I 1-13 for use of property. 13. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs shall be permitted. 14. Provide five-foot-wide sidewallcs in accordance with City DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT {AZ-00-019) - 6 Ordinance Section I2-5-Z.IC I5. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Adopt the ACHD Recommendations as follows: 16. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of--way from the centerline of Meridian Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of--way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACRD Ordinance # 193. 17. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of--way from the centerline of Ustick Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of--way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, ff the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACRD Ordinance # 193. I8. Any existing or proposed irrigation facilities on Usticlc Road and Meridian Road should be located outside of the new right-off way. 19. Construct two main entrances on Meridian Road located 270-feet north of the south property line, and 300-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. The roadway entrances shall be designed with minimum 21-foot street sections on either side of a DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (,x-00-019 - 7 center median. The median shall be constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum of a 100-square foot area. The applicant is proposing to construct two outbound lanes and one inbound lane with a median, within 64-feet of right-of--way. 20. Construct center turn lanes on Meridian Road for the main entrance intersections. The turn lanes should be constructed to provide a minimum of I00-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the appraach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the turn lanes with District staff. 21. Construct a S-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Meridian Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of- way. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 22. Construct one main entrance on Usticlc Road located at the west property line, as proposed. The proposed entrance is located in conformance with District policy, and the applicant shall construct Venable I~ne as one half of a 36-foot street section, plus 12-feet of additional pavement within 42-feet of right-of- way. The applicant is not proposing to construct a median at this entrance. 23. Construct a center turn Lane on Ustick Road for the main entrance intersection. The turn lane shall be constructed to provide a minimum of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 24. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewallc on Ustick Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of- way. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 25. Construct the segment of Ashton Drive from Meridian Road to Elsmore Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 pEVELOPMENT AGFtEE1V1ENT (AZ-00-o19) - 8 • • vehicle trips per day, District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as a 3b-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right- of-way. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment should be stated on the final plat. 26. Construct the segment of Ashby Street from Meridian Road to Alexis Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right- of-way. Due to the fact that Ashby Street abuts the south property line, the applicant should only be required to construct one half a 36-Foot street section plus I2 additional feet of pavement within 42 feet of right-of--way. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment shall be stated on the final plat. 27. Construct three stub streets to the north, as proposed. The applicant should not be required to provide paved temporary turnarounds at the end of the stub streets because the stubs are less than 150-feet in length. The applicant should be required to install signs at the termini of the roadway stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan fox the stub streets with District staff. The proposed stub streets are located: ^ Between Lot 1, Block 15 and Lot 1 I, Block I8 ^ Between Lot I I , Block 15 and Lot I ,Block 13 ^ Between Lot 8, Block 13 and Lot 2, Block 10 28. Construct Ashton Lane from Meridian Road to the proposed Venable Lane. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150-feet in length. The applicant shall be DSVELOPMF1vT AC'iREEMENT {AZ-00-019) - 9 required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashton Lane stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. . 29. Construct Ashby Street from Meridian Road extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Alexis ,Avenue and from Greenwich Avenue extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Venable Lane as a 29- foat street section within 50-feet of right-of:way, as proposed. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150-feet in length. The applicant shall be required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashby Street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. 30. Construct Venable Lane as a local/commercial street. The applicant shall construct Venable Lane from Ustick Road to the north property line of the school lot as one half of a 40-foot street section plus 12-feet of additional pavement, with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewallc within 42-feet of right-of--way. To . the north of the school site Venable Lane shall be constructed as a 36-foot street section. 31. Any proposed landscape islandsimedians within the public right- of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this should be required on the final plat. 32. The applicant should be required to construct all public roads within the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with cwcb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of--way. 33. The public streets within the subdivision shall be located to align or offset a minimum of 125-feet {centerline to centerline). It appears that the street layout is in conformance with District policy. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-00-019) - 10 -~- - -- 34. The turnarounds shall be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 4S-feet. 35. Provide a $30,000 deposit to the Public Rights-of--Way Trust Fund for the cost of one-quarter of a traffic signal at the intersection of Usticlc Road and Meridian Road. 36. Other than the proposed public streets, direct lot or parcel access to Ustick Road and Meridian Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as required with this aplicaxion, shall be stated on the final plat. 3 7. Comply with the Standard Requirements (9) listed in ACHD's Planning and Development Division Development Application Report dated December 12, 2001. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 38. That afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute be available to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' part. 39. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 40. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection is contingent upon acceptance of the water system by the Meridian Water for water quality. 41. Final approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department, 42. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 43. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT {A2-OO-019) - l 1 Additionally, the applicant shall comply with the action of the City Council taken at their February 19, 2002 meeting as follows: 44. Based upon testimony, and the widely recognized need for infrastructure improvements in the North Meridian Planning area sooner, rather than later, espeaally as it respects large developments, the Ov~mer/Developer, as a condition of annexation and zoning, shall participate in the negotiations with Ada County Highway District, and shall become a party to any eventual agreements worked out by the Developer/ACRD Group. Therefore, as a condition of annexation, and as a condition of the Development Agreement, Applicant shall participate in any road infrastructure in the North Meridian Planning area agreements negotiated with ACRD and shall faithfully perform the terms of such agreement or agreements. 45, That no building permits shall be issued until the sewer is constructed and connected to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. 46. The Parks Department agrees to pay for four feet of the road on the northern boundary which abuts the City park, and pay for the curb and gutter for a total cost of approximately $13,500.00, per ACJHD. 47. Applicant shall be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through the proposed development which shall include stubbing to the south boundary of the development. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the centerline. 48. That the Developer shall extend Venable Lane, north from Ustick Road, and dedicate their one-half of Venable Lane on the east side to provide a full residential collector wide street from Ustick to the north, and which will line up with the existing Venable Lane property. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-oo-019) - 12 • 7. COMPLL4NCE PERIOD/ CONSENT TO REZONE: 'This Agreement and the commitments contained herein shall be terminated, and the zoning designation reversed, upon a default of the "Owners" and"Developer" or "Owners" and "Developer"'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. 8. CONSENT TO DE-ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF ZONING DESIGNATION: "Owners" and "Developer" consent upon default to the de- annexation and/or a reversai of the zoning designation of the "Property" subject to and conditioned upon the following conditions precedent to-wit: 8. I That the "City" provide written notice of any failure to comply with this Agreement to "Owners" and "Developer" and if the "Owners" and "Developer" fails to cure such failure within six (6) months of such notice. 9. INSPECTION: "Owners" and "Developer" 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. I0. DEFAULT: 10.1 In the event ",owners" and"Developer", "Owners" and. "Developer"'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 ail of the terms and conditions included in this Agreement in connection with the "Property", this Agreement may be DEVELOPMENT AGREEIV~NT (AZ-00-o19) - 13 • 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 "Owners" and "Developer" of any one or more of the covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to the breach and breaches waived and shall not bar 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 "Owners" and "Developer"'s cost, and submit proof of such recording to "Owners" and "Developer", 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 "aty" 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 "Owners" and "Developer", 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 "Owners" and "Developer" 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 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-OQ-019) - 14 (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 as maybe 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 "Owner" and "Developer" 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 similaz 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 bands, irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check or negotiable bands, as allowed under Meridian City Code § 12-5-3, to insure that installation of the improvements, which the °`Owners" and "Developer" agrees to provide, if required by the "City". I5. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The °`Owners" and "Developer" agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued until all improvements are completed, unless the "City" and "Owners" and "Developer" have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements will be completed in a phased developed; and in any event, no Cextif?cater 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 "Owners "and "Developer" 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. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (A~OO-o19) - 15 • 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: 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 OWNER/DEVELOPER Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation 4822 N. Rosepoint Way, Suite C Boise, Idaho 83713 17. I 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. I9. 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. DEVELOPN~NT AGF:EER~NT' (AZ-00-019} - 16 2Q. 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 acquiring an interest in the "Property". Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the "Froperty", 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 "Owners" and "Developer", to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if "City", in its sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that "Owners" and "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 "Owners" and "Developer" and "City" relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are na promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between "Owners" and "Developer" and."City", other than as aze 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. I 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 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-00-019} - 17 • amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 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 Clerlc DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-00-o19) - 18 ACItNOWLEDGMENTS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and Made it effective as hereinabove provided. ObVNER/DEVELOPMENT: HO'WELI--IVIYIRDOCH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEVELOPER B VIN HO LL, PRESI ENT CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: ' MAY R ROB RT D. CORRIE Attest: ~c,~~:-= CITY CLERIC `````,``t`t_tf~~111t11i I6111g1+~`~'/,'//,' ~~~~ ~- `1 ~ ~ ~~i ~~o = ~~AL = :.~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ-Oa-019) - 19 STATE OF IDAHO) COUNTY OF ADA) :ss On this ~' day of _ /~~ , in the year 2002, before me, I.a ,.r v ~ , ~,f , +~,- i, a Notary Public, personally appeared ICe~rin Imo- Dwell, known or identified to me to be the President of Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, who executed the instrument on behalf of said corporation and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said corporation. `c'.I D. ~J~~t * ....~ ~.~• ~. STATE OF IDAHO o lic for Idaho Residing at:,~~~r ~~ Commission expires: 2 /e :ss County of Ada JJ~~ ) On this "r'~ day of _ ~~~(/YLQ , in the year 2002, before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Robert D. Cowie and '4William G. Berg, know or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerlc, 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. Sh~,~ae~ (SEAL) Notary Public for Idaho Commission expires: Q,~_2S~ DEVELOPMENT AGREE1y~NT (AZ-00-019) - 20 ADA COUNTY RECORDER d~ID NAVARR4 AMOUNT .00 ' ° 1~1 BDISE IDAHO 06110/06 02:08 PM ~t DEPUTY IOcki Allen RECORDED-REQUEST OF Ideridian Clty 10505563 FIRST ADDENDUM TO 4.1 BUSES PERMITTED 13Y THIS AGREEMENT" OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (CASE NO. A2P00-019 FOR NEW CASE NO. RZ-03-013} The fallowing is an addendum to that certain Development Agreement between the City of Meridian and Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, and specifically to section 4.1 Uses Permitted By This Agreement on page 4 of the Development Agreement, which is subsequeirt to entering into of the original Development Agreement dated May 6, 2002, and recorded in the Ada County Recorder's office as Instrument No. 102067381. The parties hereto agree as follows: A. The Development Agreement dated May b, 2002, as it pertains to Uses Permitted By This Agreement, is amended to read as follows: Construction and development of 264 building lots and 31 other lots for a residential subdivision, carwash, coffee stand/kiosk, fuel pumps and office uses. Development shall be consistent with the 2002 Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map, which designates the property as "Mixed Use-Community" and "Medium Density Residential." B. It is agreed between the City and Developer that the development project of Cedar Springs Professional Center shall be fully incorporated into the original development agreement with Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, and shall include the 5.51 acreswith a C-N zoning. Additionally, the conditions and the specific uses that were allowed within the original development agreement, which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full and consisting of forty-eight (48) pages, shall apply to the Cedar Springs Professional Center. Therefore, the "Developer" shall comply with the following additional condil3ans as follows: A. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Department as follows: 1. The legal description submitted with the application meets the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission. 2. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. Essential City services will be made available to the subject property. First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 1 of 7 3. 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 far non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. B. Adopt the Recommendations of ACRD as follows: 1 • Construct Venable Lane as one-half of a 4Q-foot street section with curb, gutter, 5-foot concrete sidewalk on the east side of Venable Lane and a minimum of 24feet of pavement within 40-feet ofright-of--way. 2. Construct a 30-foot shared curb return type driveway that intersects Venable Lane approximately 270-feet north of Ustick Road, as proposed, Pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15- foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 3. Construct a 48-foot shared curb return type driveway with an 8-foot center island within it that intersects Ustick Road approximately 140-feet west of the east property line, as proposed. Pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. 4. Other than the Access point that is specifically approved with this application, direct lot access to Ustick Road is prohibited. Access restrictions will be r~uired to be noted on the final plat. 5. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. ACRD Standard Conditions of Approval 1 • Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of- way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. . 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number} for details. First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 2 of 7 ~ ~ 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-625$ (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifica]ly waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans far staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit {or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval far occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road imgact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #198, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. it is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACRD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-SOU-342-1585} at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACRD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled} are compromised during any phase of construction. 1 U. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signal by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway ,D15trlct. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject propertyunless awaiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 3 of 7 r • C. Adopt the Meridian Fire Department Recommendations as follows: 1. That afire-flow as required by the International Fire Code is provided to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 350' apart. 2. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 3. Final approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. Additionally, internal fire hydrants will be required for the project. 4. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have a turn around. 5. All entrances and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside. 6. Operational fire hydrants and access roads are required before combustible construction begins. fi. All building uses and processes ~to comply with the fire cede in effect at the time of constriction. 8. No vertical obstructions or mature landscaping which obstructions the outlet4 of the fire hydrant within 10'. 9. Vertical clearance for driveways shall be 13'b", this may affect tree placement in landscaping areas, 10. All fire lanes shall have a clear driving surface which is20' wide available at all times. D. Adopt the conditions of Sanitary Service Company as follows: 1. Design the enclosure per the standard recommendations of SSC for access, gates, floor/pad, container stops/bumpers, and dimensions. Coordinate the design with SSC. Approval of the trash enclosure design will be required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance for the project. E. Adopt the action of the City Council taken at their March 16, 2004 meeting as follows: For clarifi tion: 1. The revised Site/I,andscapePtan (Sheet L-1, by Jensen Belts) is dated 3/8/04. The CUP shall also reflect this revised plan. First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 4 of 7 2. The new fuel island canopy elevations sheet (by LAB Architect) is dated October, 2003. The CUP shall also reflect the revised sheet in Condition #6 of the Recommendations. 3. The revised Site/Landscape Plan reflects most of the modifications rewired, but the Plan does not reflect the following: a) a detached sidewalk on Ustick Road (PP condition #2} b) right-of-way landscape improvements adjacent to Ustick Road (PP condition #8.b.} • • c} parallel parking stall change (CUP condition #7, page 2) 4. The above modifications (3 above} must be made during the Final Plat and/or CZC approval process. 5. The proposed school site is presently conceptual, as the school district has not decided on a layout as of yet. 6. Hours of operation for thedrive-through coffee stand shall be from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Hours of operation for the car wash {no more than three (3) vacuums allowed}, and two (2} fuel pumps shall be allowed as a 24 hour operation. Hours of fuel delivery and refrigerated truck operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The decibel levels generated at the site shall be required to comply with Meridian City Code 6-3-b. 7. The developer shall also be required to comply with all the conditions set forth in the corresponding applications, which are PP-03-044 and CUP-03- 067. C. Except as modified by this Addendum, the Development Agreement • between the parties dated May 6, 2004, is hereby ratified and confirmed, IT IS SO AGREED. First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 5 of 7 s 'f LJ DATED AND SIGNED this ~~ - CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: ~ Mayor leerd Attest: !~1°i~ _, L'a~c~;C S 3-OS BY~/l.~-=~ ~ City Clerk "~' ~ ~. DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEVELOPER BY: ~ STATE OF IDAHO } ss County of Ada, ) On this ~ day of ~~ l , 2004, before me, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared Kevin Howell, known or identified to me to be the President ofHowell-Murdoch Development Corporation, who executed the instrument on behalf of said corporation and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said corporation. c, ,. OAR .,Vp ~. ~ ,~ ,~ . r L ~ '~~~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ...: First Addendum to otary Publ'c for Idaho Residing ats. .D ,~~ Commission Expires: ~ ~.~~ • Agreement Page 6 of 7 r STATE aF IDAHO ) S5 County of Ada, ) On this ~ day of JYC$ ,,,,~~~S Notary Public, personally appeared Tatum de WeerdW illi ore me, the undersigned identified to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the persons that executed the instrument on behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. tC'8 L. 8''~• (SEAL) ti~ vT~ $ 'i * ~!._ r piTBLIG ~A~ OF 19~~~~ ublic for Idaho ' ion Expires: v 0 O Z.1VNorklM\MeridianlMeridiau 153bOM1Cedar Srpings Professional Canter RZ-X3-013 PP-03-044 CUP-03-O6TFirst Addendum roo AA.doc First Addendum to Development Agreement Page 7 of 7 • • March 31, 2006 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Mayor's Office ITEM NO. 6-A-1 REQUEST Proclamation for Fair Housing Month 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: COMMENTS See affached 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: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • -- ~ `:, ,a crrv or ~~~~ `~ '~ .~r~ .~ eYl~rcn ~ ~~~.. IDAHO ~b~ ~,~ ^ ~ \: F ~~Mrttr o q, Tar~nSi~nr. V,.u~ ~ Ste,) 19@7 the Office of tdie ~-~layor Z' R O C ~ .~1. ~Vl .~l ~~ O ~1(~ ~l~Vhereas, April 2006 marks the 38th anniversary of the passage of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing Act; and 1Nhereas, the Idaho Human Rights Commission Act has prohibited discrimination in housing since 1969; and 1Nhereas, equal opportunity for all -regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin - is a fundamental goal of our nation, state and city; and `1Nhereas, equal access to housing is an important component of this goal - as fundamental as the right to equal education and employment; and ~l~Vhereas, housing is a critical component of family and community health and stability; and ~1Nhereas, housing choice impacts our children's access to education, our ability to seek and retain employment options, the cultural benefits we enjoy, the extent of our exposure to crime and drugs, and the quality of health care we receive in emergencies; and "bVhereas, the laws of this nation and our state seek to ensure such equality of choice for all transactions involving housing; and 1Nhereas, ongoing education, outreach and monitoring are key to raising awareness of fair housing principals, practices, rights and responsibilities; and ~1NFiereas, only through continued cooperation, commitment and support of all Idahoans can barriers to fair housing be removed; ~Fierefore, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim April 2006 to be ,~.~l.~R 3~O~,1SI~C~ .~VIO~V ~3~ in the City of Meridian to promote awareness of equal housing opportunities. Dated this 4th day of April, 2006. Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Shaun Wardle, City Council Joe Borton, City Council Keith Bird, City Council Charlie Rountree, City Council d Q u , ~~ I p ~~~ ~~~, i. o~'Y1G~~G~-1? ~'~ ~"u. d ~ ~i IDAHD ,t~ ~Cq.1 '~'f'Rxnstt~ Vw-~'~ ; au:~ t~oa 2~ie office of the ~vtayor PROCL.A~I.~ITION 1Nhereas, April 2006 marks the 38th anniversary of the passage of Title Vlq of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing Act; and "'Whereas, the Idaho Human Rights Commission Act has prohibited discrimination in housing since 1969; and tiVhereas, squat opportunity for all -regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin - is a fundamental goal of our nation, state and city; and 1Nhereas, equal access to housing is an important component of this goat - as fundamental as the right to equal education and employment; and 1Nhereas, housing is a critical component of family and community health and stability; and Whereas, housing choice impacts our children's access to education, our ability to seek and retain employment options, the cultural benefrts we enjoy, the extent of our exposure to crime and drugs, and the quality of health care we receive in emergencies; and 1Nhereas, the laws of this nation and our state seek to ensure such equality of choice for afl transactions involving housing; and 'Whereas, ongoing education, outreach and monitoring are key to raising awareness of fair housing principals, practices, rights and responsibilities; and 'Whereas, only through continued cooperation, commitment and support of all Idahaans can barriers to fair housing be removed; ?~eerefore, 1, Tammy de INeerd, Mayor of the Ci#y of Meridian, do hereby proclaim April 2006 to be ,~'.~IR 3-f011SING ~IR09Y'~3-f in the City of Meridian to promote awareness of equal housing Dated #his 4th day of April, 2006. Tammy eerd, 1171~a or Shaun ardle, City Council Joe Borton, City Council Keith Bird, City Council Charlie Rountree- City Council • March 31, 2006 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Mayor's Office ITEM NO. 6-A-2 REQUEST Criteria for Scholarship 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: Date: Phone: _ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clay of Meridian. • • March 31, 2006 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Attorney /Legal Department ITEM No. 6-8-1 REQUEST Report from SWAC on Letter from Cherry Lane Christian Church AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached Lefler ~~~ Contacted: Date: Phone: _ Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the Ctiy of Meridian. ~ ~ 11 W Cherry Lane P O Box 671 Meridian ID 83680 (208) 888-3101 www.clcrchurch.org _ - ~L ~k~ R, k~ ~~ ~ ~~a~ 3/15/06 Sanitary Services Company 2130 W. Franklin Road, Meridian, ID 83642 Gentlemen; ~~tj~ ~~ ~e~~~ Ci~i ~Iexl~ ®ffice Re: Cherry Lane Christian Appl. For Matching Fuads Last month we sent an application to yon for $1800 in matching funds to assist us as we purchased benches-and tables utilizing recycled material for our new memorial park on Ten Mile Road. We have been advised that we might be eligible for the full amount of our request ($3,600) if we could show an offsetting amount of volunteer time by our congregation in connection with the benches, tables, and parkin general. Here is an estimate of the volunteer hours we envision on this project: Preparing flower beds with mulch 30 hrs. Planting bushes, trees, and bushes 60 hrs. Lay sod 20 hrs. Installing sprinkler system 80 ham, Laying memorial bricks 30 hrs. Flatwork concrete around gazebo 30 hrs. Painting 5 hrs Siga installation 5 hrs. Bench and picnic table assembly 5 hrs Bench placement g hrs. Cleanup for 100th anniversary on 6-6-6 10 hrs. Total 280 hrs. Than ou very mu or our assistance. Larry L. W odard, Outreach Minister "Equipping ~eopCe to ~Iorship, Ge~rn c~Ser}ve" _ ~~~~~~ • March 31, 2006 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Attorney /Legal Department ITEM NO. 6-8-2 REQUEST Draft RFP / RFQ for New City Hall Building 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: Date: Phone: _ Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. Request for Statements of Qualifications: Professional Architectural Services For Meridian City Hall APRIL 07, 2006 CITY OF ~ --~` - __-,~. -~ ~Y1 1~~ ~ ~t IDAHO SINCE 1903 Draft Version 040406(1) 1 Request for Statements of Qualifications Professional Architectural Services For Meridian City Hall Introduction and Instructions The City of Meridian is soliciting statements of qualifications and performance data from interested persons or firms to provide architectural services for the design of a new 80,000 square foot Meridian City Hall to be located on an a two acre site located at the southeast corner of Meridian Road and Broadway Avenue, Meridian,. Idaho. The architectural services must be provided under the direct supervision of an Architect licensed in the State of Idaho. The person or firm'hired for this project will'be selected on the basis of qualifications and demonstrated competence, and the contract for architectural services for the city hall project shall be; negotiated at prices that are fair and reasonable given the estimated value of the project, and the nature, scope, and complexity of the architectural services to be provided. Each submittal must include the information requested by this RFQ and be signed by an officer or owner of the company. Eight (8) copies of the ubmttal must be furnished. Brochures, photos, financial statements, and annual reports not specifically requested maybe appended to the back of each submittal. Submittals shall be typed or printed on 8-1/2" x 11"paper. Emphasis should be placed on the specific qualifications of the people who will actually perform the work and their approach to this specific project. To assist in the evaluation, it is desirable to format the submittal using the three categories of the "Information Requested" portion of this RFQ (A: Qualifications; B: Relevant Experience; and C: Approach to the Project). Sealed Statements of Qualification will be received until, and no later than, 4:00 PM, on Monday, Apri124, 2006. Submittals shall be mailed or delivered to the office of the City Clerk, Meridian,City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642. All submittals shall be marked "Meridian City Hall-Architectural Services Statement of Qualifications". Late submissions will not be accepted. The City of Meridian reserves the right to waive informalities and reject any submittal that does not comply with the requirements of this RFQ. The cost of the submittals and any related expenses, including travel shall be entirely the responsibility of the respondent. Draft Version 040406(1) Background: City of Meridian and its City Hall The City of Meridian is a growing community of approximately 67,000 residents, and is in the center of a region of more than half a million people. Meridian preserves its unique identity as a place that treasures its past, appreciates the present, and looks to the future with a spirit of harmony and prosperity. Meridian is located in southwest Idaho, 10 miles west of the State Capitol in Boise. Meridian enjoys many advantages due to its central valley location. Meridian was once fertile farming country for grains, vegetables,. and fiuits. Dairy products were produced locally for many years. During the past 20 years, farms have yielded to residences for the expanding population. The valley has seen explosive growth because of the influx of people who work in government,. finance,: business, professional, and technical fields. Meridian's current City Hall, built in 1987, is clearly inadequate to serve the needs of the growing community. Offices for many city services are currently housed in rented space spread across the community. Anew city hall is needed to bring the departments for many city services under one roof. This centralization will bring many benefits to the community including convenience for citizens seeking city services and increased employee productivity. Description of Proiect Site: Past and Present The project site is located on''approximatelyttyo acres at the southeast corner of Broadway Avenue and Meridian. Road in the heart of downtown Meridian. The property is bordered on the south by the Union Pacific Railroad right of way. Depictions of the site and vicinity are attached to this RFQ as Attachment "A. As early as 1912, the project site was occupied by private residences and the Meridian Livery and Feed. In 1929, the Ada County Dairymen's Association developed the Meridian Creamery on the site. An area to the south of the site was the home of the Fletcher Oil company in the'rnid twentieth century. The creamery operations continued to grow and production reached its peak by the mid 1960's. Since the closure of the creamery in 1970, the facility has housed a number of impermanent uses, but the site has been largely underutilized. Many of the structures on the site have suffered severe deterioration as a result of neglect (including the smokestack -see engineering analysis at attachment "A-7", at RFQ page 14). Meridian's downtown is currently undergoing a renewal, and the site for the new city hall is intended to act as a catalyst for further revitalization of downtown. Draft Version 040406(1) • Proposed City Hall Project Preliminary plans for the project site include an 80,000 square foot city hall building, a public plaza, a meandering water feature, a connection to the adjacent rail corridor to support a future regional commuter rail station, and surface vehicle parking to support the various activities intended for the site. A portion of the existing brick warehouse building at the southeast corner of the site may possibly be renovated to accommodate a local history museum and other civic uses. The site plan should also include a pedestrian connection to the existing City Hall to the north which may to continue to serve as the home for some municipal services in the future. Design Guidelines and Sustainability The design for this project is expected to adhere to the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines, a copy of which is attached to this RFQ as Attachment "B:" The purpose of the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines is to aid in the development of a concentrated urban, mixed-use, transit-supportive center that fasters pedestrian activity and defines Downtown as the heart of the Community. The City also intends to include sustainable design principles in this project to the extent possible given practical funding and time. constraints. The facility.. should be designed and constructed to optimize energy efficiency, promote occupant'productivity and health, utilize construction techniques and materials that: promote resource conservation and environmental responsibility,.. can be easily modified as occupant needs change, and can be easily adapted or converted to other uses. Scope of Services Desired The scope of services.. may include any combination of: • Preliminary designplanning and project vision articulation. • Facilitation of a Citizen's Advisory Committee selected to assist in the design phase. • Alternative study sketches with preliminary cost estimates. • Schematic or conceptual design. • Detailed design development. • Project programming. • Required permitting. • Construction documents. • Coordination with City's selected Construction Manager. • Other duties as assigned. Draft Version 040406(1) 4 Information Requested A. Qualifications and Experience of Staff Assigned to Project: Provide basic data relative to firm's size, history, personnel, and special expertise. List the team expected to accomplish this work. Describe who will perform the various tasks, the amount of their involvement, their responsibilities, and their qualifications. Include details on specific involvement in projects of similar scope, and include details on level of experience utilizing sustainable design principles. Office brochures, individual resumes, awards, associations, etc, maybe included as supplemental material. B. Relevant Project Design Experience: Provide a list of at least five (5) projects, with brief descriptions which demonstrate ability to complete projects of this scope. Renderings, photographs, preliminary drawings, working drawings and specifications maybe submitted as examples of'your work. Reference letters from prior clients or client representatives. are optional. C. Approach to Project: Provide a statement of your approach to and anticipated response to a protect of this scope, including but not limited to the following: 1. How your firm can expedite the design process while incorporating public input from a citizen's committee. 2. How your firm can immediately deploy.. staff and allocate resources to meet an aggressive design and construction schedule. 3. How your firm can design a facility and site plan that can meet current and future needs while honoring the historical nature of the site. 4. How your. firm will address the requirements of the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines. S. Haw your firm can include sustainable design principles without negatively impacting timeliness of the construction schedule and long- term project cost. Selection Process The following process will be used for the selection of the Project Architect: 1. The selection committee will review, screen and rank the submittals based on the criteria described above. A minimum of three (3) firms, if qualified, will be invited to attend interviews on a date to be announced. Firms selected for interviews will be notified as soon as possible. 2. Based on the submittals, interviews and other information, the selection committee will rate and rank the firms that have been interviewed. Draft Version 040406(1) g • 3. The City of Meridian will select a firm with which to negotiate a contract based on the ranking and information supplied by the selection committee. Should negotiations prove unsuccessful, a second firm will be selected, and so forth, as necessary. Scoring of Submittals 1. Qualifications and Experience of Staff Assigned to Project 25 2. Relevant Project Design Experience 25 3. Approach to Project 50 Total Points 100 Draft Version 040406(1) (FOR PUBLICATION) Request for Statements of Qualifications Professional Architectural Services For Meridian City Hall The City of Meridian is soliciting statements of qualifications and performance data from interested persons or firms to provide architectural services for the design of a new approximately 80,000 square foot Meridian City Hall and associated facilities to be located on a two acre site located at the southeast corner of Meridian' Road and Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. The architectural services must be provided under: the direct supervision of an Architect licensed in the State of Idaho. The person or firm hired for this project will be selected on the basis of qualifications and demonstrated competence, and the contract for architectural services for the city hall project shall be negotiated at prices that are fair and reasonable given the estimated value of the project, and the nature, scope, and complexity of the architectural services to be provided. Persons or firms who are interested in submitting their qualifications and performance data may request an information packet, including selection criteria and procedures, from the Office of the City Clerk at Meridian City Hall, 33 E Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and telephone (20$)888-4433. Sealed Statements of Qualification will be received until, and no later than, 4:00 PM, on Monday, April 24, 2006: Submittals shall be mailed or delivered to the office of the City Clerk, Meridian City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642. All submittals shall be marked "Meridian (City Hall-Architectural Services Statement of Qualifications". Late submissions will not be accepted. Publishing Dates: Apri110, 2006 Apri117, 2006 Draft Version 040406(1) • ATTACHMENT "A" Page 1 SITE LAYOUT Current Aerial View "~~~' Internet Ma in Framework ~.~_ ---..~,..n..~~..,,., E~ BRO~QDUV-'~AY,.~i4VE~ ~ ~..,.,, _ ~ M.w, , -- ,_ ~ f,_ e ~, ~ ~, 'v' ' w' 56T p ~: 200012 , a ~ ~ i ... __ ,. A F +~ ~.3 ~ ~ t gy~~ $ z ,#n' '7 ~~'~ ~. - t ~ . ~il~ y. s~ :~. _ - ~ i . ~ ~s~~~ ,~ ~2 ~` ~., '~ ~ ~ ~ .,..,,.a.. ~.~ ~~ ~~I +,~ ;~ - ~I y +'..+~rrrw. i P ~_ f 27 ~ ~~ ~~' '~ . _..ora~enn a, ~.~w t;~ r I I n. ,; yC' This map ~ a user generated static output from an Imemat mapping aria artd Is for general reference only. Dab Ana that appear on fhls map may or ~y not be accurate, cuneni, or otherwise retiabte. Ttfl§ MAP lS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION. Draft Version 040406(1) 8 • ATTACHMENT "A" Page 2 Scaled Site Layout and Depiction of Possible Future Adjacent Uses ~. '-'_.------'--Tmrav ~ - ~ u i - .1.u~t ~ I~ ® ® 0 ® ® ® ® ® 1ID a~ ® ~ ® 0 ® 0 I ~ ~ ~ 1 ~~ _ ~~ ~ cl 'g a v ~ 1 va yl b~ ro ~ 6 ~~ I A R,{tlAMO pIJC 1 r N 6!J' °~ 1 f ~ jI ~ ~ { 1 , N ~ Y L35 I / ,o o S Y ~ J i ~ ~}i I~ '~ _ 's ~ ~ :e,.., ~ ,,.., s~ 50~ eF uP(5L~ rirjk.e-of- wo.Y eft. IcaSa- ~,pr ~fc~1. i ---'-'---_ armvnextraelaswar_v,1a~tRw~.~ro BflU tomb( `~--~-~--- ~ MtM1N 8010 0 q b tE0 '~ LEGEND LOIXA IJl00MM • RL[Al,~?tdi Rl ~ aa,mvmlasl~ w ~ rawmunw~rn Gucun+w.ovrr --- cwrtvua •-------- rww.v1r1+4 eoulmantna €~ .or,asams Draft Version 040406(1) i ~ ATTACHMENT "A" Page 3 NW corner of Project Site (SE Comer of Meridian Road and Broadway Avenue) ~~ ;- ~~~~ '.' ~ ..w..~~'~ L~ Ir, , ,';k Draft Version 040406(1) ~~~ ~~~ ~. "~ • 'r ~ ,~ ,~ _ ~`" - ~ -~ ' t ~ i , 3 3 ~ Y3 ,y~- ~--~ __.,~ .max w~ . ~ ~ ~~ i~ : a .~, ~ - . . ~tt~ ~ h 10 ATTACHMENT "A" Page 4 Possible Concept for 4,624 sq ft Historical Structure Planned to Remain on Project Site Draft Version 040406(1) 11 °y~ . ATTACHMENT "A" Page 5 New Structure Across from Project Site NE Corner of Meridian Road and Broadway Avenue Draft Version 040406(1) 12 • • ATTACHMENT "A" Page 6 Proposed Mix Use Development On NE Corner of Project Block, Adjacent to Project Site (SW Corner of Broadway Avenue and Main Street) ar- . ~~ k• ~~ ~, , - a 5: w ~kyk `~ ~w ~~ ~ ia~ ~~. ~ ,~, ~ ~ . h ~ ~~~ ~-: r~''~,r~~ti . , ~ '~,. ~ :I ~~,j ytr ,~~ of l .: ~~ ~, fj! '~` , 4 9qq~ eK - R~ '~` ~`~3" Draft Version 040406(1) 13 • ATTACHMENT "A" Page 7 R TRtT ENGINEERING, P.C. August 12, 2005 Zeke Johnson, P.M. RSCI 1854 Lanark St. Meridian, Idaho 83842 Subject: Meridian Creamery Stack Re: Lateral Evaluation Dear Mr. Johnson, Shortly after you contacted me, I went to the subject jobsite and took some measurements of the stack -namely the bottom diameter and the manifold opening dimensions at the bace. Two 1934 Meridian newspaper articles supplied me with the rest of the dimensions such as over-all height, top stack diameter, and we0 thicknesses. In mid August, MTl was hired to perform forensic analysis of the stack Their analysis supplied me with approximate concrete strengths at two lootions and reinforcement sizes and sparang. Due to the age of the structure, grade 40 was assumed for the reinforcement and used in the analysis. See MTI's inspection report dated August 19, 2008 far their testing results. TRU Engineering, P.C. input the physical dimensions and materials into a finite element program. Current design wind and seismic loads were applied to the model. The results of the analysis proved that seismic governed the design and the deducted results are as follows: in-plane shear strength capacity is sufficient, out-of-plane moment opacity is adequate, but the tension ~mponent of the overturn resistance is under capacity. MTI's report shows ~6 bars at the base spaced at 12 inches on canter. With this configuration, the reinforcem®nt is 4X overstressed with design seismic toads applied. With design wind ksads, the reinforcemenrt is 2 ~ X overstressed in tension. Footing data was unknown at the time of this evaluation. Therefore, the footing was riot checked for allowable soil loading norovertuming capacity. During my site visit, I noticed a large amount of cracking which is a concern. Cracking concentrated at the upper comers of the opening is understandable, but, vertical cracking beome more abundant at the 35 foot elevation. I'm assuming the brick finer stopped at this elevation where temperature expansion and cmnMaction cs3used the cracking. The concern 1 have about the craddng is that water can penetrate the cracks and deteriorate the reinforcement. And through freezeJthaw action cause worse cracking and possibly dislodge pieces of cancret®. tf you have any questions concerning this subject, please call at your convenience. Sincerely, TRU EEngineering, P.C. Tracy McGllilck, P.E. 5531 N. Glenwoor3 St • G~ City, Idaho 83714 • Phone: (208) 938-0255 • Fax; (208) 938-0453 • e--~: 6veng~@troengr.com Draft Version 040406(1) 14 ATTACHMENT "B" DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES (in separate pdf document) Draft Version 040406(1) 15 • Request for Statements of Qualifications: Construction Management Services For Meridian City Hall APRIL 07, 2006 CITY OF ~Y1 19 3 1 ~ ~ Request for Statements of Qualifications Construction Management Services For Meridian City Hall The City of Meridian is soliciting statements of qualifications and performance data from interested persons or firms to provide construction management services for the design, bidding, and construction of a new approximately 80,000 square foot Meridian City Hall to be located on an approximately 2 acre site located at the southeast corner of Meridian Road and Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. The project budget has not been set, and the project architect is currently being selected. The construction management services shall be provided under the direct supervision of a Construction Manager licensed in the State of Idaho, and fines shall hold a Certificate of Authority to provide Construction Management Services in the-State of Idaho. The person or firm hired for this project will be selected on the basis of qualifications and demonstrated competence, and the contract for construction management services for the City Hall project shall be negotiated. at prices that are fair and reasonable given the estimated value of the project, and the nature, scope, and complexity of the construction management services to be provided. Sealed Statements of Qualification must be received until, and no later than, 4:00 PM, on Monday, April 24, 2006. Submittals shall be mailed or delivered to the office of the City Clerk, Meridian City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642. All submittals shall be marked "Meridian City Hall-CM Statement of Qualifications". Late submissions will not be accepted. The City of Meridian reserves the right to reject any and or all submittals and to waive informalities. The Construction Manager (CM) will provide services for a flat fee or a percentage of total construction cost, not to exceed a certain construction price. The CM will have total responsibility under the contract to coordinate, direct, supervise and manage the project. The CM will publicly bid all subcontracts, for the City, assure that all-applicable laws and regulations are complied with and that all necessary records are complied with. The CM will not directly provide labor, materials or equipment for the project construction. The CM's insurer will be required to name the City of Meridian as an additional named insured on all required coverages. All subcontractors will be required to be insured and provide performance and payment bonds for each contracts scope of work. It is anticipated that the work of the project will involve multiple bid packages. During the design phase the CM will also provide value analysis, scheduling, cost estimating, constructability and phasing assistance. 2 ~ ~ INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENTS Each submittal must follow the outline below and be signed by an officer or owner of the company. Eight (8) copies of the submittal must be furnished. Brochures, photos, financial statements, annual reports not specifically requested maybe appended to the back of each submittal. Selection criteria and scoring is set forth at the end of this request for submittals. SUBMITTAL FORMAT Submittals shall be typed or printed on 8-1/2" x 11" paper'Emphasis should be placed on the specific qualifications of the people who will actually perform the work and their approach to this specific project. To assist in the evaluation, it is desirable to format the submittal similar to the headings listed below: 1.Overall Construction Experience Give a brief description of your company history and its capabilities. Are you a licensed Construction Manager in the State of Idaho? What is your bonding capability? Summarize current projects and status. Provide historical data on the separate dollar volume or commercial and public building contracts and the number of such contracts in each calendar year. 2. Relevant Construction Experience Provide a general statement regarding knowledge and experience with the construction of similar facilities and in particular, describe your experience with the Construction Management process, pre=:construction services, scheduling, value analysis, constructability reviews, cost estimating and phasing. List Similar Projects beginning with the most recent first. Provide the following information. 1. Brief description, location, and scope. 2. Date of completion. 3. Initial construction budget. 4. Final cost of the project. 5. Total dollar amount of change orders. 6. Construction period. 3. Subcontractor Relations Explain how you will bid work to be preformed under subcontracts. What techniques will be used to coordinate the work of different subcontractors performing different divisions of work? How will the City be protected from delay claims from subcontractors? What program will be used to assure subcontractor compliance with OSHA rules, tax, and social security withholding rules? Describe the CM's role in establishing and maintaining a job site safety program and quality control program. Familiarity with the local labor and subcontracting market. 4. City/Contractor Relations List references for recent significant and similar construction projects. Indicate type of contract for each construction project (LE. CM, public bid, negotiated, cost plus, etc.). Set forth a history of litigation and arbitration regarding previous contracts. Include claims made, or litigation or arbitration threatened even though no formal lawsuit or arbitration proceeding was filed. Include actions brought by Owners, your firm, subcontractors, and third parties. This request also includes any challenges to process or procedures made by the proposed construction manager against any public entity in relationship to a project. Give the amount contested and paid, if any, for each case and a brief description of the issue. Include the names of the attorneys involved for any of the parties, case number or arbitration number, as applicable, and any other relevant information pertaining to these claims. Provide as a reference all architectural firms with which you have worked as a Construction Manager or as an Owners Representative in the last five years. 5. Administrative Capacity and Proposed Personnel Identify key participants with names, resumes, qualifications, and relevant experience. Please also indicate a percentage of their time to be allocated to this project and include a listing of their current project responsibilities. Describe your approach to planning, phasing and scheduling the project. Describe how you will monitor the work and maintain the project schedule. Describe the scheduling method proposed. 4 ~' • Describe the project record keeping system. Include methodology for coordinating and accomplishing inspections, testing, and final closeout. Describe proposed methodology and approach to value engineering. Describe project manuals to be delivered to City at completion of the project. Describe proposed format for weekly CM and Subcontractors meetings and monthly City, CM, and Architect meetings. 6. Managing Cost Provide a statement regarding proposed techniques to assure that using your firms approach will result in the project being completed within the budget and for the least overall project cost to the City of Meridian. Provide a statement regarding how unspecified, but necessary and foreseeable, facilities, equipment, fixtures, and parts will be fiarnished so that the completed facility will be fully operational. Describe warranties to be provided for all facilities and equipment. Set forth call back criteria and cost to City, if any, for emergency callbacks. Describe training of City's personnel provided in basic fee. Identify training items that will be extra cost. Describe how monthly progress billings will be prepared and submitted. SELECTION PROCESS The following process will be used for the selection of the Construction Manager: 1. Respondents shall submit eight (8) copies of the submittal 2. The selection committee shall review, screen and rank the submittals based on the criteria described above. A minimum of three (3) firms, if qualified, will be invited to attend interviews on a date to be announced. Firms selected for interviews will be notified as soon as possible. 3. Based on the submittals, interviews and other information, the selection committee will rate and rank the firms that have been interviewed. 4. The City of Meridian will select a firm with which to negotiate a contract based on the ranking and information supplied by the selection committee. Should • negotiations prove unsuccessful, a second firm will be selected, and so forth, as necessary. SCORING OF SUBMITTALS 1. Overall Construction Experience 20 2. Relevant Project Experience 20 3. Subcontractor Relations 10 4. Owner/Contractor Relations 10 5. Administrative Capabilities and Proposed Personnel 30 6. Manaein~ Cost 10 Total Points 100 LIMITATION The cost of the submittals and any related expenses, including travel shall be entirefly the responsibility of the respondent. The City of Meridian reserves the right to reject any or all submittals and to waive informalities. 6 ~ ~ (FOR PUBLICATION) Request for Statements of Qualifications Construction Management Services For Meridian City Hall The City of Meridian is soliciting statements of qualifications and performance data from interested persons or firms to provide construction management services for the design, bidding, and construction of a new approximately 80,000square foot Meridian City Hall to be located on an approximately 2 acre site located at the.: southeast comer of Meridian Road and Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. The construction management services shall be provided under the direct supervision of a Construction Manager licensed in the State of Idaho, and firms shall hold a .Certificate of Authority to provide Construction Management Services in the State of Idaho. The person or firm hired for this project will be selected on the basis of qualifications and demonstrated competence, and the contract for construction management services for the City Hall project shall be negotiated at prices that are fair and reasonable given the estimated value of the project, and the nature, scope, and complexity of the construction management services to be provided. Persons or firms who are interested in submitting their qualifications and performance data may request an information packet, including selection criteria and procedures, from the Office of the City Clerk at Meridian City Hall, 33 E Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642, and telephone (208)888-4433. Sealed Statements of Qualification must be received until, and no later than, 4:00 PM, on Monday, Apri124, 2006. Submittals shall be mailed or delivered to the office of the City Clerk, Meridian City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642. All submittals shall be marked "Meridian City Hall-CM Statement of Qualifications". Late submissions will dot be accepted. Publishing Dates: Apri110, 2006 April 17, 2006 7 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines for the Downtown District is to aid in the development of a concentrated urban mixed-use tran it , , s activity and defines Downtown as heart of the communi -supportive center that fosters pedestrian ty. GUIDING PRINCIPLES: 1. A mixed-use urban configuration supports retail 5. and commercial businesses by clustering them Comfortable and visible vehicular, as well as transit, cyclist, and pedestrian facilities in a tight-knit, pedestrian-friendly environment with compatible amenities such as restaurants, encourage visitors to and from downtown. entertainment, housing, and related services. 6. Defined and continuous streetscapes with 2. Buildings designed to be compatible with historic downtown buildings reinforce the ycl st amenfies screate identity and provide an cultural heritage of Meridian. attractive, predictable environment for business. 3. Street facing buildings with active ground floor 7. uses help support apedestrian-oriented Civic and community buildings and public environment. spaces are integral to the civic identity of the community, and should receive special 4. Quality building materials and their consistent consideration and pride of place. application create an environment of quality that supports property values. ,~~ _ ~4' ~_ Idaho Street then ^~,i~y Imo„'."""._ ~y?~__ ,- ~~'' ~_ _~ Idaho street today Idaho Street future, looking west from Second Street 1 ~ s p~ ~ ~,~~A;: PURPOSE The purpose of Design Guidelines in the Downtown District is to: • Support community and cultural identity in the historic center of Downtown Meridian; • Encourage the rehabilftation and conservation of existing historical buildings; • Create infill mixed-use building of character, height, scale, and proportion compatible with the existing historical buildings; • Reinforce the urban pattern by minimizing interruptions in the wall of street-facing building facades; • Slow traffic by shaping the street "room" and providing "eyes on the street"; • Create a comfortable environment for pedestrian activities • Reduce off-street parking requirements by realizing that the Meridian Development Corporation will provide parking in the area. APPLICABILITY These guidelines apply to new development and any proposed improvements to existing development, such as fagade improvements and/or building additions. G~~ ;~., `_l~ _ ~ 3 ~~~ ~ ~~'~ }', °~t"~ K - ~~ Present day downtown, Second Street, Merldlan, Idaho 2 Future downtown, Second Street, Merldlan, Idaho Old downtown, Second Street, Mertdlan, Idaho SETBACKS (See definition of setback in Meridian Unified Development Code). Purpose: The purpose of setbacks in the Downtown District is to create a safe and lively pedestrian ~~ ~ environment with continuous building facades facing the street (Fig. 1.1). Front and side setbacks: In the Downtown District, all new buildings must have first floor facades built to the public right of way ("build-to lines°) at the street sides and to interior lot lines (exceptions may be considered at interior lot lines for pedestrian paths and existing adjacent buildings with windows, and for civic and community buildings and public spaces). Buildings will be built to the alley for a depth of 20 feet from the Main, Second and Third Street sides (Fig. 1.0, 1.ti). Pedestrian plazas behind the build-to line will be considered if such plazas are less than 50 percent of the total fagade length of an individual fagade. Rear setback at alley: 5-foot minimum, except as noted above (Fig. 1.0). S`1t~inin~um Se~4ack .~!!'ey 20'~ --- REAR Parking (optiQTe¢l} FIGURE i.o Set back diagram PLAZA (opC6ore~L) itti ~~ ~~ ~ ~a ~_ ~, t -~ IDAHO SPEED CEr~1TER a~~~F ' ,. ~,, FIGURE i.2 DO build the public right of way forte " continuous storefront effect right of way. - ~ ~ -~~ `. !} i~ _ . E ~ - ~ ,~ , ~ ,~_ ~ ... ..:_ ,.~„ _. ~ tl ~~~ _ . ~~ ., ~ ~,Yaa .a ~,.[ f ti«r ~ ~~ i g!~~f` f ~ 9 ii 1 FIGURE 1.4 DO create small shallow plazas flanked by FIGURE 1.5 DON'T create deep gaps between buildings. bulldings. r'^~ 7 ~ ~y ~ .jjrwAw 4}.. ue ~i ~ ~~~ ~ ~~_a _._ ~i~€~ ~+~; _ . ___ lh'"' gn~nu ~.,~. i~ _ .~~~ ~.... _ x~Y _ ,,_. FIGURE 1.6 DO create bulldings tight to alley and Maln FIGURE 1.7 DON'T create wide view Into ells . Street, 2"d Street and 3b Street y _ ~. ~-" ._ ' __ 4 ~ ~ .. - . BUILDING ORIENTATION Purpose: The purpose of defining building orientation is to locate building entrances and windows facing the street and public sidewalk to aid in the creation of an active and safe pedestrian environment. All developments in the downtown District shall be oriented to the street. The requirement is met when: 1. Buildings have their primary entrance(s) oriented to the street. Buildings located on Main Street must have one primary entrance on Main Street and may have other entrances on side street(s). Second story uses, not associated with the ground floor use, must have their primary entrances on the street side; a secondary entrance/exit may be located on the rear. No tenant spaces may be solely accessed by an entrance on the alley. c~ V~ ,~o 0°\a .\ Off-street parking, driveways, and other vehicular circulation shall not be placed between the building and the street. Parking is not allowed at first floor of a structured parking garage within 30 feet of street-facing facades as this area must be used for tenant space with active uses (except on Meridian Road and Third Street). See Figure 1.55 illustrating a parking structure with auto entrance and also active ground floor tenant uses. 4. Service areas for new buildings will be located at the rear including loading, recycling, garbage, meters, mechanical equipment, etc. Service areas will be screened from view to the height of the equipment wfth decorative walls compatible with the building facade if visible from the street (alley view is excluded). 5. Rooftop mechanical equipment must be screened to the height of the equipment with allowable exterior materials (See Fagade Treatment). ,'~ .~ .~ .~ .\ .~ .~ Prknary ertbante on Main St. FIGURE 1.8 Building orientation diagram k 9~0~ ~o F~a~ „ oc RG~i o~ o~~~ maz. 'Entrance to/ second s~rY i" i • la • ~ ~- c +~ r__ T ~,~ ray. .~„ +5 ~~iil~_ cx~.: - - '"""" ¢I ~' ~~ .<°~ - - - _ _ _ _ ~ ~ . ~~n FIGURE 1.13 DO locate parking In the rear. FIGURE i.io DON'T locate primary entrance to rear. (Note that this photo shows no entrance at all from the street sides). FIGURE i.iz DON'T locate only entrances to second story uses on the rear. 6 FIGURE 1.9 DO locate primary entrance facing Main Street FIGURE 1.14 DON'T locate parking In the front. FIGURE i.ii DO locate entrance to second story uses on the street side. BUILDING HEIGHT AND FORM Purpose: The purpose of building height and form guidelines is to ensure that new construction and reconstruction is compatible with historic Meridian downtown buildings. All development in the Downtown District shall meet the following limits of height and form: Height: Method of Measurement: See definition in Meridian Unified Development Code. For allowable additional height for parapets, see also page 8 under Form. Note: Height may be exceeded along the rail corridor through the Conditional Use Process. Minimum height at street-side facade: 2 stories/40 feet Maximum height at street-side fagade: 3 stories160 feet Maximum height at 10 feet behind street-side facade: 4 stories/75 feet Note: See Fig. 1.8, 1.15 !/' i ~I~ ~,. ~'•i l s 7 FIGURE 1.15 An additional floor Is allowed ff set back 10 feet from facade. FIGURE 1.16 Corner turrets are encouraged. c vows f 3 f ~.~ o FIGURE i.v DO provide a decorative parapet, Ilke the one on the bullding at left In this photo. DON'T provide a parapet with no cap, as In the right hand bullding. Form: Street-side facades must include a parapet whether a flat roof or pitched roof is used. Decorative elements are encouraged and may exceed height limits by 4 feet maximum, and are restricted to 50 percent of parapet length (Fig. 1.17). Facades stepped back 10 feet or more may have a shaped roof profile without a parapet, but must not exceed height limit (Fig. 1.8). Form may include comer elements at street intersections only, such as towers, projecting bays, etc., but must not exceed height limit (Fig. 1.19). Ground level building comers, on comer lots only, may be chamfered a distance of 10 feet maximum from the comer property line for comer entries (Fig. 1.18). Balconies and bay windows may project beyond the fagade up to 6 feet if at least 15 feet above ground. Such projections must also comply with Ada County Highway District right-of--way requirements (Fig. 1.20). o ~ ~ -- i` F_~~ ~ FIGURE i.20 A 6-foot projecting balcony is allowed. 8 FIGURE s.is Chamfered comers, Ilke the one at the left abov®, aroe allowed. Parapets are required and decoretlve elements Ilke the ones above are encouraged. Da;Arn#awn MEridian Design Guidelines FACADE TREATMENT, ENTRANCES, ROOFS Purpose: The purpose of fagade treatment and entrance guidelines is to ensure an active, interesting, and safe pedestrian environment, and create compatibility with Meridian's esteemed architectural heritage. All developments in the downtown District will meet the following requirements for fagade treatment: First floor street facing facades: Facades must contain no less than 50 percent glass (Fig. 1.21). Storefronts must follow the proportioning system. (All first floor street-facing facades must be constructed such that storefronts can be added to allow flexibility of use over time). Glass must be clear with no tinting or reflectivity. Window frames must be recessed from the face of the finished wall minimum 4 inches. Non-glass materials may be one or a combination of the following materials: Stone or brick masonry, tile, or stucco (Fig. 1.28). Concrete masonry is prohibited. Paneled painted wood may be used within the storefront if detailed in an historically compatible manner. Active doors are recommended approximately every 25 feet, or as close as feasible for the project. Window headers and sills are encouraged. Belt coursing at 12 feet to 20 feet above the ground is encouraged, especially if matching an adjacent building (Fig. 1.35). Street-facing facades above first floor: Street- facing facades above the first floor shall have no less than 20 percent glass. Windows shall be vertical in proportion and frames recessed from the face of the finished wall by a minimum of 4 inches (Fig. 1.26). Reflective glass is not allowed. Acceptable wall materials include stone or brick masonry, tile, and stucco. Concrete masonry is prohibited. Bedt Cori Bulddree 71~unso~ Displa ~~ Buse Entry buyers. Alley-0rlented and Interior side lot facades; Alley-oriented facades and interior side lot facades may be materials other than those noted above, but preferably in keeping with the street-side facades. Such other materials must be painted in a color compatible with the front fagade. FIGURE 1.23 Storefront design r ~ i • ~' ~i,~ n. s 'L ~ , r +:. ~ ~ '+ '_ ._._ ~.a ~' to ~ ~~, ,4 "~ .~ h ~'. -- -a-~ ~~~, _ ~E ~ 1.24 DO locate active doors every 25 feel to create activity. compatible with existing ~- ~ a ,~ FIGURE 1.25 DON'T close up storefr -_ _ ~_ ~ ,; s ~ ~. i -.___ ~. ~.~,. _ _ . ~, - -- ~, r FIGURE 1.27 DON'T make blank second Floor facades. .- ;,~ ~v FIGURE 1.Z8 DO use brick and stone. FIGURE 1.29 D~ of up historic buildings. 10 ~n~ to cover Screening: On grade screen walls shall be constructed of materials similar to those of the building fagade if visible from the street (alley view is excluded). Roof-top screening materials shall be compatible with building fagade materials (Fig. 1.33). Parapets: Parapets are required and must have a shaped cap of no less than 6 inches vertical, projecting no less than 1 inch horizontal. Decorative elements of parapets may exceed height limits by 4 feet maximum, and are restricted to 50 percent of the parapet length (Fig. 1.30). Protecting cornices: Projecting cornices, if used, must be consistent or compatible with historic structures of the turn of the 20~' century (Fig. 1.32). Awnings: Retractable fabric awnings or permanent canopies for sun protection and the creation of protected sidewalk space are encouraged (Fig. 1.37). Temporary and permanent awnings of plastic fabric are not allowed (Fig. 1.38). 11 FIGURE 1.30 Parapet elements ana com~ces. arucwateti parapet II B B 8 # ~i` I R, 16L`a~tAYe_~i.e: ~~...n2:~.-~f~~~+'a'railm~.:~YCd:iR7~lYA~~t`~ewa,_ .q~"~ "_~~"5,11-1" ~1,gR":1" ~F }~ R ,f FIGURE 1.33 DO screen roof top equipment to height of equipment. 12 FIGURE 1.36 DON'T make an undifferentiated facade. FIGURE 1.35 DO detail continuous belt course and align. for sun protection. ~ ~ MID-BLOCK PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS Purpose: The purpose of Mid-block Pedestrian Pathway guidelines is to create safe mid-block passages while minimizing the interruption of the continuity of building facades, understanding that the primary pedestrian pathways shall be on the street sides of buildings (See Streetscape Design) (Fig. 1.39). All developments in the Downtown District will meet the following requirements for mid-block pedestrian pathways, if those pathways are deemed necessary by the applicant/owner: Location: The preferred location for mid-block pedestrian pathways through a block is at the center of the block (fig. 1.41). Width: In open areas, the minimum width of mid- block pedestrian pathways is 5 feet, with 8 feet preferred. Beiween buildings, the minimum width is 10 feet, with 15 feet maximum width. Materials: Pathway materials may be concrete, brick, concrete pavers, and/or colored asphalt, and must clearly delineate the pathway separate from any driving surfaces. ~ ~'~ ~ ;~~ i ~ ~ '~ ~~ _~ _ F...A'...f __,_ . _ ~„, --~' t ~,-~~. ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~, I~ ~ iw > y.ff 4 4 - ~. ~: FIGURE 1.39 DO create windows on mid-block pedestrian pathways. ~ ,3 1~~, ~ Lighting: Shielded light fixtures shall be installed to light the pedestrian pathway at appropriate intervals to proved continuous down-lighting on the path surface. 1.40 DO create activity on pathways. _ AJley Rear Park{ng - ~~ 1 U' FIGURE 1.41 Mld-block pedestrian pathway diagram 13 Visibility: Mid-block pedestrian pathways shall not be obscured by dumpsters, screen walls, plantings, or any other feature to a height greater than 3 feet. Through or between buildings, the pathway will be straight with no side alcoves; the ends of the pathway shall be unobstructed for visual access down the pathway. Prohibited trees: No evergreen frees shall be adjacent to the pathway due to safety, sight distance, and maintenance concerns. "`~," FIGURE 1.42 DO build 14 Fences and walls: Fences, plantings, and walls adjacent to a pedestrian pathway are to be "see trough° (20 percent maximum opaque) as it provides better visibility from adjacent homes or buildings. If solid fences or walls are used, the solid portion shall not exceed three (3) feet in height. Building walls should contain windows at first floor to provide safety visibility to the pathway. views. overgrown and obscure views. • ~ ~ ~ '~'` STREETSCAPE DESIGN Note: Streetscape Designs in the Downtown District are in the process of being developed in conjunction with Ada County Highway District. Purpose: The purpose of streetscape guidelines is to ensure defined and continuous vehicular, transit, cyclist, and pedestrian environments with consistent trees, signage, and amenities to create identity and to provide an attractive, informational, and predictable environment for business and entertainment. Streetscapes: Until specific new streetscape standards are developed, streets and sidewalks shall be built to be compatible with streetscape improvement built in 1991-93, and as specified by Ada County Highway District. Alleys: Alleys must be improved per Ada County Highway District standards. Shielded light fixtures shall be installed to light the alleys at appropriate intervals to provide continuous down-lighting on the alley surtace. ~ ° J~., ~;~; i~ ~'° L~ 4 tk1~,1'1~I tY _b _ _.. ~,~ _~., ..~~ FIGURE 1.46 DON'T create narrow harsh pedestrian envlronmer~ts. ~~ ..~"° -- - --~- FIGURE 1.47 DO create streefficapes with pedestrian amenities. ,~. ~; 1b Id. . lr ____ _ T -...--, _ - .~ _i~~~l~~ffL.AYfsi91i114[af~lt®z~.>z,._. _.. 4.. ~. ~. ~ a LANDSCAPING Purpose: The purpose of landscape guidelines is to ensure attractive, safe, and distinctive landscaping to add value and identity to downtown and enhance its aesthetic quality, economic viability, and environmental health. Streetscapes: Until specific new streetscape guidelines are developed, streets and sidewalks shall be built to be compatible with streetscape improvement built in 1991-93, and as specified by Ada County Highway District. Streetscape trees shall be pruned with a clear branching height of at least eight feet above the sidewalk surface and 14 feet above the street. Surface parking lots shall be required to have streetscapes as described above and be screened at the street side(s) with minimum 3 foot high hedges, fences, or walls. Additional plantings, such as Class I trees, flowers and/or smaller shrubs may also be included. (The classes of trees are defined for the purposes of these guidelines by the publication Tree Selection Guide for Streets and Landscapes Throughout Idaho by the Urban Forestry Unit of the Boise Parks and Recreation Department (latest edition). In general, Class I trees are smaller ornamental trees; Class II trees are medium/large trees appropriate for street tree panting; and Class III trees are very large). ~ :~ ~ __ _ v .,:,~ . trace ~ ~ ~ ^~ ~ t~'i'~ °m aa'~so.ye_ ~ 4\ .. _. ~~-~~® FIGURE 1.48 DO plant street trees to shade FIGURE 1.49 sidewalks and cars. to low. r : ~~~'~,ec;,r ~ma~: , - .:~;:~ ~~ ,~ i ~~- FIGURE 1.50 DO screen vehicles with low continuous plantings and site walls. FIGURE 1.51 DON'' too low plantings. 16 -mot, ~~:: ,,mac ~~N- ~" ~ ~~~ w: ~.._ ..r ,~y s ` ~'"` ` .~~~ ~ ~• ~ t ~`, y .. allow branches to grow L' PARKING Purpose: The purpose for parking guidelines is to locate parking in such a way as to not interfere with pedestrian environments, with the understanding that the Meridian Development Corporation will supply parking for the Downtown District in nearby parking lots or structures. Curbside parking, where possible, will provide short-term parking. Number of spaces required: The applicant shall provide one off-street parking space per 500 square feet of building area or an equivalent in-lieu fee. Accessible spaces shall be provided as per federal accessibility standards. Size of spaces: See Meridian Unified Development Code. Location: Off-street parking is allowed only at the rear of building not visible from streets and in parking structures. Parking is not allowed within first floors of parking garages within 30 feet of street-facing facades. This street-facing area must be used for tenant space with active uses. 17 _~ _ Ai yr Yvr&:vg FIGURE 1.5z Parking allowed at rear only of street-facing facades. r~ *~ ~ ~r ~ r - -~ ~ ~ - ~,~ ~ - _x ~ `' ~ ~ rill ~ ~ ~ - - - - ~~ --'.- ~~, ~ ~ ~ ~~li, ~ ~ .~--- -__._--~----_--- - qq I YF..--^__...-.- -- __~ ._ - -.- _. -~ ~_ 1 ~- ~ -_° . ~- , ___ ~.__ __. i _._.. _._ ~;. FIGURE 1.55 DO screen vehicles to 42 Inches. Screening: Screening of parked cars in parking structures above the first floor must include a solid panel up to 42 inches from floor levels. Structured parking garages will conform to the requirements of the Facade Treatment, Entrances section in these guidelines, except glazing is not required at floors above the first floor. a FIGURE 1.56 421nches. open below 18 March 31,2006 FP 063-015 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Fairview Lakes, LLC REM NO. 8 REQUEST Final Piat approval of 16 building lots and 1 common lof on 3.2b acres in C-G and R-40 zones for Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 - 1875 North Lakes Place AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: Sea affaehed SMft Comments CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comments CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See adtached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materiab presented at pubNc meetings shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C April 4, 2006 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FAIRVIEW LAKES, LLC FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF 16 BUILDING LOTS AND 1 COMMON LOT ON 3.26 ACRES IN C-G AND R-40 ZONES LOCATED AT 1875 NORTH LAKES PLACE IN A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1 OF DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION N0.2, AND A PORTION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION NO. 1 LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE SW 1/a OF THE SE 1/a OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 6 CASE NO. FP-06-015 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 April 4, 2006, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 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: ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION N0.3 / (FP-06-015) Page 1 of 4 1. The Final Plat of "PLAT SHOWING DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION N0.3 IN A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1 OF DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION N0.2 AND A PORTION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION NO.1 LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE SW '/ OF THE SE '/ OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 6, BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2006, HANDWRITTEN DATE: 03/10/06, SHEET 1 OF 2, ANDERSON SURVEY GROUP, INC", FAIRVIEW LAKES, 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 Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006, listing 15 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 12 GENERAL REQUIlZEMENTS, 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 Tamura & Associates, PLLC, 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 additional requirements from the action of the Council taken at their Apri14, 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 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION NO. 3 / (FP-06-015) Page 2 of 4 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 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 TAHINGS 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 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR DEVON PARK SUBDMSION NO. 3 / (FP-06-015) Page 3 of 4 Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 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, withintwenty-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 ~ day of _ ~j~ , 2006. Attest: L e William G. Berg, Jr., Copy served upon: `\\~``~`~~~,~~~,-~;,,,~~~,~~~ ammyde eerd `~~. ~~°a ~~~ yor, C of Meridian ~ o /t~ ~ r r 4.Jd::>Y~S~i~s~ 0 AA ~ ~ ~ Jerk Applicafirt,r ' ~,```~~~~``~ -~ Planning and'`G'b'~ing Department Public Works Department ~~ City Attorney By: Dated: '~- ~ ~j -QLD ' Clerk's Office ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR DEVON PARK SUBDIVISION N0.3 / (FP-06-015) Page 4 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPA• ENTS STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: We have reviewed this These conditions shall Meridian City Council: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006 Transmittal Date: March 28, 2006 Mayor & City Council ,, re-cv s~~ ;, t ,,t~~ ~ . I ~, Iu.LF14? Ja ::. '~;~: t Sonya Wafters, Assistant City Planner '' Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator ~ C- Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 Request for Final Plat Approval of Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 Consisting of 16 Commercial Building Lots and 1 Common/other Lot on 3.26 Acres in the C-G and R-40 Zoning Districts by Fairview Lakes, LLC. (File# FP-06-015). 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 SUIVIlVIARY & LOCATION The applicant, Fairview Lakes, LLC, has applied for final plat approval of Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 which consists of 16 commercial (office) building lots and 1 common/other lot on 3.26 acres in the C-G and R-40 zoning districts. Office use in the R-40 zone was approved under conditional use permit CUP-03-014. Devon Park Subdivision is located on the north side of E. Fairview Avenue, midway between N. Meridian Road and N. Locust Grove Road, in the South %z of Section 6, T.3N., R.lE.. This property is a re-subdivision of Lot 3, Block 1, Devon Park Subdivision No. 2. The submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat. Staff recommends approval of Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 with the comments and conditions stated in this report. SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat (PP-OS-018) and conditional use permits (CUP-03-014 & CUP-OS-023). 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. 3. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the 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-06-015 Devon Park Sub3 FP.doc PAGE 1 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPA• ENTS STAFF REPORT 4. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. 5. Sanitary sewer service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N. Lakes Place installed in earlier phases of this development. 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 N. Lakes Place installed in earlier phases of this development. T'he 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. Provide a 20' easement for all public water/sewer main outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). This maybe done as a separate document on the City of Meridian's standard forms or dedicated via the plat. Graphically depict an irrigation easement on the face of the plat where the pressurized irrigation mains are not protected by back lot line easements. 9. The applicant shall comply with the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Catalog of Stormwater Best Management Practice's for Cities and Counties requirement of 20-feet of separation between infiltration trenches and building foundations. 10. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 11. 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. 12. The landscape plan, prepared by Tamura & Associates and dated 2/14/06, is approved as submitted. 13. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat dated 3/10/06, prepared by Anderson Survey Group., prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer: (10.) "...approved conditional use permits file No.'s CUP-03-014 &CUP-OS-023." 14. Complete the Certificate of Owners and accompanying acknowledgement. 15. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved preliminary plat or Exhibit "A" FP-06-015 Devon Park Sub3 FP.doc PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT conditional use permits 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 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, 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. 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. 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. 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 shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 9. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 10. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 11. 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. 12. 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 Exhibit "A" FP-06-015 Devon Park 5ub3 FP.doc PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen months, may be considered for fmal approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval per UDC 11-6B-7B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Devon Park Subdivision No. 3 (FP-06-015) with the above stated comments and conditions. Exhibit "A" FP-06-015 Devon Park Sub3 FP.doc PAGE 4 March 28, 2006 Ms. Sonya Watters City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 202 Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Fairview Lakes Devon Park No.3 Final Plat (FP-06-015} Meridian, Idaho Dear Sonya, In regards to Devon Park No. 3 Final Plat (FP-06-015} I concur with staffs findings of fact and conclusions of law and agree to Site Specific Requirements 1 thru 15 and General Requirements l thru 12. I will not be attending the hearing on April the 4~', if you need any additional information in regards to this application please contact me at cell: (208) 721-2151 or email: dou tamura(co~,rmci.net. Thank you for your consideration. Yo~rs t~rllly, . Do~ig`T~inura Tamura & Associates, PLLC 499 Main Street Boise, ID 83702 (208) 343-2931 E.~chibit "B" March 31,2006 FP 06-013 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2~?6 APPLICANT Richard Breinholt ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Final Plat approval for 20 single-family residential building lofs and 3 common lots on 3.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Breinholt Subdivision - 2580 North Meridian Rovd 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: COMMENTS See at~ched Stall Comments No comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See attached Comments SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAMO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Stall Initials: Materials presented at pubAc meetings ahaN become properly of the City of Meriden. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C April 4, 2006 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF RICHARD BREINHOLT FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 20 SINGLE- FAMLIY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOTS AND 3 COMMON LOTS ON 3.57 ACRES IN AN R-8 ZONE LOCATED AT 2580 NORTH MERIDIAN ROAD IN A PORTION OF THE SW 1/ OF THE NW 1/ OF T. 3N., R., lE., SECTION 6 CASE NO. FP-06-013 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 April 4, 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: Apri14, 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 BREINHOLT SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE SW '/a OF THE NW `/a OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 6, BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2006, ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR BREINHOLT SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-013) Page 1 of 4 • HANDWRITTEN DATE: 12/19/05, SHEET 1 OF 3, LEAVITT & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC.", RICHARD BREINHOLT, 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: Apri14, 2006, listing 22 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 12 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 Leavitt & Associates Engineers, Inc., a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "B" and consisting of 2 pages, and by this reference incorporate 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 TAHINGS ANALYSIS ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR BREINHOLT SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-013) Page 2 of 4 • The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the ®wner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not morethantwenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 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, withintwenty-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 qr~l'' day of A ~ ~ , 2006. `,,~~~' ~~.~' y d erd ~~o`~'t~ ~ayor, Ci of Meridian Attest: ~~ ~® '~ William G. Berg, Jr., Ci Clerc , ~- !'J,. 4 ~~.f ~ Copy served upon: ~ Applf I ,.~` ~- Plannin~~' ~ t~~~'epa: /~ Public Works Department City Attorney a. amrn Dated: ~ -1?j' ~ (~ ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR BREINHOLT SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-013) Page 3 of 4 City Clerk's Office C~ ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR BREINHOLT SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-013) Page 4 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPA• ENTS STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006 Transmittal Date: March 30, 2006 Mayor and City Council fi ~ ~~~~o ~' ~.~ ~~ 1' ,, ~t'~-~~ a AIi~.Na4Al' ~~V~ We have reviewed this These conditions shall Meridian City Council: Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator ~ C Breinholt Subdivision Request for Final Plat Approval of Breinholt Subdivision Consisting of 20 Single-Family Residential Building Lots and 3 Common Area Lots on 3.57 Acres in an R-8 Zone by Richard Breinholt (File# FP-06-013). submittal and offer the following comments and conditions of the applicant. ~e considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION The applicant, Richard Breinholt, has applied for final plat approval of 20 single-family residential building lots and 3 common area lots on 3.57 acres of land for Breinholt Subdivision. The zoning designation for the proposed subdivision is R 8 (Medium Density Residential). The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 5.6 dwelling units per acre; the net density is 7.72 dwelling units per acre. Breinholt Subdivision is located on the east side of Meridian Road, %2 mile south of Ustick Road in a portion of the SW '/4 of the NW 1/a of Section 6, T. 3N., R. lE. This property has not been previously platted. The submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat. However, Lot 1, Block 2 does not meet the dimensional standards for frontage required per UDC 11-2A-5. Staff did not notice the substandard frontage dimension during the preliminary plat review. The final plat should be amended by either attaching the house on Lot 1, Block 2 with the house on Lot 2, Block 2 to create an attached product (townhouse), or by eliminating one of the three lots on the west side of N. Larchmont Avenue (See Site Specific Condition #14 below). Staff recommends approval of Breinholt Subdivision with the comments and conditions stated in this report. SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat (PP-OS-036) and annexation and zoning (AZ-OS-037). 2. The applicant has indicated that the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District will own and maintain the pressure irrigation system within this development. Therefore, a letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 3. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a single-point connection is used, the developer shall be responsible for the Exhibit "A" FP-06-013 Breinholt Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 1 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 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. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to release of building permits for this subdivision. 5. Sanitary sewer and water service to this site is being proposed via extensions of existing sewer mains from Fothergill Pointe Subdivision to the south. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer and water mains to and through this proposed development including the trunk main, 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. To comply with the City of Meridian's to and through policy the applicant shall connect the water system to all water mains stubbed to this property. 7. Any water meters located in a common driveway shall be constructed of upgraded materials per City of Meridian Standard Specifications, Drawing 7.08 note 3. Remove the portion of Lot 17, Block 2 that contains the drainage pond and either add it to Lot 20 Block 2, or make it its own common lot. Coordinate with the ACRD for access to this facility for any required maintenance. 9. It appears to staff that the distances shown on the northern boundary of Lot 20, Block 2 are not accurate. The applicant shall confirm this and make any necessary adjustments. 10. Submit encroachment agreement with Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District for fencing on Lots 16, and 17 where they encroach into the South Slough Easement. 11. Complete the instrument number depicted on the plat for the South Slough. 1 Z. Prior to signature on the final plat, remove all existing structures that do not meet the applicable setback and zoning regulations. 13. 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. 14. Because the proposed frontage for Lot 1, Block 2 is substandard, the applicant shall either remove the proposed utility easement between Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 2, and attach the dwellings on Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, to each other (townhouses), OR eliminate one of the three proposed lots and leave two larger single-family lots. 15. All common driveways shall be constructed in accordance with UDC 11-6C-3D, and be paved a minimum of 20-feet wide with a surface capable of supporting 75,000 lbs. with a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside for fire vehicles and equipment. All properties that abut a common driveway shall take access from the driveway. 16. Depict the building setbacks, and orientation of the lots and structures for all lots sharing driveways, on the face of the final plat. File a perpetual ingress/egress easement for all lots that share a driveway. The applicant may record an easement and include the instrument number on Exhibit "A" FP-06-013 Breinholt Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT the face of the plat prior to signature of the City Engineer, OR dedicate said easements via the plat. Graphically depict the common driveway easements for each applicable lot on the face of the plat. 17. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat prepared by Leavitt & Associates, stamped on 12/19/05 by Craig McCoullough, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer: 1.) Delete note, it is not required on final plat. 2.) Delete note, it is not required on final plat. 9.) Delete note, it is not required on final plat. 18. The landscape plan, prepared by Leavitt and Associates and dated 2/2/06, shall be revised as follows: a. Include mitigation details in accordance with UDC 11-3B-10 for all existing trees on the property. Coordinate mitigation/protectionplan with the City Arborist. b. Include a calculations table per the requirements specified in the final plat landscape plan submittal checklist. c. Include fencing details for the 4-foot high chain link fencing along the pathway. d. Revise the landscape plan accordingly to reflect changes per site specific comment number 8. e. Include contours and landscaping details for the storm drainage pond currently located on Lot 17, Block 2. The bottom of the storm drainage shall be vegetated with seed. f. Include landscaping details for the storm drainage area located on Lot 20, Block 2. The bottom of the storm drainage area shall be vegetated with seed. Submit three copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. Complete the Certificate of Owners and the accompanying acknowledgement. 22. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions of the preliminary plat does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. GENERAL REQUIItEMENTS Exhibit "A" FP-06-013 Breinholt Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways and the South Slough, 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. 5. A written certificate of completion shall be prepazed by the landscape azchitect, 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. 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. 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 shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 9. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 10. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 11. 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. 12. Approval of the preliminary plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record the final plat within two yeazs 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. Exhibit "A" FP-06-013 Breinholt Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Breinholt Subdivision (FP-06-013) with the above stated comments and conditions. Exhibit "A" FP-06-013 Breinholt Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 5 ~ ~ LEAVITT & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Structural -Civil -Survey - Landscape Architecture -Planning Apri13, 2006 Kristy Yigil Assistant City Planner City of Meridian Planning and Zoning 660 E. Watertower Ln. Suite 200 Meridian„ Idaho 83642 Re: Breinholt Subdivision (FP-06-013) Ms. Vigil, Reviewing the staff report for this project has raised a few concerns. Site Specific Conditions 1) Will meet terms of the approved preliminary plat (PP-OS-036) and annexation and zoning (AZ-OS-037). 2) A letter of approval from Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District will he submitted prior to pre-construction meeting. 3) This pressure irrigation system is supplied with a year round water source from the domestic water system. Irrigable areas will be provided. 4) Fencing will be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-?. Temporary construction fencing will be constructed as necessary. 5) Sewer and water will be constructed to comply with the City of Meridian's to and through policy providing service to the adjacent properties. 6) See note 5. 7) Any water meter in a common driveway will meet the City's specifications and be traffic rated. 8) The portion of Lot 17 Block 2 that contains the drainage pond will be added to lot 20, block 2. Ada County Highway districts access for maintenance will be coordinated and appropriate easements/agreements will be attained. 9) Agree; adjustments will be made. 10) An appropriate agreement will be entered into with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation district to allow the fence. 11) Instrument number for the South Slough will be annotated on the plat if it so exists. 12) All structures will be removed that do not meet setback requirements. 13) All wells and septic systems will be abandoned per the governing authority. Wells are inconveniently located for sites proposed use. 14) Agree. ENGINEERING THE WORLD- LICENSED IN ALL 50 STATES 1324 1"Street South -Nampa, ID 83651 - (208) 463-0333 - Faa (208) 463-4040 r:.n~n~~ °a^ March 31,2(}06 FP Ob-012 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Touhcmark of the Treasure Valley ITEM NO. 10 REQUEST Final Plat approval of 22 building lots and 1 other lot on 15.55 acres in an L-O zone for Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 -- 3805 East Franklin 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 iRRlGATION: 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. • BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C April 4, 2006 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF TOUCHMARK OF THE TREASURE VALLEY FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF 22 BUILDING LOTS AND 1 OTHER LOT ON 15.55 ACRE5 IN AN L-O ZONE LOCATED AT 3805 EAST FRANKLIN ROAD IN A PORTION OF BLOCK 2, TOUCHMARK LIVING CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 AND A PORTION OF THE NW 1/ OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 16 CASE NO. FP-06-012 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 April 4, 2006, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 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 TOUCHMARK CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 LOCATED 1N A PORTION OF BLOCK 2, TOUCHMARK LIVING CENTER ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR TOUCHMARK CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 / (FP-06-012) Page 1 of 4 • • SUBDIVISION NO. 1 AND A PORTION OF THE NW '/a OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 16, BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2006, HANDWRITTEN DATE: 02/10/06, SHEET 1 OF 3, BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC", TOUCHMARK OF THE TREASURE VALLEY, 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 Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006, listing 28 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 12 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 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 additional requirements from the action ofthe Council taken at their Apri14, 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-offis not to create a mosquito breeding problem; and it is suggested that the stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR TOUCHMARK CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 / (FP-06-012) Page 2 of 4 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 TAHINGS 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 request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR TOUCHMARK CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 / (FP-06-012) Page 3 of 4 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 ~~ of ~' , 2006. Attest: ~~ a William G. Berg, Jr., Copy served upon: day By: ~,, `,`tttttllllll!(((d((~P Tammy a eerd `\\\`~~,~~ ~ ~.,,~~!'Mayor, ty of Meridian ~~ .. ~~~ ffi~v~ ~' Cl k= ~' ~Pe ~- l~d~ ~ ~ v~~\ /~ App~~d `a~.. ~lannui~' Rg~~epartment Public Works Department ~~City Attorney By: Dated: ~'- ~~'~~D Clerk's Office ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR TOUCHMARK CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 / (FP-06-012) Page 4 of 4 i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: We have reviewed this These conditions shall Meridian City Council: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006 Transmittal Date: March 30, 2006 Mayor & City Council EASY t1F 1 ,._ _ _ ; _.:,-~ "`_ ~.• Sonya Wafters, Assistant City Planner Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator ~ C Touchmark Center Subdivision Request for Final Plat Approval of Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 Consisting of 22 Commercial Office Building Lots and 1 Common/other Lot on 15.55 Acres in an L-O Zone by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley (File# FP-06- 012). 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, Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, has applied for final plat approval of Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1, which consists of 22 commercial office building lots and 1 common/other lot on 15.55 acres in an L-O zone. Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 is located on the south side of E. Franklin Road, approximately 1/3 mile east of Eagle Road, in the NW '/ of Section 16, T.3N., R.IE. This property is a re-subdivision of a portion of Block 2, Touchmark Living Center Subdivision No. 1. The submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat. Staff recommends approval of Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 with the comments and conditions stated in this report. SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved preliminary plat (PP-OS-054) and conditional use permits (CUP-03-005, CUP-03-014, CUP-OS-043 & CUP-OS-050) approved for this development. 2. The applicant has indicated that the Business Owner's 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, with the final draft being submitted prior to signature on the plat on the final phase of this development 3. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant is proposing a well source as the main source, therefore asingle- point connection to the culinary water system is not being proposed. If, in the future, asingle- Exhibit "A" FP-06-012 Touchmark Center Subl FP.doc PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 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. 4. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. 5. Sanitary sewer service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains extended from Franklin Road. 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. If the easement line being shown on the plat is proposed to be a sewer and water easement it needs to be labeled as such with bearings and distances shown. 7. Water service is being proposed to this development via extension of mains adjacent to this site. 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. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 9. Revise the plat name on the face of the plat to read "Touchmark Center Subdivision leTo. 1" since this is phase 1 of 2 of this subdivision. 10. The lot configuration on the plat does not match the lot configuration in the construction plans. Prior to construction plan approval the applicant shall revise either the plat or construction plans to ensure that they match. 11. The pressure irrigation mains that are being installed need to be protected by easements. The applicant shall ensure the appropriate easements are in place to protect these facilities. 12. Remove the old parcel lines that are being shown from the face of the plat. 13. Remove the existing fence being shown on the face of the plat. 14. It appears as if the applicant is attempting to dedicate an easement through block 2 of Touchmark Living Center #1 which is outside the bounds of this plat. If this is an existing easement or a new easement include the instrument number. 15. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas and improved private roadways. Storm water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into a surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. Exhibit "A" FP-06-012 Touchmark Center Subl FP.doc PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 16. All structures along E. Franklin Road will be subject to Administrative Design Review per UDC 11-3A-19. 17. All future buildings on the site shall obtain Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval prior to issuance of building permits. 18. Any structures which do not comply with Meridian City Code must be removed prior to signature by the City Engineer on the final plat for the property. This includes, but is not limited to, the existing home and outbuildings on the property. 19. The existing driveway access to E. Franklin Road shall be eliminated prior to signature by the City Engineer on the final plat for the property. 20. Setbacks on the proposed private street shall be measured from the back of curb if no sidewalk exists, and from back of sidewalk if a sidewalk exists. Z1. Development on all lots within the subdivision will require individual detailed conditional use permit approval. 22. The access drive to Lots 2 and 6 shall be paved a minimum of 20 feet wide with a surface capable of supporting 75,000 lbs. with a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside for fire vehicles and equipment. 23. 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 24. Depict separate easements for the common access and utility easement shown as one on the plat. 25. The landscape plan, prepared by South Landscape Architecture and dated 1/11/06, shall be revised as follows: a. Scale shown is not correct; revise accordingly. b. Notes, plant schedule, Planner/Developer/Owner information, planting details, and calculations table are ghosted out on sheet L1.0; unghost. c. Include tree class in Plant Schedule. Submit 3 copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 26. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat dated 2/10/06, prepared by Briggs Engineering, Inc., prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer: (3.) "... is not allowed ." (4.) "...above the highest l~xea~sea~ established normal ground water elevation." Exhibit "A" FP-06-012 Touchmark Center Subl FP.doc PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT (9.) Strike note; this property does not lie within a flood plain. (*.) Add note stating that the private street within this development shall be subject to a perpetual ingress/egress easement that provides access to all applicable properties. (*.) Lot 2, Block 14 is prohibited from having access to 5. Touchmark Way. 27. Complete the Certificate of Owners and accompanying acknowledgement. 28. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved preliminary plat or conditional use permits does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. GENERAI. REQUIIZEMENTS All imgation 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. 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. 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. 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 shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 9. Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 10. All development features shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. Exhibit "A" FP-06-012 Touchmark Center Subl FP.doc PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 11. 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. 12. 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 Touchmark Center Subdivision No. 1 (FP-06-012) with the above stated comments and conditions. Exhibit "A" FP-06-012 Touchmark Center Subl FP.doc PAGE 5 C~ l~l~aGGS ~N~i~IE~R#N~a Ins ~7i~~~ l ~~ f ~~~~~ !larch 3 i , 2i?Q6 Honorable Tviayor and t~eridian Cit}~ ('ounci::14ember .33 irast Ldaho ;'~vc. MLridian Idaho, 83G-1~ RF.: Tinal Fiat C~ 1800 VUest Overland load Boise: 19aho 837G5 - 3142 Voice 1208) 344-97(10 Fix (7(1R> :tas-r~~n E-mail sabrinawQbriygs-ertgineeriny.com (')n bchalfnfrlyclient "i'uuchnrtrk r-fthc Z''ctt-sur~ ~%allcy and Firt~t's i.--~~irrc~-in~~, I r~,lsc~tlully -c:,.,::~. t::~-i you apl?rote ~i-~a': Play application Fc~r -:ouciamark Center Suhaiti•i~iun \c-.l. phis a(riliia,tic:~; .: i-~ c:onli-nnatt-ce witf~ City c-f ~[cridia:n's Boni-i~ ()rdinarc~. I hay e reviewed the stafl'repon ~~rittcn b}r Sonya. ~itattcrs, Assistant Cu}• Plu-u-~z, a:-d a~rrc r47ih ali cunditiUU~ oi` approval. t)ur oi~ice is currently taking action to meet ap recluirc~n~cnls rcqu~st~d n} the ci'.y f• i :l :,-!1 rcquit-cments «•ili be met or hotttl~~cl by a leper ofcrrdit ur ca:-h suri:ty band, ario- tea tl i~ -uutuiu. ~1 t1-::. ;-'i-~:zi Plat. Touch:nark of'tltc ']-rca-snt•e Vaslley as -n thL past has proc•cn [~~ he a yu.;l-ty development, with iljt~~r;r~, a r "i'c <. riaal Plat, this traditio:~ ofgtiwlitg~.c•ill bc:ontinucci heria~een Tcx-ch,nar:; ut'the'rrcttau-~: ~~~tac}'.:-~~l tic: •`_~,r ~• :vieridiaa. bL'e Ivok Con~itrcltc ~varkin~~ u•itliyou and yaurstat7-t-nrirc~~ur~t approval u('tlti l=in~~f I'1~-I ,~I:i;li.~i•I~,~ ~ `~';r~i-a shQ:-id hall'C ilily gUC5tICY•iS, 1?IL'rlSk it.'la il'Ct: t:) %'nnLaiCt Cal' ill BUR-~~ ~)~t)i) (l[ •.;f, i ~.., „ ~ :~~:.. '1'haulk vc~u fir your c~~nsidcratron. Sahrina 1Vhitchcacj Land isso ['la-uier Ciri~.~~s 'rngi ni;crin~ Pwi:::• ~a;in~r Exhibit 'B" March 31,20(}6 AflFP 06-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 200b APPLICANT Jayo Construction REM NO. 11 REQUEST Modify the approved fencing for Hacienda Subdivision -6000 Norfh Meridivn 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 Staff Comments No Comments MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See aHached Leiters #rom Bailey Engineering Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetln~ shall become properly of the CNy of Meridian. March 31,2006 FP 06-016 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Gem Star Development, LLC ITEM NO. ~I Z REQUEST Final Ptat approval of 103 residential lots and 7 common lots on 31.72 acres in a R-4 zone for Estancia Subdivision -east of South Locust Grove Road and north of Amity Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CI1Y WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: G1TY 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 Staff Comments No Comments OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at publk meetings shag become property of the City of Meridian. • , BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCII. C/C Apri14, 2006 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF GEM STAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR 103 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 7 COMMON LOTS ON 31.72 ACRES IN AN R-4 ZONE LOCATED EAST OF SOUTH LOCUST GROVE ROAD AND NORTH OF AMITY ROAD IN A RE5UBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1 OF TERRIER SUBDIVISION, AND A PORTION OF THE E %z OF THE SW 1/ OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 29 CASE NO. FP-06-016 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 April 4, 2006, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 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 ESTANCIA SUBDIVISION A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1 OF TERRIER SUBDIVISION, ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR ESTANCIA SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-016) Page 1 of 4 • , AND A PORTION OF THEE 1/z OF THE SW % OF T. 3N., R. lE., SECTION 29, BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2006, HANDWRITTEN DATE: 02/09/06, SHEET 1 OF 6, BAILEY ENGINEERING, INC", GEM STAR 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 Wafters, Assistant City Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006, listing 14 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIltEMENTS/FINAL PLAT and 15 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 Bailey 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 additional requirements from the action of the Council taken at their Apri14, 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 mosquito breeding problem; and it is suggested that the stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR ESTANCIA SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-016) Page 2 of 4 ! ~ 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 TAHINGS 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 request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR ESTANCIA SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-016) Page 3 of 4 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 ~' day of ~T~l-~ ~ , 2006. By: Tammy er ,\~`~~~,n,e,,,,,,~e~ayor, ity of Meridian \~ ~ ~. a° Attest: ,.~ ~~ °° ~' °°° s"~. A'- ~ a /~ x ~ William G. Berg, Jr., Ci Clerk ~ Copy served upon: ~-/ Applic~~®9 ~.°` / ,~ Planning ° ~p Dent Public Works ~`~i'a°~'ient ~R City Attorney BY~ Dated: ~ • ~1- Q LO i Clerk's Office ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR ESTANCIA SUBDIVISION / (FP-06-016) Page 4 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006 Transmittal Date: March 30, 2006 Mayor & City Council s ~*='b f'f~6'1' f7F ~~,~yr~~~~. 1~ ~_ ~~- ~. ~~Y ~~F Fri ~F ~ ~ ~~~ ~ to.ta-~~a i°, ,~~ 4''E f . ~. ~ We have reviewed this These conditions shall Meridian City Council: Sonya Watters, Assistant City Planner Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator ~ C Estancia Subdivision Request for Final Plat Approval of Estancia Subdivision Consisting of 103 Single-family Residential Building Lots and 7 Common/other Lots on 31.72 Acres in an R-4 Zone by Gem Star Development, LLC. (File# FP-06-016). 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 SUIVIlVIARY & LOCATION The applicant, Gem Star Development, LLC, has applied for final plat approval of 103 single-family residential building lots and 7 common/other lots on 31.72 acres in an R-4 zone for Estancia Subdivision. The proposed gross density of the subdivision is 3.25 dwelling units per acre. The proposed net density is 5.18 dwelling units per acre. Estancia Subdivision is located northeast of the E. Amity Road and S. Locust Grove Road intersection. This property is a re-subdivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 of Terrier Subdivision and a portion of the SW of Section 29, T.3N., R.IE. The submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat. Staff recommends approval of Estancia Subdivision with the comments and conditions stated in this report. SITE SPECIFIC COIVIlVIENTS 1. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved annexation (AZ-OS-046) and preliminary plat (PP- OS-049) for this subdivision. 2. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall submit an updated groundwater report. 3. Temporary fencing to contain debris during construction shall be installed along the perimeter boundaries of the subdivision where permanent fencing is not proposed. Perimeter fencing is required to be installed prior to release of building permits. All fencing shall comply with UDC 11-3A-7 and conditions of approval of the preliminary plat. 4. Revise or add the following note(s) on the face of the plat dated 3/10/06, prepared by Anderson Survey Group., prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer: (7) "... is prohibited; io a ;.~,..,» .,ii„ oa i... +~e ~ a.. n,. ..,., u• ,, n• ,...:,., a ~Y J~ ~o (`;4. ..I' T d o. Exhibit "A" FP-06-016 Estancia Sub FP.doc PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT (*.) Add note stating that all future front garage setbacks shall be 20 feet as measured from the back of sidewalk or adjacent property line, whichever is more restrictive. The Landscape Plan, prepared by The Land Group and dated 3/7/06, shall be revised as follows: a. Include mitigation details in accordance with UDC 11-3B-10 for all existing trees on the property. Coordinate mitigation/protection plan with the City Arborist. b. Revise plan to match the fmal plat in terms of the relocation of the stub street (E. Melwood St.) to the eastern property boundary. c. A 10-foot wide compacted gravel shoulder meeting the construction standards of the Transportation Authority (ACRD) is required along E. Amity Road. The remaining area must be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover; revise plan accordingly. d. Include a 5-foot wide detached sidewalk along S. Locust Grove Road & E. Amity Road on the plan. Submit three copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Depai tment prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. The applicant has indicated that the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District will own and maintain the pressure irrigation system within this development. If the system is to be owned and maintained by Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District, evidence of a license agreement with NMID shall be provided to Public Works prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 6. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the irrigable common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 7. The applicant shall be responsible to install two temporary off-peak pumping stations in locations coordinated with the Public Works Department. The stations design and capacity shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department, the design shall include communication capabilities that are consistent with the City of Meridian's SCADA system. If the applicant redesigns the sewer to all flow to a single outlet point then only one off-peak pumping station will be required. 8. The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this development. The applicant shall coordinate with the City of Meridian Public Works Department, main size and routing, to be in conformance with the City's Master Sewer Plan. The applicant shall execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 9. Water service to this proposed development is being proposed via extensions of mains in Bellingham Park and extended mains in Locust Grove Road. The applicant shall install water mains to and through this proposed development, and coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department. The applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. 10. 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. 11. No subdivision identification signs are approved with this application. All proposed signs will require approval of a separate sign permit. Exhibit "A" FP-06-016 Estancia Sub FP.doc PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR• ENTS STAFF REPORT 12. Remove or relocate all trees within the right-of--way of S. Locust Grove Road or E. Amity Road or obtain a license agreement with ACRD for any trees to remain within the right-of--way. 13. Remove all buildings that do not meet setback requirements, prior to signature on the plat by the City Engineer. 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. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions, or terms of the approved annexation or preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. GENERAL REQUIItEMENTS 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 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. 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. Exhibit "A" FP-06-016 Estancia Sub FP.doc PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPA~ ENTS STAFF REPORT 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. 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. One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 14. 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 Estancia Subdivision (FP-06-016) with the above stated comments and conditions. Exhibit "A" FP-06-016 Estancia Sub FP.doc PAGE 4 alley Engineering,lnc. CIVIL ENGINEERING~PLANNING~CADD DATE: April 4, 2406 TO: Mayor and City Council RE: Estaacia Subdivision Dear Mayor and City Council, On behalf of our client we would like to state that Gemstar Properties, LLC., agrees with all Site Specific Comments and Conditions set forth in the final plat for Estancia Subdivision. Thank you for your time and consideration, Sincerely, ~~`o--- 1500 E. Iron Eagle Drive • Eagle, Idaho 83616 • Tel.: 208-938-0013 • Fax: 2~-938-0516 www.baileyengineer°s.com E~:hihit "H" March 31,2006 ZOA 05-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING Aprll 4, 2006 APPLICANT City of Meridian Planning Department ITEM NO. 13 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006 -Zoning Ordinance Tent Amendment with areas amended include definitions of collector sts, adult entmm~t, net dens, standards for TN-R, fence standards, tabte detailing decision making changes to app req., measure block length, etc. 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 / MMutss See attached FMdings MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 31, 2~b AZ 05-056 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT JBS Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. 14 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006 -Request for Annexation and Zoning of b.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: RDA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet /Minutes Contacted: Date: Phone: Emaiied: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meefMgs shag become properly of the CNy of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER * RECEIVED APR 1 2 1006 City Of Meridian atv clerk ®ffice r~~°~~~ -- 4 ~, lt~:~iaa P~ ,,, y ~~ k~= y A.R 4.P , r'~-~~ ,I In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat approval of 23 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres, for Sharp Estates Subdivision, by The Gables, LLC. Case No(s).: AZ-OS-062 and PP-OS-062 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006 and Apri14, 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-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 - PAGE I of 4 C~ 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected parry requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat stamped December 1, 2005 by Lance Warrick (Revised 12/1/05) is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the City Council hearing: a. Requiring a Development Agreement in which the applicant agrees: 1. For homes on Lots 1 to 8, Block 2, along the northern boundary of the property, either single story homes or homes with bonus rooms that have windows facing south (street) will be allowed (no second story windows facing north). 2. For Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be at least 60-feet wide. 3. 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 Applicable Time Limits (as applicable) 1. Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record a final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 2 of 4 the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 3 of 4 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~' day of ~ 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 MA\Y~O~~ , °tle,,WEERD / ~ ATTEST: ~ °~`'~~, ~` WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., ' ITY CLERK, ~ ~~ ~ ,' Copy served upon: / Applicant, / Planning Department -/~ Public Works Department _ ,/City Attorney By Dated: ~'-~1~t0 City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 4 of 4 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 3/7/2006 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: C. Caleb Hood Current Planning Manager Meridian Planning Department 208-884-5533 _~ m ~ , : .. e r~~ 3,~ lw t 4i ~ ~' ~ i i ICJ.'n~-8~,~ ~' ',, ~. ,.- ~..~. p_- SUBJECT: Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062 Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential). PP-OS-062 Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in a proposed R-8 zone. 1. SiJ1VIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, The Gables, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to R-8 (Medium- Density Residential) for 5.11 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located south of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3, on the west side of Wingate Lane, approximately %i mile south of Ustick Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home and associated outbuildings on this site. The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 19, 2006 and February 2, 2006. At the February 2, 2006 public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Ron Sargent (Applicant's Representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: C. Caleb Hood v. Other staff commenting on application: Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Mike Cole b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Pathway on south of project and to the west and east, ii. Wingate Lane and vacating interest in the easement. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. The Commission voted to amend Condition 1.1.5 of Exhibit B by requiring the applicant to terminate or vacate their interest in the Wingate Lane private road agreement, all the way to Ustick Road. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None The subject applications (AZ and PP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. The Planning and Zonine Commission is recommending annroval of the nronosed Sham Estates Subdivision (AZ- OS-062 and PP-OS-0621 with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report. Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE I • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 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- OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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- OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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 and you must state specific reason(s) for denial of the plat.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ-OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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: 2445 N. Wingate Lane; approximately'/z mile south of Ustick Road and %z mile west of Eagle Road / 3N1E5 b. Owner: Dale & Helen Sharp 2445 N. Wingate Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642 c. Applicant: The Gables, LLC 1771 N. Wildwood, #200 Boise, Idaho 83713 d. Representative: Ron Sargent e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning of the subject 5.11 acres to R-8 and Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family buildable lots and 2 common lots. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family detached. All of the proposed lots conform to the dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 6,307 square feet. The gross density of the project is 4.9 dwelling units per acre. Just over 10% (approximately %z of an acre) of the site is being set aside for open space. The applicant is proposing to construct aneast-west, 10-foot wide pedestrian path within the southern common lots. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 12/1/05 Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 11/15/OS h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The subdivision is to have 25 buildable lots on 5.11 acres with .53 acres of open space. A thirty foot wide pathway will be constructed along the south side of the property with the potential to connect from the property to the other street to the west and east. There will also be common area on either side of Devlin Ave. at the southern entrance to the subdivision (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. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: January 2~ and January 16`x, 2006 (for Planning & Zoning Commission hearing) and February 13 and 27, 2006 (for City Council hearinng). d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: December 23~', 2005 (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 asingle-family home and some associated outbuildings on this site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This is an infill development. All of the parcels surrounding this property are part ofcity-approved residential subdivisions. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 3. South: Single-family lots within Kearney Place Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Single-family lots within Chateau Meadows Subdivision, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: There is currently sewer in N. Devlin Avenue both on the north and south side of this property. Location of water: There are water stubs to the north and south of this parcel in N. Devlin Avenue. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: There are several existing trees on this property that need to be protected during construction, or be mitigated for. Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 3 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Any open irrigation ditches, laterals and canals, should be tiled when this property develops. 5. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards associated with this property. 6. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) 7. Size of Property: 5.11 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 25 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 25 4. Common Lots: 2 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 27 7. Gross Density: 4.9 units per acre (net density is 6.0 d.u./acre) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): Street buffers are not required on any of the internal, local streets. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.53 acres/10.4% 4. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micro-paths should generally comply with UDC 11-3B-12. Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11-3G-3E2). See Section 10, Analysis below. h. Amenities: Ten percent open space and pedestrian pathways. i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached dwellings to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standards: R-8 Setbacks (in feet) Proposed Required Front Living Area (to sidewalk)* 15 15 Side Accessed Garage (to sidewalk)* 15 15 Front Accessed Garage (to sidewalk)*20 20 Side 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (garage facing street) 50 50 Frontage (on common driveway) 10 10 Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 4 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 Frontage (alley loaded garage) N/A 40 Lot Size (garage facing street) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (alley loaded garage N/A 4,000 *See Common Driveway in Section 10, Analysis below for required standards for lots adjacent to a common driveway. k. Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Although there are two public stub streets to the property, access is currently taken from Wingate Lane, a private street. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest in Wingate Lane and provide access to the lots in the subdivision via Devlin Avenue stub street extensions from the north (through Packard Acres) and south (through Kearney Place). All of the internal streets are local streets with either a 34-foot wide or 36-foot wide street section (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain sidewalks that are attached to the back of the curb. Staff is supportive of the proposed street system. For a detailed report on all of ACHD's conditions, please see the ACRD report and Exhibit B. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 30, 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, Meridian Police Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOAL5 This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain between three and eight dwellings per acre (see Page 95 of the Comprehensive Plan.) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 25 single-family lots on 5.11 acres for a gross density of 4.9 dwelling units/acre. Staff fords that the overall density is within the range of a medium density project. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics below policy): Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriffs Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 5 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACLID). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 3 -Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land-use decisions. This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. Staff believes that the subject applications comply with the policies listed in the literature noted above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 -Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. The submitted preliminary plat proposes to extend two stub streets, one from Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue), and one form Kearney Place Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue). There are no undeveloped parcels adjacent to this property. Staff believes that the applicant has done a nice job of connecting and extending existing stub streets to this property. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13 -Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments. See analysis above. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9 -Require new residential development to provide permanent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties. Fencing exists along the north, east and west property lines. There is also existing fencing located approximately 30 feet north of the south property line (adjacent to the irrigation ditch.) Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 5 -Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. The applicant is proposing to construct attached sidewalks adjacent to all of the proposed streets, which connect to adjacent properties. The applicant is also proposing to construct a 10 foot wide Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 pathway near the south property line. This pathway will connect with adjacent pedestrian connections in Chateau Meadows to the west and Packard Acres No. 1 to the east. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to adjacent properties. See Analysis below for more information about the pedestrian path on the south side of this property. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 6 -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. See above. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This property does not have access to any classified arterial or collector street. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a residential zone. Staff finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west are compatible with the proposed development. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-8 zone. Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place and Packard Acres No. 3 all obtained R-8 zoning. Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 obtained R-4 zoning. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. Staff believes that the proposed density (4.9 d. u. 's/acre) and zoning (R-8) for this property is appropriate. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2-1 lists single-family detached homes as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-8 Medium-Density Residential: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard lot size and street Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE• G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 frontage requirements of the R-8 zone established in the UDC. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. Staff is recommending an alternative to the standard requirement for landscaping adjacent to the pathway on the south side of the development (see Special Considerations in Section 10 below.) 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal .description submitted with the application (stamped on November 14, 2005 by John Goettsche, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. UDC 11-SB-3.D.2 and Idaho Code & 65-6711A provides the City the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) with the City that may reauire 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 neeatively impact nearby properties. At the April 4a' City Council meeting, the Council voted to reauire a Development Agreement (DAl for this proiect. Included within the DA should be: • A provision that limits homes on Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be either sin~le- story or if bonus rooms are provided, they will have windows that face south_ (towards the street) with no second story windows that face north on said lots. • A provision that reauires Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be at least 60-feet wide. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Narv. at 888-4433 to initiate this process. 2. PP Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Common Driveway: The applicant is proposing to use a common driveway for Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1. Staff is supportive of the common driveway proposal. UDC 11- 6C-3D7 requires setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures to be shown on the plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. Further, UDC 11-3C-6 requires every single-family detached dwelling to have atwo-car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad on the lot. The asphalt for the common driveway should not count towards the required parking pad area. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1 should maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement should be depicted and explained on the face of the final Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DA'I`S OF MARCH 7, 2006 plat. Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. See Exhibit B below. Pathways: The applicant is proposing to construct a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway along the south side of this development. This pathway will tie in with the cinder pathway to the east in Packard Acres No. 1. The cider pathway in Packard Acres No. 1 then connects to an unimproved path along the south side of Carol Subdivision. The pedestrian connection in this area is hindered by some gates, but eventually terminates at River Valley Elementary School to the east. UDC 11-3B-12C requires a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 35 linear feet on both sides of the pathway. However, due to the pathway being within a Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) easement, staff is recommending that the applicant be Qranted a modification of this standard requirement. Instead of trees staff recommends that the applicant be granted alternative compliance from the standard landscape requirement along_pathways. Staff recommends that the applicant be required to install shrubs and other low-lying_~xoundcover on both sides of the pathwaySas allowed by NMID.) See the Landscaping section and Exhibit B below. Landscaping The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15- 05, labeled Sheet Ll is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways. • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, at least one deciduous shade tree per every 8,000 square feet of common open space should be planted, and common areas should be improved with lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Access: Access to this site is currently provided from Wingate Lane, a private lane. The applicant is proposing to extend stub streets from the north and south as access to this property. Wingate Lane was created with a private road agreement that was created in 1913. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest this property has in Wingate Lane. Staff is supportive of this proposal. Staff recommends that prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the applicant be required to submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7 2006 City's Legal Department.) Further, the applicant should either be required to depict the existing Wingate Lane easement on the face of the final plat, OR terminate/vacate the private road agreement. NOTE: The buildable area of Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, will be significantly affected if the Wingate Lane private road easement on this property is not vacated. Lot 10, Block 1, will only have about a 29-foot wide building pad area. See Exhibits A and B below. Existing Residences/Buildings: The site currently contains multiple buildings. Because the existing structures span across proposed lot lines, all buildings shall be removed or relocated, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. See Exhibit B below. Fencins: The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. There is existing fencing along the north, east, and west property lines. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision (UDC 11-3A-7A7bi). See Exhibit B below. Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Owners' Association. See Exhibit B below. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: There are existing irrigation ditches that run along and through this parcel. Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. See Exhibit B below. Pressure Irti atg ion: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 15 and MCC 9-1-28. Densi : At the April 4a' Citv Council meeting. the Council voted to approve the revised plat that is dated March 20, 2006, and includes 23 single-family building lots. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject applications AZ-OS- 062 and PP-OS-062, with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report for the hearing date of January 19, 2006. 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~ G DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-OS (revised 3-20-0~) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: 11-15-OS) 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 Unified Development Code Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-OS (revised 3-20-06)) t. y...i ~T1 'S34QNJ 711 ~~ ..r°'.a~ - `i a ~D r ~, I '' '' ~~~`+ ~. '~ ~~ _ ~°~`~d ~ it • e c ~ ~ ~ = P . p r~,, i .~. - ~ s a ~ °' I .~ v,~i ~..... ~ I I ~~~ ~ ~ q§ + I ! ~ . E _ 'w _ . ti~~ ~¢ S . r ~ g ~ 4 ~ 9 r ~A ~a~ y+ , 1 _~ f ~~ ~ 4 ~' S ~ fi. ~ 9 ~~g+~~ r r~ s a ~Q sa9~@~Bf6s I~ I ~3s~~i~i~P ~'-'d`'a~o.m m+oY Cn mr tl li w a~ i - ~! ~ ~ _ .__L w~~e ~ { ~, ~9 fi t 3i Qp ;~ Pg ~, 1 Kf ~~ 4 " e r ~ "J F ~RQ P~~~3` p p ~ q BB iii@:~ii~e~ ~ 3' ,1 _, rte,. .i5 H ! 1 ip~k I v= ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~Y~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~: ~ ~~ Lt d' ~ ~ dpi A ~ '4l t ~Pi -- ~Y ~~'~ `~ L~'~` ..ry ~ •'~^' '.. ~ ~ - 111 _ ~ 1~ a ,jl ~~F~e • ~~ ~ 191 _ } :1 ~ ~ (3t` i G1) ~ i4?" w - - ~ p ~~ Rill .•i J '. ~r -- ~~. ~ ; ,, `,, ~~l i ~ gg i~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i i ~ Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANU ARY 19, 2006 2. Landscape Plan (dated 11-15-OS) ,.®..,®, i ,m maw _ o Sit~'S~yr83H1. _~. 1° aria m~'•~e~a® +~ Ya~tra gnat 4~ :~ ~a ' e ~ i s~ q! e+ p a ~~ ~~~~ g ~ ~~g~~ ~~' ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ , ~~ (°j PQ. E~ ~a~ ~ {~ ~ - •~ ~. '<`a ~ ~ • - F bA _ I t P { Q °~ •i i J --- -~ 7~ U ~ ~` i a ~ .~ e~ ~.. _ __ ~, _ _-~_ J~r<< i ~ ,y ~~ s ~ ~ ~ ~~ e r ~~f =~ --- 'I ^ _ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ r -- _ __ _~ ~ ~ ~ x ~ ~ '! ~ _- _ . t -- J ~ ~ ~ e x , i r `------~-_ -- - r` ~==' s ° _ _ __J_ ~ a ,a ~ slea n ' e 1 i ~, a n ~ ~ i. ~a ! ° I~ ~~ ~~ ~.~ ®• ;, .i ~ ~_~_d ~~ Exhibit A -Page 2 CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-OS-062) 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as P1, prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, dated December 1, 2005 (revised 3-20-0 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-OS-062) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-OS-062). 1.1.2 The applicant is proposing to use a common driveway for Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1 shall maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement shall be depicted and explained on the face of the fmal plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. In accordance with UDC 11-6C-3D7, depict the required setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1, on the face of the final plat. In accordance with UDC 11-3C-6, provide each single-family detached dwelling with atwo-car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad between the garage face and the common driveway (the asphalt for the common driveway shall not count towards the required parking pad area.) Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 1.1.3 UDC 11-3B-12C requires a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 35 linear feet on both sides of the pathway. Due to the proposed pathway on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2, being within a Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) easement, the applicant is hereby granted alternative compfliance from the standard requirement to install trees along side the pathway. In lieu of trees, the applicant shall install shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on both sides of the pathway (as allowed by NMID.) 1.1.4 The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15-05, labeled Sheet Ll is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways (as allowed by NMID). • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, install at least one deciduous shade tree per every 8,000 square feet of common open space area, and install lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Submit a copy of said plan with the final plat application. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to occupancy of any buildings. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Exhibit B -Page 1 • • CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.1.5 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the City's Legal Department.) Further, the applicant shall terminate/vacate their interest in the private road agreement all the way to Ustick Road. 1.1.6 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all buildings shall be removed from this site or relocated in compliance with the City Code. 1.1.7 The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision. 1.1.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Owners' Association. 1.1.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 1.1.10 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-OS-062) 1.2.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.2.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.2.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the Exhibit B -Page 2 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of fmal construction. 1.2.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.2.5 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation and conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.2.6 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall install all mains necessary to provide service; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall be required to continue the 10-inch water main in N. Devlin Avenue as opposed to the 8-inch that is proposed. 2.4 The applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system in this development is to be owned and operated by Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. A letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 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 9-4-8. Wells maybe used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.8 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.9 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.10 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining Exhibit B -Page Z CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 certificates of occupancy. 2.11 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 2.12 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Exhibit B -Page 2 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 3.5 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.6 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is at least 20' wide. 3.7 Requirements for dead-end fire apparatus access roads that are between 500'-750' in flength. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 26' wide. Streets with less than a 35' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 39' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. Special approval required over 750' IFC Table D103.4. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.8 For all Fire Lanes, provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.9 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 3.10 Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6". This includes mature landscaping. 3.11 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.12 To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than %z the diagonal measurement of the full development. 3.13 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.14 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.15 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.16 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). 3.17 The Fire Dept. has concerns about the ability to address the project and have the addresses visible from the street which the project is addressed off of. Please contact Vicki Heugly at 898-5500 to address this concern prior to the public hearing. 3.18 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 4. Police Department 4.1 Lot 6, Block 1, creates a residence that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors. Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the plat/site plan such that the houses/dwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage interaction between more neighbors. 4.2 Any interior fencing next to common open space shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 SSC will not provide trash nick-up services utilizing the common drivewav The developer shall install a concrete pad at the end of the common drive no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk. The pad shall be of sufficient area to accommodate the receptacles of the residences that take access from the common drivewav 7. Ada County Highway District Site Specific Conditions o Ann~oval 7.1.1 Extend the two existing stub streets, from the north and south property lines, into the site, as proposed. 7.1.2 Construct the internal local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way, as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct the cul-de-sac turnaround with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 7.1.4 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions ofApproval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 2 CTI'I' OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACRD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B -Page 2 CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING-DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 C. Legal Description V cn u .9roa srat+rpraaa. [~ae~etvc EXhibit ~$ Property Qescriptiorl Sharp Estates The Scsuth lia9f of the Southeast Quarter of th® Nartt-west Quarter of Sedion 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise 111~d1an, Ada County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as fol{ov~s~ 5; ~ience~, along the south line ®f th~egsaay~ Quarter~of the Rlo~hwest~pua+rter of Bald Sectieon 5, Nord Bg°39'53" West a distance of E70.89 feet to a 6l8 inch rebar marking the Southwest Corner of the Southeast Quarter of rite iiforthwest Quarter of said Set~on 5; thence, alor~ the west liure of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 5, North 0O°2T36° East a distance of 331.92 to the NaRhwQSt tomes of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence; along the north line of the South Haif of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Se#tcn 5, South 89°38'08° East a dlstanr~ of 871.07 feet to a Sf8 inch rebar marking the Northeast Corner of the South Hats of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence. along the east line of tht3 South®ast Quarter of tha torthwest Quarter of Bald Sermon 5. South 00°28'28" West a distance Of 331.57 feat to the Pant of Beginning. Containing 5.11 acres, mare or less. Subject to any existing eassmeM affecting the above descritiad parcel of land, written, unwritten, recorded, or unrecorded. ~: ~f]f~.[T14~!:p~ [%IHU#~.()fBLIfl~41$UM1Gy \pPO~'i[y dC46(.I[~Cil1.LWt AUVEItIbCT ~4, ZL~!$ `Trcu.~arc 1'~~Ik~. f u~raerr:, lxc~. , p@te-, , 7Rla ~ :6a• ~-r, t f b 1'1!Nt 41 '~~ ut P~97xt~~ ie'd~hc~F;,~,i;~ . ':v. Tre _a rr 1~1. ,~I,~In~r ~c~~Rt Exhibit C -Page i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 ~t ~~ ~~,~ ~~ ~~ ~. ~~ ~- ~ ~~ ~~ ~4 ~~ a ~_ Exhibit C -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. 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; Council fords that single-family residential uses are allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8. Medium Density Residential permits the establishment of residential uses and is designed to protect the integrity of residential development by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible nonresidential uses. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to the proposed zoning designation. 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 fords 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 (LTDC 11-SB-3.E). The R-8 zoning amendment will provide lots that are similar in nature to existing subdivisions in the near 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. 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, Council finds that Annexation and Zonin of this property to R-8 would be in the best interest of the Citv 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARINo'DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Council generally supports the proposed plat layout and proposed density as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Council fmds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See fording Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, Council fmds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Council relies upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACHD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See fording "Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings above, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and City Staff originally had some concerns about Lot 6, Block 1, and how the future residence will be somewhat isolated from the rest of the development. Such areas tend to have an increased crime potential. However, this situation is not much different from homes at the end of cul-de-sacs, and therefore should not create a safety problem. Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Council should reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Council references any and all public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING PROPOSED °r ~ ® 8n J 12.. ®15" ~ ®' 18" 21" ., ~ 27.. 30" FORCEMAIN CITY OF MERIDIAN PROJECT LIMIT FOR BLACK CAT PHASE 4 March 31,2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 PP 05-058 APPLICANT J BS Enterprises, LLB ITF~ NO, ~ ,~ REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2~b -Request for Preliminary Plat app 29 residential lots, 7 cornmerciat lots and 7' common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN-Rand G-C zones for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision -- 1845 West 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: MER{DIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Previous Item Packet / Mlrnites Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubUc meetings shati become properly of the Ctiy of Meridian. RECEIVED a~ z, mos CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~~ ~~ i:l'i5r' ~YF . C:~%'~~~r~~a s~ ~~~ ~~ M ~~~' In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 10.15 acres to C-C zone (Community >iusiness District) far 6.08 acres of the site and a TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood- Residential) for 4.07 acres of the site AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 29 single family lots, 7 commercial lots, and 8 comn~on/other lots AND a Conditional Use Permit for a mined use development within 300' of a residential district, for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision, by Franklin Centre, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-05-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 25, 2006 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date ofApri125, 2006 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April Z5, 2006 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 25, 2006 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri125, 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 6S, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial native 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. C1TY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACm, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ•OS-054/PP-05-0581CUP-OS-051-PAC,E 1 of4 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment{s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. S. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached StaffReport for the hearing date of January 10, 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Flat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated October 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated January 29, 2005 is herby conditionally approved; and 3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri125, 2006 incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Twelve {12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record a final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminazy plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-054JPP-05-058/CUP-05-051- PAGE 2 of 4 and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (1$}months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final. decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the Gity 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 Cade. F_ Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of April 25, 2006 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the Z~~day of 2006. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE VOTED_y~~C~-~ COUNCIL MEMBER JOE NORTON VOTED i~~~C'.~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_~~~~-~' COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__ (~~,~,,, TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED '~~ YO /l1VIY de WEERD CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S}. Az-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051- PAGE 3 of 4 *~`'`,',`~,~~1111111111 f JAI`,, J,l~f', ~~ ATTEST: - WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CLERK~`~~.~ ,~~' ~~~` ,~~ f~ R r, r ~ f r~ 1; `~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ' ~~~ Copy served upon: / Applicant ~ Planning Department -~ Public Works Department ~- City Attorney By: Dated: 5' ~ . 0 cc City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN ENDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-054/PP-05-05$/CUP-OS-051- PAGE 4 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING pEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 STAFF REPORT Meridian City Council ~„~ „F Hearing Date: April 25, 2006 d ' ~` City Council hearing date: April ?, 200b ~+~~~~~ 7 ~ City Council hearing date: March 7, 2006 ~ `,, '~''`~r' City Council hearing date: February 7, 2006 c~ TO Meridian City Council FROM: Meridian Planning Commission APR ~ ~ ~(~ STAFF: Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner City 4f Meridian SUBJECT Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision c~lty Clerk 4~oe AZ-OS-OS6 Annexation of 10.15 acres from RUT to 4.07 acres GC (Community Business) and 6.08 acres TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) PP-OS-058 Preliminary Plat for 29 Single-family residential lots 7 commercial lots and 8 other lots CUP-05-051 Conditional Use Pezznit for a mixed use development within 300' of a residence 1. SITMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 10.15 acres of land that is currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The applicant is seeking a C-C zone (Community Business District) for 6.08 acres of the site and a TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood- Residential) for 4.07 acres of the site. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property requesting 29 single-family residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 8 common/other lots for the 9.47 acres plat. The applicant has also submitted a conditional use permit for a mixed use development within 300' 2. SiT1VIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 5, 2006. At the public hearing they moved unanimously to recommend approval. a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Jane Suggs, JBS Consulting ii. In opposition: None. iii. Commenting: None iv. Staffpresenting application: Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner v. Other staff commenting on application: Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator. b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. - Location of the site in relation to industrial uses on Franklin Road ii. --Lot 19 Block 1, the open space lot south of the site which will be for future development. iii. -Lot 5 Block 1 will be reconfigured from one lot to approximately five lots which the eastlwest portions will be service drives and the nortb/south portions will be either public or private streets for future connection to Lot 19. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision A~OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-0S-051 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/200b i. Public Works Condition 2.15 shall read "All development improvements for each phase of this development, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro- paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. ii. Planning Condition 1.11 shall read Lot 21 instead of Lot 22. d. Outstanding Isaue(s) for City Coancil: i. None. 3. PROPOSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing) Approval (All applications) I move to approve File Numbers AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058ICUP-05-051 as presented in. staffreport for the hearing date of Apri125, 2006 and the preliminary plat dated October, 2005 with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications) Denial (All applications) I move to deny File Numbers AZ-05-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-OS-051 as presented in the staff report dated Apri125, 2006 and the preliminary plat dated October, 2005 for the following reasons: Continue (All applications) I move to continue the public hearing for items number AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 to (date certain). 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Locatian: South of Franklin Road, and West of Linder Road -Approximately 10.3 acres of an irregular shape in the NW % of the NE % 3N1 W S 14 b. Owner Franklin Centre, LLC 1767 W. Franklin Raad Meridian, Idaho 83642 c. Applicant: Jane Suggs JBS Enterprises, LLC 200 Louisa Street Boise, Idaho 83?12 d. Representative: Jane Suggs, JBS Enterprises, LLC e. Present Zoning: COUNTY- RUT f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use Regional, Multi-Use Pathway, 2002 Comprehensive Future Land Use Map g. Description of Applicant's Request: 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached as Exhibit Al ): October, 2005 2. Date of landscape plan (attached as Exhibit A2): October 31, 2005 h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The proposed mixed use prof ect complies with the City's designation of Mixed Use Regional where the C-C district allows for smaller commercial operations which will be paired with the TNR district which allows for residential densities up to 8 dwellings per acre. We believe the use of the project will Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERID[AN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 provide a development which will complement the surrounding land uses and will include many amenable features such as detached sidewalks, extensive open space, future multi-use pathway, a pond, and use the integrated home office designs of the TNR dl9triCt. S. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter S, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5 and Chapter 6, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16, 2006 and January 30, 2006 c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 13, 2006 d. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 27, 2006 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Agricultural b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: AgriculturaUUrbanizing c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Caffarelli Subdivision I-L, Franklin Road 2. East: Harks Corner C-C, Linder Road 3. South: Whitestone Estates, R-4, Ten Mile Creek 4. West: Agricultural Ada County RUT and Rl d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: Extension of main located in the southwestern corner of this property. Location of water: Extension of mains in Franklin Road Issues or concerns: The sewer flows to the Whitestone lift station. The applicant shall be responsible for Gay upgrades that may be required. 2. Vegetation: Agricultural/Irrigated 3. Flood plain: Ten Mile Creek -Mainly contained within the banks 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Ten Mile Creek 5. Hazards: Floodplain 6. Proposed Zoning: TN-R and C-C 7. Size of Property: 8. Description of Use: Common Harks Cauyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-0S-0S 1 10.1 S acres Residential, 29 Single Family detached, 7 Commercial, and 7 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIpIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAI+F REPORT FOR THE }TEARING DATE OF 4!25!2006 f. Subdivision Plat Information 1. Residential Lots: 29 2. Non-residential Lots: 7 3. Total Building Lots: 36 4. Common Lots: 5 S. Other Lots: 3 6. Total Lots: 43 7. Open Lots: Lot 21 Block 3 is the main pond/comman lot. Lots 9, 12 Block 2 and Lots 10, 14 Block 3 are internal common lots within the residential component 8. Gross Density: 9.84 units per acre shown (2.94 acres by 29 SF) -(Build out for T'N-R as presented in conceptual plan shows 79 units on 6.08 acres for 13.0 du/a) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet required for Franklin Road (25 feet shown) 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: 25 feet commercial to residential (15 feet shown to the residence west of the site) (5 feet proposed C-C to TN-R) 3. Percentage of site as open space (PP application): .44 acres or 4.3% open space (future lot 19 Block 3 not included and parkway calculations not included) 4. Other landscaping standards: Retain existing healthy vegetation; rehabilitate the natural vegetation/habitat cover along the Ten Mile Creek to Park Department and NM1D standards; possible cooperation with the Parks Department for development of a multiuse pathway across to Whitestone Estates Subdivision h. Amenities The applicant is proposing amenities in open space and pond with Gazebo, parkway streets. i. Proposed and Required Residential Standards C-C (Standards) Proposed Required Front 0 0 Interior side 0 0 Street landscape buffers ~~ 10 10 ~~~ 25 25 Landscape Buffer to residential uses 5/15 2S Maximum building height 50 50 TN-R (Standards} Setbacks (measured from back of sidewalk) Proposed Drafted Harks Canyon Greek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-OS1 PAGE 4 CITY OF MER1p1AN PLANNIN4 DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DAT)r OF 4!25!2006 Minimum front setback Alley accessed properties 10 Minimum front setback Street accessed properties 20 to garage 10 to living area Minimum rear setback Alley accessed properties without parking pad S Alley accessed properties with parking pad N/A Street accessed properties 12 Minimum side setback Property lines adjoining unattached walls 4 Property lines adjoining attached walls 0 Minimum side street setback Alley ~ 5 Local Street 10 Collector N/A Street Landscape Buffer Local Street Arterial 8 -parkway with Class II trees or tree wells w/8' sidewalk Maximum building height 25 40 10 20 10 S 20 12 4 0 5 10 20 8 25 40 j . Proposed and Required Non-Residential Commercial lots shall conform to the use requirements of the C-C district and shall receive a certificate of zoning compliaztce for all uses, See exhibit B. Non-residential lots in TN-R district are to be used for amenities and open space only. k. Off-Street Parking {Multi-Units): 1. Parking spaces required: 2 for each unit, {29) TNR attached units; 58 stalls req. 2. Parking spaces proposed: 29 rrrin;n,~ covered stalls are shown as conceptual, 24 on street parking stalls are provided. 3. Compact spaces proposed: 0 4. Off-site parking proposed: No 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access {private, public, common drive, etc.): Direct lot access to Franklin Road is to be prohibited. Access to future development is as proposed with pubic stub streets at multiple locations to the east. Potential commercial cross access through the GC district lies both east and west at the shown parking lots. An additional stub street to the east at "public road No 2" will not be required. The applicant has agreed to make all changes as required by the attached ACTED staff report. The Meridian Police and Fire Departments have submitted requirements which exceed the standards as recommended by the UDC PIG Committee for the TN-R district. The Planning Department is recommending approval of the minimum standards as set forth Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25!2006 by ordinance in the TN-R District. For a detailed report on the public streets and access points to public streets, please the attached staff report from the Ada County Highway District (Exhibit C). 7. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On November l Os' 2005 staff held an agency comments meeting, all agencies attending provided comments as attached in Exhibit B. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PQLICIES AND GOALS The subject site is designated `Mixed Use Regional' on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and the applicant has generally drawn the annexation requests for the TN-R and C-C district to meet the goals of the Mixed Use Regional District. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, this designation is defimed in part as an area that is situated in highly visible or transitioning parts of the City where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The MU-R has no upper limit on the square footage ofnon-residential uses and is intended to allow a broad range of uses. The proposed density (9-13 d.u./acre) is within minimum target density of 8 to 15 d.u.lacre for Traditional Residential Neighborhoods within a mixed use development, staff finds that the proposal conforms to this stated purpose and intent. Higher density subdivisions north and west of Linder Road have provided smaller lots in the "High and Medium Density Residential" areas which have been at or above eight dwelling units to the acre. Other subdivisions south and east of the site along Linder Road and Franklin Road have been closer to the 3 to 5 d.u./acre with zoning designations of R-8 or primarily Rte. Similar projects to the Traditional Neighborhood concept Franklin and Ten Mile Roads vicinity have Commercial designations (Neighborhood Commercial, Community Business, and Limited Office) under the Meridian City Code where a mixed commerciaUresidential product was not available under the Meridian City Code, but is being applied through the TN-R District. 'The properties east of the site at Harks Corner are also zoned C-C where the restaurant/bar uses share the existing water feature amenity on the site. Staff finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application (staff analysis is 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 properties. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff s Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 • The northern roadway adjacent to the subject lands is currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway Distract (ACFID). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change 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 and Zoning Department, Meridian Utility Balling Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets: ' (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) In accordance with this Goal and Action Item, the applicants design only allows collector (commercial/local street) road access to Franklin Road. These collector roads are designed with landscape dots and oriented as to only allow vehicular traffic flow to the public road system. No lots within Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision are provided dot access to a collector or arterial street. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B: Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. Stajf finds that the site is designated for MU-R on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Although a wide range of commercial uses has not been planned for this property, the identity of MrT-R in the area of the Ten Mile Interchange would tend to become more commercial as the area transitions to the future interchange. The project integrates a residential/Community Business component into the design and stafffinds the TNR products provide an appropriate transitional use to the more intense commercial uses along Franklin Road. More intense commercial/high density developments are anticipated for the Ten Mile Interchange and the TN-R complements existing uses an Harks Corner and buffers the Community Business aspects closer to Franklin Road from the residential uses south of the site. Therefore Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision meets the general policies for the mixed use regional comprehensive designation. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 5: Locate new Community Business areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. Franklin Road is classified as arterial roadway. The applicant is proposing access from the adjoining areas from micro paths, sidewalks and shared (cross access) streets which will provide future connection to residentaal/commerciad areas east, west and south of the site along Franklin Road and across the Ten Mile Creek. Staff believes that the Traditional Neighborhood areas proposed compliment the existing and planned residential areas in the vicinity. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D: Encourage appropriate land uses along transportation corridors. Sta„~`'believes that the proposed land uses are appropriate along the adjoining transportation Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-OS-051 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25!2006 corridors (Franklin Road and Linder Road). • "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation comdors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.): ' (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to construct a 25 foot wide landscape buffer with a perimeter fence and dense vegetation along Franklin Road. The applicant is also proposing to construct a YS foot wide landscape buffer along the western boundary where there is an existing single family residence. Sta, f~`'is supportive of these widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-of-way. See Site Specific Condition in the Preliminary Plat section below in Exhibit C. • "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, #3) This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. The additional rights of way for Franklin Road will be large enough to accommodate future pedestrian walkways and possible bicycle lane as weld as interconnection of sidewalks along arterial roads. T'he urban design of the TN-R district includes larger open spaces integrated into the front yards of all blocks in this district. These larger open spaces will all include pedestrian traffic routes connected to the arterial roadways. The applicant has indicated that a bridge will be provided for access to the south through Whitestone Estates where the future Ten Mile Creek Multi-use Pathway will be located The applicant shall bond for the multiuse pathway and bridge with this development to ensure compliance with the future pathway system. • Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1) The properties adjacent to the subject site are designated for a wide variety of uses. North of the site is planned for Industrial uses, east and south of the site are existing commercial/residential developments not expected to change, and west and south of the site are continuations of the mixed use regional uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The project provides a transition from the intense commercial and industrial uses along Franklin into a mix of residential densities from the C-C District to the TN-R District. • Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condomimiunns, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities (Chapter VII, Goal rV', Objective C, Action 10) The subject property is designated Medium Density Residential on the Meridian Future Land Use Map which identifies this area as an appropriate area for residential development. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan definition of medium density, with a gross density of 9 to 13 dwelling units per acre. Sta~`'has reviewed Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision under the Traditional Neighborhood Residential designation which supports residential densities from 8 to IS dwelling units to the acre (PIG Group recommendations). Staff anticipates the housing types for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision to be very diverse due to the lot sizes, Harks Canyon Creels Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-0S-058/CLIP-05-051 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 attachments and Varying inlegrated designs. These projects as a neighborh00d meet the variety needed to be offered within residential designations. The project also concentrates the higher density housing within the TNR district and transitions to a larger open space area as the subdivision flows south and into the R-4(medium density) designation. • "On-street bikeways should be incorporated on all future Collector streets." (Chapter VI, Figure VI-5) Figure VI-S on page S7 of the Comprehensive Plan designates a bikeway on all collector roads and arterials. The proposal will provide a local road connection from the site to Franklin Road which will provide interconnection to future collector streets. Interconnectivity between subdivisions will also provide for a multiuse pathway connection through Subdivision for pathway access to the Ten Mile Creek pathway systems. The subject property dies within the immediate vicinity for apark/pathway connection in the area north of I-84 and Linder Road and future connection all the way to .I-84 along the Ten Mile Creek. Currently no pathway exists in the near vicinity. No bike lane is proposed for Franklin Road. See ACHD report, • The following standard applies for all Mixed-Use Regional developments proposed within 300-feet of an existing residence or school require a conditional use permit. (Chapter VII, Pgs 97-98) Tlae applicant has submitted a Conditional Use Permit CU.1' OS-OSI to comply with this section. The applicant's conceptual plan provides for an additional fifty units shown as condominiums as weld as future open space and a pathway connection along the Ten Mile Creek. Staff supports the conceptual site plan dated July 19, 2005 as submitted but will require assurances that the future amenities will be provided in a timely manner as to be able to be used by future residences contained within the associated plat. Sta f~finds that the proposed zoning and subsequent uses (Community Business /single-family home will be eg nerally harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. ZONING ORIIINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: 11-2D-2 (TNR) lists Single Family Residential (attached and detached) as permitted uses in the TNR and C-C zoning districts. Furthermore, limited office/commercial uses are allowed in the TNR district, also listed in UDC 11-2D-2. 11-ZB-2 (C~C) lists many limited commercial uses as permitted as well as many more intense uses as conditional in the Community Business district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT (C-C) the purpose of the commercial districts is to provide far 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 the mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to the streets and highways: Community Business Districts offer allowed uses of Larger scale and broader mix of retail, office, and service uses with access to arterials or nonresidential collector streets. TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (TN-R): The purpose of the TN-R District is to provide for a variety of residential land uses including attached and detached single-family Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 residential, duplex, townhouse, and multifamily. A TN-R bistrict includes open spaces and promotes pedestrian activity through well-designed and varied streetscapes that also provide for the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic. Most dwelling units should be accessed from alleys. The maximum density of the TN-R District is fifteen (15) units per acre. The minimum density is six (6) units per acre. Density should decrease away from the center and closer to conventional residential districts. The TN-R District should be generally located: adjacent to a TN-C District, along a transit corridor, or within a mixed use neighborhood. For the purposes of this Title, the term, residential district shall also include the Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. c. Traditional Neighborhood standards: UDC 11-2D-6 -The standards of the Traditional Neighborhood District are to be negotiated by the Planning Commission and tb.e City Council. The following is a draft of standazds developed by the 2005 Process Improvement Group (PIG) group. Qptions for Street Sections in the TN-R District: The width of the allowed street section shall be determined by how the properties are accessed and whether or not a parking pad is provided that has rn;n;rn~ dimensions of twenty feet (20') by twenty feet (20') as measured from the paved surface of the alley or street to the face of the garage door. 1. For alley accessed properties that provide a pazking pad, the following shall apply: a. The parking pad must meet the dimensional standards noted above. b. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20') right-of-way with a m;n;rnum of sixteen feet (16') of paving. c. The applicant shall be allowed to have a reduced street section oftwenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back-of-curb to back-of-curb) with parking on both sides. 2. For alley accessed properties that do not pmvide a parking pad, the following shall apply: a. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20')right-of--way with a minimum of sixteen feet (16') of paving. b. The applicant shall provide a street section ofthirty-three feet (33') (measured fram back- of-curb to back-of-curb) with pazking on both sides. The requirement for aff-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such. circumstances. c. The applicant may request a street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back- of-curb to back of-curb) with parking on one side where the street only provides residential access on one side of the street. For example, where one side of the stmt has homes on it and the other side of the street is a dedicated open space lot. Such request shall be approved by Council with the preliminary plat. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. 3. For street accessed properties, the following shall apply: a. Although street accessed properties are allowed in this district, it is anticipated that only properties on the perimeter of a TN-R development would be street accessed. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design meets the purpose statement of the TN-R district. b. All street accessed properties must provide a parking pad as detailed above. c. The applicant shall be allowed to have a reduced street section oftwenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back-of-curb to back-of-curb} with parking on only one or on both sides. 4. Block lengths shall meet the standards as set forth in Section 11-6C-3F2. Although block lengths are allowed to exceed five hundred feet (500') when a pedestrian pathway is used to break up the block, it is anticipated that most blocks will not exceed the five hundred-foot (500') requirement. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design meets the purpose statement of the TN-R district. Harks Canyon Cr~k Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-OS-O51 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 Tn addition to the standards as set forth in Section 11-3A-?, the following restrictions shall apply to fencing within the TN-R district: 1. Front yard. Fences shall be wrought iron or similar of similar quality and appearance and shall be no greater than three feet (3') in height. 2. Side yard. a. Side yard fences that follow the side yard property line shall only be allowed where the side setback is five feet (5'} or greater. The portion of a side yard fences that extend from the building to the side yard property line shall be setback two feet (2') behind the enclosed portion of the frotrt of the building. b. Side yard fences that extend from one building to an adjoining building are allowed where the adjoining houses have use easements on the side yard area. Such fences shall be setback two feet (2') behind the enclosed portion of the front of the building adjoining the fence. 3. Rear yard of alley accessed properties. Fences shall be setback a minimum of seven feet (7') from the alley (measured from back of paved surface of the alley). 4. The maximum fence height shall not exceed six feet (6'}, subject to the provisions set forth in Sections 2 and 3 below. 5. Un corner properties, the maximum fence height in the required street side yard shall be six feet (b') above the grade (as measured at the property line), and the minimum setback shall be ten feet {10') from the street side property line. See Figure 11-3A-3. 6. Where the rear yard of one property adjoins the front yard of another property, the fence along the rear and side yards where they adjoin the adjacent-front yard shall be flush or angled at forty-five (45) degrees to provide continuity with the adjoining fence and property line. See Figure 11-3A- 3. 7. Additional height shall be allowed for arbors, arches and/or other architectural appurtenances extending over gates and/or other entryways Such appurtenances shall not exceed five feet (5') in width and/or eight feet (8') in height. 8. Additional height shall be allowed for gate posts. Such gateposts shall not eight feet (8') in height. Lighting. In addition to the standards as set forth in Section 11-3A-11, the following standards shall apply within the TN-R district: All dwelling units shall have a minimum of two (2) lights at the front of the unit. All dwelling units on alley accessed properties shall have a m;n;mmn of two {2} lights along the alley. All lighting required in this section shall be on a photocell that activates the lighting at dusk and turns it off at dawn. 10. ANALYSIS 10a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation 1. ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSES: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-OS$/CUP-0S-0SI PAGE 1 i C1TY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARINQ DATE OF 4/25/2006 Development Code, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Single Family Residential products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. 1.1 The annexation legal description subAOitted with the application (stamped on October 13, 2005 by Todd R. Waite, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 1.2 Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 1.3 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. 1.4 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. 1,5 UDC 11-SB-3D2 provides the P&Z Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that tray require soxne written commitment for all future uses. Due to the mixed use nature of the commerciallofftce/resi~ggt~ uses the size and scope of the project the undetermined location of amenities pathway location, undeveloped areas of Lot 19 Block 3 and the variable standards of the TN R district as defined by the Meridian City Unified Development Code staff believes that a Development Agreement is necessary to ensure that this property is develQned in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation and does not ne tively impact nearbYproperties. If the Commission or Council feels additional development agreement requirements are necessary, staff recommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer being required. A Development Agreement (L7A) will be required as part of an armexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The apylicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 8~~433 within 18 months of Council aJmroval to initiate tl is process. The DA shall incorporate the following: • 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 Harks Canyon Greek Subdivision AZ-OS-454/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING BATE OF 4/25/2006 operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • The applicant shall provide a surety agreement for of the construction of the multi-use pathway and bridge in accordance to UDC 11-SC unless a development application has been submitted for Lot 19 Block 3 prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision. • The applicant shall coordinate with the Meridian Parks Department and Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to define the location of the multiuse pathway, bridge maintenance, and landscaping along the Ten Mile Creek. • The applicant shall maintain Lot 19 Block 3 in a state free of accumulation of junk, noxious weeds, and shall fence the perimeter of Lot 5 Block 3 to limit public access to the waterway. • The applicant has agreed that all of the TN-R residential units will be constructed with fire sprinkler systems to mitigate for the 5' setback to alley required by the Meridian Fire Department as discussed on Apri14, 2006. That the applicant shall provide trash pickup/refuse pads at the end of the dead end - shortened alley as shown an the site plan and discussed on Apri14, 2006. 2. PRELIlViINARY PLAT SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS ~.1 Public Streets and Access: Connectivity (future developments): Local stub streets for future development west of the site shall connect from "Public Street #2"west of the site at the location shown. Cross access shall be provided to the property west of the site adjacent to Lot 1 Block 1 from the parking lot as shown. Cross access shall be provided to the property east of the site adjacent to Lots 22 and 23 Block 3 from the parking lot as shown to connect with the existing Harks Corner Development. An additional public or private street to the south shall be provided in the general location of Lot 5 Block 3. The public or private street shall be for addressixxg and unobstructed access to future development in Lot 19 Block 3. See Exhibit $ below. No direct access will be allowed to Franklin Road. 2.2. Landscaping; Staff is generally supportive of the landscaping design with the following considerations: The 25 feet of right-of--way landscaping on Franklin Road shall be maintained by the Business Owners Association. The landscape buffers along these arterials shall be designed in accordance to UDC 11-3B-7. The landscape buffer shall be measured from the back of sidewalk if attached sidewalks are used. Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING RATE OF 4/25/2006 The landscaping slang Franklin Road shall be installed prior to final plat signature. The landscaping along Franklin Road shall be contained in a separate lot or on a permanent easement which will be maintained by the business owners association. Common Lot 22 Block 3 shall be maintained by the business owners association and not by the home owners association. All parkway trees shall be Class II trees. All parking lots adjacent to the TN-R district shall provide a rn,rrimum of one tree at the end of each parking aisle; the parkiuag lot landscaping shall comply with the design standards as listed in UDC 11-3B-8. The applicant is nat showing the required 25' landscape buffer between uses in this location. The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the required buffers or submit a new landscape plan with an application for alternative compliance to the director. If the director fails to approve the request far alternative compliance the applicant shall provide the required landscape buffers as detailed in UDC 11-3B. See Exhibit B. A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council signature of the Final Plat. All standards of installation shall apply as listed iu UDC 11-3B-14. 2.3 Tree Mitigation: 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 are removed. The applicant should coordinate a tree protection/mitigation plan with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Department. 2.4. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: 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. Nampa Meridian Irrigation District has adjacent laterals on this site but has not commented on the proposal. Staff has applied the standard NMII7 conditions to this site. 2.5 Pressure Irri a~; tion: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle--point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. ff a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3B-6. See Site Exhibit B below. 2.6. encin :The applicant is not showing fencing on the submitted amenity and landscape plan. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat or prior to City Council if required. If permanent fencing is not provided, teznparary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences should taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 Harks Canyon Creels Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/Ci1P-OS-051 PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4!25!2006 feet of all right-of--way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code in effect at the time the permit is issued. The landscape architect shall draft the landscape plans to meet the standards of UDC 11-3B. See Exhibit B, Condition 1.5 The Meridian Police and Fire Departments have indicated. that fencing shall have gates and there shall be no side yard fencing, the fencing requirements shall comply with the standards of UDC 11-3B. Perimeter fencing shall be designed according to UDC ll-3B and maintained by the adjacent (home/business) owners association. Temporary fencing shall be provided along Lat 5 Block 3 until a development application for Lot 19 Black 3 is approved. All fencing along the Ten Mile Creek shall be installed with non-combustible materials. 2.7 Unimproved Right-of--Way: Meridian City Code requires a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder abutting right-of--way where the unimproved portion of the right-of--way is greater than 13 feet (measured from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk or property line), and Franklin road widening is in the ACID Five Year Work Program and is scheduled for widening in 2010. The remainder of the unimproved right-of--way should be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. Franklin Road abutting this site appears to meet the warrants for the 10-foot wide gravel shoulder requirement listed above. Therefore, the applicant should be required to construct a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder on Franklin Road, with the remaining portion of the right-of--way being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. 2.8 Multi-Use Pathwav: The applicant is not showing but will be required to install a multiuse pathway in accordance to the Comprehensive Plan and installed according to UDC 11-3A-8 along the Ten Mile Creek in a location to be agreed upon with the Parks Director and Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. Currently, NMID owns the property upon which the applicant is proposing to install the pathway. All NMID standard conditions shall be applied to this site and all pedestrian access easements shall be enacted. Staff has required the applicant to bond for improvements to the multi-use pathway with this application. The pathway connection is listed as an amenity to the residents of the site and will be essential for pedestrian connection from the school site, Whitestone Estates, and Mallard Landing Subdivisions south of the Ten Mile Creek. Therefore, the pathway shall be a priority to be completed as soon as practical with the fixture development of Lot 19 Block 3. 2.9 Private Streets: The applicant is proposing to use Lot 5 Block 3 to provide fixture access to Lot 19 Block 3. Staff will require at a minimum the Nortb/Sauth legs of Lot 5 Block 3 to be a private street (if not public) to provide addressing and maintained connections to the future residential area south of Lot 5 Block 3. The applicant has not submitted a Private Street application as required by UDC 11-3F-3. The private street standards are listed in UDC 11-3F. The applicant shall design and construct the private streets in compliance with the standards listed for Private Streets in UDC 11-3F Private Streets and UDC 11-ZD Traditional Neighborhood Residential. See Exhibit B Condition 1.11 The Meridian Fire and Police Departments are requesting a minimum of 24' paved sections for alleys which shall not apply to the TN-R districts as this would exceed the standards set forth by ACRD and the Process Improvement Group for the TN-R district. Harks Canyon Crcek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 15 CITY OF MER1b1AN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF RETORT FOR THE HEARLAIG DATE OF 4/2S/2006 2.IOCommo /n_Open Snace: The applicant has a qualified application meeting the requirements of UDC 11-3G. The proposal is showing 4.3% of qualified open space which does not meet the requirements of a minimum of 5% open space. The applicant has provided landscaped Parkways in compliance with UDC 11-3G-5 but these calculations have not been provided by the applicant and not added to the overall required open space. Staff is confident that the minimum of 5% has been provided with the presented design but with the off site improvements and parkway streets 2.11 eni 'es: The applicant is required to provide one amenity per 20 acres. The applicant is showing qualified site amenities as follows: 11-3G-3C-1- Quality of life amenities -Picnic area/Gazebo in Lot 22 Block 3 11-3G-3C-2 -Recreation amenities -None shown at this time, however the applicant is proposing to tie the landscaping and pathway improvements to the Ten Mile Creek pathway system to this development. 11-3G-3C-3 -Bicycle circulation amenities -Several blocks are connected with. an internal 5' pathway which will be required to connect to the required Multi-use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek Amenities are generally located centrally and in common lots. 'These common lots shall be maintained by the Harks Canyon Creek (Home or Business) Owners Association. The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet of lawn has been provided on the landscape plan. 2.12Tr~ditional Neighborhood Residential- The standards as defined in the TNR district UDC 11-ZD-6 are currently defined as "determined by Council upon annexation and/or rezone". The standards listed under section 8 of the Harks Canyon Creek Staff report dated January 5, 2006 have been drafted by a working group specifically for TN-R projects to be used as a guideline. The applicant has designed the project in accordance to these standards and shall comply with the street sections, dimensional standards, lighting and fencing requirements as contained in this report. 2.13Street Sections: Canditions 3.23 and 3.09 of Exhibit B from the Meridian Fire Department Conditions of Approval will not apply to the street sections within the TN-R District. These standards exceed the street sections proposed by the UDC process improvement group. ACHD has reviewed the street sections and if the applicant complies with all ACHD conditions of approval then the street sections will meet all standards as set forth by policy. lOb. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of AZ-0S-056/PP-05-058/CUP-OS- O51 for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision as presented in the staff report dated January 6, 2006 based. on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions of approval as listed in Exhibit B as attached to this report. Staffhas prepared findings consistent with this recommendation. 11. E~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: October 2005) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: October 1 Q, 2005) 3. Conceptual Site Plan (dated: July 19, 2005) Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-0SS/CUP-05-051 PAGE 16 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 $. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works 17epaztment 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Pazks Department 6. Sanitary Services 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Nampa Meridian Irrigation District C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054lPP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 17 A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat dated: October 2005 . ( 5 { t k.~ } ~ j; .l ~• - i +, t j~ ~ II ~I • fE ~ i, , ~•~"•.. g i ~ : ; i i ~ .' I~ {!~ I ~i~ {~i F g~ c ~' ll'.. ; pt ~ ~,, ~I ~Yi!~;! 1 ~: ~~~ _~ at }; ~~, I~ ,. ; ~- ~ I;' .. i ~; ~~ .,; .. .: %~:~ =~~5.. r.~~~ ;',Fi ~ ~; ;~ ' ~:: i ~ i ,~mac 5 j ' . .~ tit 91~t~; qq <p'L Yy Diet ~tr Ck ; iiiiii .' J ~~`"'~r dt ~ Y~C ~@~ ]_~ LY CC C s } ~,g ~_II ~q~ ~~¢ ~ ~ '~ii' fl ~yI~~4 ]°h~ 70• ~! }; •.~t~~wg~ ~~~ a~ I ,: f ~ ~' r ~ .• Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Exhibit A Page 1 2. Landscape Plan (dated: October 14, 2005) ~ 1--~._J /N~.M TF d.Mr ra r Yr.A.. ra oow.r.. tv 4.wo.wY.w ra tia.w..y. rm wr ra ~Yw raa r `t Wo~wraww+erwow~.y i W~.~iy ~+~~ ~w~-4 A Mwlwi~iMly.b.MwMdY41M. VFti~ A a+wMr•1AkYA a w~pwrrsr~y~ ~"'^~7 A aw4~MYb~.IwYws~.Y~r ^~MMw~4~wiW~mf$N.. •Nww Rr4/wtim~.gptpw ~wr • wwn tracer, awr~.w gr.~rmr 4nwnarrraw MV/wMlMbwq~auy~f ~ 41rwf~WMr/w•Nr#ryq w~ I~ ' tiyMre~atiwe I, 1 ~q '' I rr1 r+ ~~ ~ ~^• ~~ r • ~ ~` Nww IY'11111tif4r _.'r .__ ~1II y~ , rw.1Y1 Canya~ Creek +w oermnr.v +ancas ra~,~a.r.uc rivNyy.srse rs.r.ew +a+rut ~~tr• Nr+w.mw ~ar~r fuMVwr.r.. n.rw.era veAO..x~ :~yM ~M;~~ UnN ja,W pAi !AS Wb ~1 rA~d((Y' ~aCiCS CSnyOII CfeE1C ~JUb[~tV1518T1 Exhibit A Paga 2 3. Conceptual Site Plan (dated: July 29, 2005) 1,wvs..J "" Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Exhibit A Page 3 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department SITE SPECIFIC REQUIltEMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Preliminary Plat dated October 2005 prepared by Claiborne Waite Consulting, Inc. is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All commentslconditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-056) and Conditional Use (CUP-OS-051) shall also be considered conditions of the Freliminary Plat (PP-05-058). 1.2 The applicant has proposed a 25-foot landscape buffer along Franklin Road. The Landscape buffer shall be designed and installed in accordance to UDC 11-3B-7 and certified as installed prior to final plat signature (UDC 11-3B-14B-3. The sidewalks within the buffer shall be placed as to line up with future buffers in neighboring developments. 1.3 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of no direct lot access for any lots adjacent to the arterial roads of Franklin Road as required by ACRD. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Franklin Road 1.4 The applicant shall provide cross access to all commercial lots within the subdivision and to the property west of the site adjacent to Lot 1 Block 1 and to the east from Lots 22 and 23 Block 3 as required by ACRD. 1.5 A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat showing the landscaping in relation to the changes required by this report. The submitted landscape plan prepared by Terry Hammons, A to Z Sprinkler and Landscaping., dated October 14, 2045 is not approved until re-submitted with changes outlined in this report and in compliance with UDC 11-3B. l.b The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the required buffers or submit a new landscape plan with an application for alternative compliance to the director. If the director fails to approve the request for alternative compliance the applicant shall provide the r~uired landscape buffers as detailed in UDC 11-3B. 1.7 Maintenance of all residential common azeas shall be the responsibility of the Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Homeowners' Association. (Lots 9 and 12 Block 2, Lots 10 and 14 Block 3) 1.8 Maintenance of all other common areas shall be the responsibility of the Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Business Owners Association. (all required street and use buffers, with Lot 21 Block 3) 1.9 For alley accessed properties that do not provide a parking pad, the following shall apply: a. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20') right-of-way with a minimum of sixteen feet (16') of paving. b. The applicant shall provide a street section of thirty-three feet (33') (measured from back- of-curb to back-of-curb) with parking on both sides. The requirement far o#~ street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. c. The applicant may request a street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back- of-curb toback-of-curb) with parking on one side where the street only provides residential access on one side of the street. For example, where one side of the street has homes on it and Exhibit $ Page ] the other side of the street is a dedicated open space lot. Such request shall be approved by Council with the preliminary plat. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-5 is waived far alley accessed properties in such circumstances. 1.10 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 UDG 11-3A-5, unless otherwise approved by the City and the Irrigation District(s). 1.11 If the southerly duected portions of Lot 5 Block 3 are not dedicated to the public, the applicant shall at a minimum submit a private street application to the Planning Director with the Final Plat application if the applicant chooses to provide private streets for future connection to the south along Lot 5 Block 3. 1.12 The applicant shall contact the Meridian Parks Director to define a location for the Multi-Use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek as shown on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 1.13 The applicant shall install a Multi-Use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek or other location as agreed upon by the Meridian Forks Director construction shall be in accordance to the standards as listed in UDC 11-3A-8. 1.14 The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet of lawn has been provided on the landscape plan. 1.15 All road drainage shall be contained on site in the drainage swales/areas as depicted.. 1.15 The applicant shall comply with the dimensional standards, street sections, lighting, and fencing requirements as outlined in this staff report for the Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. There shall be no modifications to the dimensional standards of the C-C Medium Density Residential District or other operating standards as contained in the Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.17 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.1.8 The applicant shall be allowed a 5' alley setback to garage/strueture for all TN-R lots. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.18 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B. Where the applicarn 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 iota the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACFID, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.19 T'he applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain Exhibit B Page 2 debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code. 1.20 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being .the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.21 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, unless otherwise approved by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. 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 not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 1.22 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexationlconditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.23 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is to being proposed via extension of mains stubbed in the southwestern portion of this property. These mains flow to the Whitestone lift station. The applicant shall be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that maybe required to handle the extra influent. 2.2 The applicant shall install mains to and through this development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum. cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Franklin Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.4 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat. The description shall be consistent with the graphically depicted easements on the plat but be recorded as a separate document using the City of Meridian's standard forms. Submit an executed easement (supplied by Public Works), a legal description, which must include the area of the casement (marked EXfuBTT A) and an 81/2" x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked E7CHIBTT $) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. 2.5 The applicant has indicated the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development is to be an extension of a private system in Harks Corner. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being required prior to fiscal plat signature on the last phase of this project. Exhibit B page 3 2.6 Prior to signature on the plat by the City Engineer the applicant shall submit a signed agreement granting permission to use the existing private pressurized irrigation pump station. 2.7 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (1~l"llC 11-3B-6D). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final. plat by the City Engineer. 2.8 All existing structures not meeting new setbacks shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.9 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1 ~ and 9~-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.10 If the stub streets to the south are going to be private streets, then Public Works will review and inspect the storm drainage systems. The applicant will be responsible for all review and inspection fees associated with this. . 2,11 If this project is to captain private streets, the applicant shall address maintenance of the private streets prior to signature on final plat by the City Engineer. 2,12 As each commercial lot develops they shall be required to retain storm runoff on site. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Starm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection We11s. 2.13 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying far building permits. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.15 All development improvements for each phase of this development, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.16 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 2.17 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting Exhibit B Page 4 that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.21 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.22 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.23 One hundred watt, high pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be places an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire I-Iydrants shall be placed on comers when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. 3.4 Entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide. 3.6 For all Fire Lanes, paint the curb red and provide signage "I`io Pazking Fire Lane". 3.7 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.8 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.9 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one Exhibit B Page 5 side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.10 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 3.11 The proposed 29-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 87 residents at build out. 3.12 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.13 The 7 office/commercial lots Iot will have an unknown transient population and will have an unlmown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2612 responses in the year 2004. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010. 3.14 The fire department requests that any future signaliution installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.15 Mainitain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.16 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy 3.17 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.1$ Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). Far Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m}. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.19 R-2 occupancies with 3 or more units shall be required to be fire sprinkled, unless specified by the UDC. 3.20 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 3.21 Gates shall be provided on the front and rear of the property, if fenced 3.22 Side yard fences shall not be allowed in the C-C district. Exhibit B Page 6 3.23 Alleys shall be at least 24-feet wide and there shall be no parking on alley streets. 4. Police Department 4.1 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used for fencing on common lots. - 4.2 The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for the commercial areas, which uses walkways and landscaping to direct visitors to the main entrance and away :from private areas. 4.3 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. Prior tv the Final Plat, the applicant shall meet with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to discuss features that increase visibility, including but not limited to: doors and windows that look out on the public areas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 4.4 The pedestrian access to the proposed clubhouselcommunity entrance is not well-defined. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that uses walkway paving materials and landscaping to alert motorists to the pedestrian traffic. 4.5 The loading areas shall be separated from all public parking areas. 4.6 Please contact the Police Chief for detailed review of any development proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be fallawed. 5.2 Pathway and Trail standards: The proposed pathway and/or trail shall be constructed in accordance with the Meridian Park Department's requirements. 5.3 Standard for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. 5.4 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-38-10.5) will be followed. b. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Dedicate 45-feet ofright-of--way at the east property line that tapers to 57-feet in the first 425-feet west of the east property line. From 425-feet west of the east property line to the west property line, the applicant should dedicate 57-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road. abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. The right-of--way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACRD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be paid the faix market value of the right-of--way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACRD right-of--way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact Exhibit $ Page 7 fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACRD Ordinance in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #200), if funds are available. AND Provide the District with a road trust deposit in the amount of $13,2$0.00 for the construction of a 7- foot wide attached concrete sidewalk. OR Dedicate 45-feet ofright-of--way at the east property line that tapers to the west to 48-feet in the first 425-feet. From 425-feet west of the east property line to the west property line, the applicant should dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the pazcel by means of a warranty deed. The right-of--way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACRD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-of--way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACHD right-of--way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACRD Ordinance in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #200), if funds are available. AND Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk within an easement to the District. Locate the sidewallc a minimum of 56-feet from the centerline of Franklin Road. 7.2 Construct Public Road #1 to intersect Franklin Road to directly align (centerline to centerline) with the driveway on the north side of Franklin Raad. 7.3 Construct North Ward Place to intersect Franklin Road approximately 104-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. 7.4 Construct all of the internal roadways within the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot attached (or 4-foot detached) concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of righx~~ way. If the applicant is proposing to construct striped on-street pazking on Public Road #2 construct bulb outs at the intersections that provide a minimum of 24-feet (measured back of curb to back of curb) at the throat of the intersection and construct the bulb outs to provide an inside radius of 1$-feet (minimum). 7.5 Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 255-feet south of the north property line to serve the 2.090-acre parcel and the 76.232-acre site to the west, as proposed. Install a sign at the tezxninus of the roadway stating, "this road will be extended in the future." 7.6 Construct a 28-foot wide driveway that intersects Public Road #1 on the west side of the roadway approximately 120-feet south of Franklin Road, as proposed. 7.7 Construct a 12 to 30-foot wide driveway that intersects Public Road #1 on the east side of the roadway approximately 75-feet south of Franklin Road. Ensure that a tangent length of 50-feet (minimum) is met on Public Road #1 before a driveway is constructed. 7.8 Construct a 28-foot wide driveway that intersects North Ward Avenue on the east side of the roadway approximately 104-feet south of Franklin Road, as proposed. 7.9 Construct a 2$-foot wide driveway that intersects North Wazd Avenue on the west side of the roadway approximately 98-feet south of Franklin. Road, as proposed. Exhibit B Page 8 7.10 Construct a private road/service drive (or public road if the City of Meridian would like a public road) that intersects Public Road #2 at the eastern end of Public Road #2 and extends to the south to serve Lot 19. 7.11 Construct a private roadlservice drive (or public road if the City of Meridian would Iike a public road} that intersects Public Road #2 at the eastern end of Public Road #2 and extends to the south to serve Lot 19. 7.12 Construct a 20-foot wide "service road" that extends from the west property line to Public Road #1. This service road will function as a private alley, as proposed. 7.13 Franklin Road is classified as a minor arterial. Other than the two public roadways that have specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Franklin Road is prohibited. A note stating the access restrictions will be required on the final plat. 7.14 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions ofAppravad 7.15 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.16 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or right-of--way. 7.17 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.18 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.19 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.20 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) far details. 7.21 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived. herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.22 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.23 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.24 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. Exhibit B rage 9 7.25 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACRD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLIlVE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACRD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACRD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.26 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain. written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.27 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B Page 10 C. Legal. Description clc~ibc~rn ~ uucait~ consulting, Ile ~~~~ ~ ~ ea7oe~ ~~ Project No. 2246 FLZAIVKLIiV CENTRE, LLC HARD CANYON ~N SUBDIVISION CC RRZpNR BOIINDARY 1)ESCBlPiTON Odo6~r 13, 2003 A PARCEI.OF LAND IN THE WE,S'I' 12 OF TIIE NORTHEAST ll4 0~' THE NORTHEAST 1/4 QF BECKON t4, T. 3 N., R 1 W:, BM., ADA COUNTY, mAHO, AND Z;EI1VCr MORE PARTICULARLY bF.SCitl$$b AS FOLLOWS: COARIV®VCIIVCi AT THB NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14, THENClr N 89°13'19"' W ALONO THE NOR'IHBOUNDARY OF SAID S$CTION 14 AND THE CENTERLIlVE OF FRAIVKl,n1(ROAD FOR A DISTANCE OF t~4.47 FIISl' TO THE BAST BOUNDARY OF THE WE4'1' 12 OF THE NOR7HEAST U4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SBClYON 14, TH>3 RRAI. POINT OF BEGiNNiNG; 'IHl7NC,E CONI7NUBVVO N 89°13'17" W ALONt3 SAID NORTH lIO11r1DARY AND CENTERI.WE FOR A DISTANCE OF 664.4b FEET' TO TEIB NORTHWBSf CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST ll4 OF THB NORTHEAST I/4 OF SAID SECTION 14; TRENCH S 00°34'18" W ALONQ THE WEST I30UNDARY OP THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF Tfl$ NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECI7ON 14, FOR A DISTANCI3 OF 199.00 PEEP; THENCE S !;4°13'17" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 481.16 FFsET; THIiNCB 500"33'43" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 267.42 FEET; THENCE S 89°13'17" B FORA DISTANCB QF 183.34 FB6I'TO THE BAST f~UNDARY OF TNB WBST 1/2 ~ THE 1~7' 1/4 OF THE NOR'I1EIDA$T I/4 OF SAID SBCTIDN 14, ALSO BEInTti THB WEST 80UNDARY OF VAN HBES SUBDIVISION; 7H~ N 00°33'43" E ALONp SAID EAST BOUNDARY FOR A DI87'ANCE OF 460,42 FESI'TO TH6 REAL POIINT OF BEGINNINQ, GONTAINWG14.07 ACREB OF LANb, MORB OR LESS. PREPARED Bl': TODD R WAITE P.L.S, C:@hojot~lV (2246 .dpp. ~ _ Exhibit C Page 1 clcaiborn ~ uuraite cansulting~ !Ic ot~{Ineers E purveyors itp Nortl1 Gwlk Hood BObe`Id 6x706 (Tae) Fmr(2ael~eaa Fiojee2 No. 2246 FlIANII;t.IN CENTRIa. LLC EWRKSCANYON CilSEKSUBDiVISiOIti TN-A RP~ONE BOUNDARY lfE9t~TION Ord 13, 2005 A PARCEL OF LAND 1iV THE W,&4(' 1/2 OF THE NOR'CHEA~SI' V4 OF'i'IiBNORTHEAST U4 OF SECTION 14, T. 3 N., R I W., B.M„ ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND BBDVG MORE PARTICULARLY D65CIt1B®AS FOidAWS: COMMENCOYG AT T1~ NOR77111ASI' CORPl1rR OF SAm SECTION 14, THENCE N 89°13' IT" W ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 14 AND THE CEAiTERL1N8 OF FRANKLIN ROAD FOR A DISTANCE OF 132$.93 F>SET TO THE WEST HONvDA1tY OF THE NORTHEAST V4 OF THE NORTHEAST U4 OF SAID SBC110N 14; THENCE S 00°34' 18" W ALONG SAID WEST BOUNDARY FOR A DISTANCE OF 193.00 FEET TO THE REAL POIlI1T OF BR(i1NMNG; THIR+ICE CON'I'aVUING S 00°34' IS" W ALONO SAID WEST BOUNDARY FDR A DL4TANCB OF 56S.d4 FF1EI'; TH8NICE N TS°OT'43" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 689.45 FEIN' TO'!'FlE EAST ~UNDARY OF THE WEST V2 OF THE NOR'I'l~lPrIST !/4 OF THE NORTHEAST I/4 OF SAID SECTION l4, ALSO BEpVG TT1E WEST BOUNDARY OF VAN HEE$ SUBDIVISION: T'Fl>~iCE N 00°33'43" E ALONG SALD EAST BOUNDARY FOR A DISTANCE OF 07..23 FRET; 1T~TCB N 89°13'17" W FOR A DL4I"ANC$ OF 183.34 F!lBI; 7Ti13I,iCB N 00°33'43" 8 FOR A DISTANCE OF 267A2 FEET; 'l'H>31+TCE N 89°13' 17" W FOR A DIbTANCS OF 481.16 FEl~l' TO THE REAL. PD1NT OF BEGINNING, CONTAQY~iQ 6.08 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LBSS. PREPARED BY; TODD R. WAITS P.L.S C:1PraJeaffi1Vabliem 12246 .R,dpC. ~ Exhibit C Page 2 l7. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commussion, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to C-C and TN-R. The Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, `mixed use regional' is defined as areas where commerciaUoffice and residential uses are transitioned between more intense uses, C-C, is harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map this is also consistent with the request for a Traditional Neighborhood Residential designation for the mixed use regional designation as a transitional zone. The density proposed with the preliminary plats are consistent with previous Commission and Council actions and generally conforms to the goals, objectives, and action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for these transition areas with a request for consistent and transitional densities. The Council finds that the proposed zoning is in general conformance with the comprehensive plan (please see Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific comprehensive plan action items that apply to this development). )~. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; Concurrent with the annexation and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a preliminary plat that proposes single-family attached and detached single family residential products as well as vertically integrated products on the subject site (PP-OS-058). The Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the accompanying PP application is approved. The Council finds that the office/retail uses would be allowed (permitted) within the requested C-C district and single family residential (townhouse) uses would be allowed (permitted) within the TN-R district. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The applicant has submitted elevations for the proposed attached commercial and townhouse units these units will be designed and constructed to meet similar architecture to the single family detached residences and approved through the Certificate of Zoning Compliance process. The Council believes that the design of these single family attached dwelling units will be compatible with the adjoining uses and transitional in nature to anticipated heavier uses south and west of the site in the Ten Mile/I-84 Interchange, The Council finds that the proposed development will change the existing character of the area, which is still largely rural. However, the proposed development is generally harmonious with the intended character envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. The Council does not find that the proposed zoning/uses will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Further, the Council does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous as long as the applicant complies with the conditions contained in Exhibit B and all City Code provisions. The Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that maybe provided when determining this finding. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited Exhibit D Page 1 ta, school districts; and, The abutting roadway, Franklin Road is within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or CIP (20-year plan) for road widening and scheduled for 2010. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of all utilities necessary to serve this proposed development. This development will be serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system through future extensions of the sewer and water lines located in Franklin Road_ The site lies on a Major Arterial (Franklin Road} and future rights of way have been determined. by the commenting jurisdictions. Crther urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. The Council finds that the subject site is proposed for development in a fashion expected for a transitional region between commercial, industrial and residential uses. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees. AC)rID has submitted a staff report with site specif c and standard conditions as attached in Exhibit B7. On November 10, 2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. Based on the joint agency/department meeting and other comments received from agencies/departments, the Council finds that except for immediate sanitary sewer, the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. The Council does not find that there has been a change in the area that dictates that this property should be rezoned. The Commission and Council rely on staff s analysis, public testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments regardug whether this property should be annexed. The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-SB-3.E). If the applicant enters into a Deve,~o~ment Ag~ceement (DA) with the City the Council finds that the annexation and zoning_of this property to C-C and TN-R would be in the best interest of the Cites 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission shall consider the objectives of this Title and at least the following: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Please see Annexation Findings Item A above. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate accommodate the proposed development; Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. Exhibit D Page 2 D. There is public finaacial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments. E. The development will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not aware of any health, safety or general welfare problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. The Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Council is not aware of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preservation. The applicant will be required to maintain, fence, and improve the waterways which aze existing on this site. Furthermore the applicant shall define with the Parks Department the location of a multiuse pathway which will further enhance the natural feature of either the Ten Mile Creek. 3. CUP Findings: The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is Iarge enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as maybe required by this ordinance; The Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features. The applicant will be required to submit for specific conditional use permits for projected commercial uses or at a minimum a certificate of zoning compliance ensuring proper application of the UDG. B. That the proposed uae and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; Please see Annexation Findings Item A above. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance wi71. be compatible wfth other uses in the general neighborhood and with the e~sting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essendal character of the same area; The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing. However, the Council finds that the applicant is not proposing to alter the structure or character of the property and the use proposed is congruent with surrounding uses and uses that have occurr~ on the property in the past. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; If all Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit li are complied with, the Council does not believe that the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. Exhibit D Page 3 E. That the proposed use wiA be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and hire protection, drainage stractures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible far the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; The ACRD has submitted conditions of approval for this development as listed in Exhibit B.7 the Council feels that the conditions applied in Exhibit B show that proper services can be provided to the site. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above G. That the proposed use will not involve actinides or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive prodncdan of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare ar odors; The Council finds that this use will not involve activities, processes, materials, equipment, ar operations that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of any persons ar property in the area. The proposed use should not produce excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Council recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any and all public testimony given regarding this fording. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B and the ACRD comments have addressed that future road connections and roadway extensions shall be designed as not to interfere with the surrounding public streets. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a nataral, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The Council is unaware of any natural ar scenic features of major importance om this site and fiords that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the subject application. The Commission and Council reference any public testimony that maybe presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature(s) of importance of which the Council is unaware. Exhibit D Page 4 March 31, 200b CUP 05-051 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 200b APPLICANT JBS Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. ~ 6 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006 -- Request for a Conditional User Permit fora mixed-use development within 300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision -- 1845 West Franklin Rood 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 OFHCE: QTHER: COMMENTS See Previous Hem Packet / M#nutes Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailsd: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubUc meetMgs shall become properly of the City o} Meridian. RECEIVED ,~~ t ~ mos CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER (i'1~ i:ISY ~Yt •~,~'~ h ~~ ~.~`, ~~- In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 10.15 acres to C-C zone (Community >iusiness District) for 6.0$ acres of the site and a TN-R {Traditional Neighborhood- Residential) for 4.07 acres of the site AND Preliminary Plat Approval for 29 single family lots, 7 commercial lots, and 8 comman/other lots AND a Conditional Use Permit far a nnixed use development within 300' of a residential district, for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision, by Franklin Centre, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-05-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 For the City Council Hearing Date of: April 25, 200G A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 25, 2006 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri125, 2006 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 25, 2006 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri125, 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 6S, 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. CITY OF MERIDIAN FIlVDINGS OF FACT', CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CLIP-OS-OS 1-PAGE 1 of 4 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, anal the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of January 10, 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat dated October 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated January 29, 2005 is herby conditionally approved; and 3. The. site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 25, 2006 incorporated by reference. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record a final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1} year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DIrCISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-054/PP-05-05$ICUP-OS-051- PAGE 2 of 4 and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-68- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (1$) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is nat met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri125, 2006 B action of the Ci Council at its re ~ Y tY gular meeting held on the •Z/C" 'day of 2006. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE COUNCIL MEMBER 70E NORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CI~ARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED_y~~G~-~ VOTED i~~~C.~ VOTED_~~~~ VOTED__G~~P~~ VOTED ~- YO Y de WEERD - CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-OS-0S 1-PAGE 3 of 4 ,`t~~~~~u ~~ t ~ i Nr~~y'`' ~~ ~ ~i Q ATTEST: - - ~~~~~ l WILLIAM G. BERG, Jk., CLERK ~`~.~' ~~`` ~.~`` Copy served upon: / Applicant -~ Planning Department ~~ Public Works Department ~- City Attorney By: Dated: 5-~ -0 co City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-0541PP-05-058/CUP-OS-051- PAGE 4 of 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TH>r HEARING RATE OP 4/25/2006 STAFF REPORT Meridian City Council ~„~ „F Hearing pate: Apri125, 2006 a ' ~ City Council hearing date: Apri17, 2006~/J~i'~~L~,t~i _ ;, City Council hearing date: March 7, 2006 ~~ , '~'•`~~' City Council hearing date: February 7, 2006 •~`c TO Meridian City Council FROM: Meridian Planning Commission ppR 21 ZOOS STAFF: Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner SUBJECT Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision G~'j, y C Bak Q~~ AZ-05-056 Annexation of 10.15 acres from RUT to 4.07 acres C-~C (Community Business) and 6.0$ acres TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) PP-05-05$ Preliminary Plat for 29 Single-family residential lots 7 commercial lots and $ other lots CUP-05-051 Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use development within 300' of a residence ].. SiTMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 10.15 acres of land that is currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The applicant is seeking a C-C zone (Community Business pistrict) for 6.0$ acres of the site and a TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood- Residential) for 4.07 acres of the site. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property requesting 29 single-family residential lots, 7 commercial lots and $ common/other lots for the 9.47 acres plat. The applicant has also submitted a conditional use permit for a mixed use development within 300' 2. SUIVIlVIARY RECOMMENDATION: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 5, 2006. At the public hearing they moved unanimously to recommend approval. a, Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Jane Suggs, J13S Consulting ii. Tn opposition: None. iii. Commenting: None iv. Staffpreser-ting application: Joe Guenther, Associate City Planner v. Other staff commenting on application: Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator. b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. - Location of the site in relation to industrial uses on Franklin Road ii. --Lot 19 Block 1, the open space lot south of the site which will be for future development. iii. -Lot 5 Block 1 will be reconfigured from one lot to approximately five lots which the eastlwest portions will be service drives and the nortb/south portions will be either public or private streets for fitture connection to Lot 19. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendatio>a: Harks Canyon Creels Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25!2006 i. Public Works Condition 2.15 shall read "All development iYx~provements for each phase of this development, including but nat limited to sewer, fencing, micro- paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. ii. Planning Condition 1.11 shall read Lot 21 instead of Lot 22. d. Outstanding Issne(s) for City Council: i. None. 3. PRQl'OSED MOTION (to be considered after the public hearing) Approval (All applications) I move to approve File Numbers AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-05-051 as presented in stafff report for the hearing date of Apri125, 2006 and the preliminary plat dated Qctober, 2005 with the followvag modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications) Denial (All applications) I move to deny File Numbers AZ-05-054/PP-OS-058/CUF-05-051 as presented in the staff' report dated Apri125, 2006 and the preliminary plat dated October, 2005 for the following reasons: Continue (Atl applicadons) I move to camtinue the public hearing far items number AZ-OS-054/PP-05-0S8/CUP-05-051 to (date certain). 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: South of Franklin Road, and West of Linder Road -Approximately 10.3 acres of an irregular shape in the NW % of the NE % 3N1 W S 14 b. Owner Franklin Centre, LLC 1767 W. Franklin Road Meridian, Idaho 83642 c. Applicant: Jane Suggs JBS Enterprises, LLC 200 Louisa Street Boise, Idaho 83712 d. Representative: Jane Suggs, JBS Enterprises, LLC e. Present Zoning: COUNTY- RUT f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use Regional, Multi-Use Pathway, 2002 Comprehensive Future Land Use Map g. Description of Applicant's Request: 1. Date of preliminary plat {attached as Exhibit Al ): October, 2005 2. Date of landscape plan (attached as Exhibit A2): October 31, 2005 h. Applicant's Statement/Justifieation: The proposed mixed use project complies vu~ith the City's designation of Mixed Use Regional where the C-C district allows for smaller commercial operations which will be paired with the TNR district which allows for residential densities up to 8 dwellings per acre. We believe the use of the project will Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-05$/CUP-05-051 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25!2006 provide a development which will complement the surrounding land uses and will include many amenable features such as detached sidewalks, e~ctensive open space, future multi-use pathway, a pond, and use the integrated home office designs of the TNR dl3triCt. - 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation and/or rezone as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title I 1 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5 and Chapter 6, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: January 16, 2006 and January 30, 2006 c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: January 13, 2006 d. Applicant posted notice on site by: January 27, 2006 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Agricultural b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: AgriculiuraUUrbanizing c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Caffarelli Subdivision Z-L, Franklin Road 2. East: Harks Corner C-C, Linder Road 3. South: Whitestone Estates, R-4, Ten Mile Creek 4. West: Agricultural Ada County RUT and Rl d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: Extension of main located in the southwestern corner of this property. Location of water: Extension of mains in Franklin Road Issues or concerns: The sewer flows to the Whitestone lift station. The applicant shall be responsible for Guy upgrades that may be required. 2. Vegetation: AgriculturaUIrrigated 3. Flood plain: Ten Mile Creek -Mainly contained within the banks 4. CanalslDitches Irrigation: Ten Mile Creek 5. Hazards: Floodplain 6. Proposed Zoning: 7. Size of Property: 8. Description of Use: Common Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 TN-R and C-C 10.15 acres Residential, 29 Single Family detached, 7 Commercial, and 7 PAGE3 CITY OF MERIpIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE }TEARING DATE OF 4/23/2006 f. Subdivision Plat Information 1. Residential Lots: 29 2. Non-residential Lots: 7 3. Total Building Lots: 36 4. Common Lots: 5 5. Other Lots: 3 6. Total Lots: 43 7. Open Lots: Lot 21 Block 3 is the main pond/common lot. Lots 9, 12 Block 2 and Lots 10, 14 Block 3 are internal common lots within the residential component $. Gross Density: 9.84 units per acre shown (2.94 acres by 29 SF) -(Build out for TN-R as presented in conceptual plan shows 79 units on 6.08 acres for 13.0 du/a) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet required for Franklin Road (25 feet shown) 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: 25 feet commercial to residential (15 feet shown to the residence west of the site) (5 feet proposed C-C to TN-R) 3. Percentage of site as open space {PP application): .44 acres or 4.3% open space (future lot 19 Block 3 not included and parkway calculations not included) 4. Other landscaping standards: Retain existing healthy vegetation; rehabilitate the natural vegetation/habitat cover along the Ten Mile Creek to Park Department and NMID standards; possible cooperation with the Parks Department for development of a multiuse pathway across to Whitestone Estates Subdivision h. Amenities The applicant is proposing amenities in open space and pond with Gazebo, parkway streets. i. Proposed and Required Residential Standards C-C {Standards) Proposed Required Front 0 0 Interior side 0 0 Street landscape buffers Local 10 10 Arterial 25 25 Landscape Buffer to residential uses 5115 25 Maximum building height 50 SO TN-R (Standards) Setbacks (measured from back of sidewalk) Proposed Drafted Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-034/PP-05-03$/CUP-03-051 PAGE 4 CITY OF MER1pIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DAT)r OF 4/25/2006 Minimum front setback Alley accessed properties 10 Minimum front setback Street accessed properties 20 to garage 10 to living area. Minimum rear setback Alley accessed properties without parking pad S Alley accessed properties with parking pad N/A Street accessed properties 12 Minimum side setback Property lines adjoining unattached walls 4 Property lines adjoining attached walls 0 Minimum side street setback Alley S Local Street 10 Collector N/A Street Landscape Buffer Local Street Arterial 8 -parkway with Class II trees or tree wells w/8' sidewalk Maximum building height 2S 40 10 20 10 S 20 12 4 0 5 to 20 8 25 40 j. Proposed and Required Non-Residential Commercial lots shall conform to the use requirements of the C-C district and shall receive a certificate of zoning compliance for all uses, See exhibit B. Non-residential lots im TN-R district are to be used for amenities and open space only. k. Off-Street Parka~ug (Multi-Units): 1. Parking spaces required: Z for each unit, (29) TNR attached units; S $ stalls req. 2. Parking spaces proposed: 29 minimum covered stalls are shown as conceptual, 24 on street parking stalls are provided. 3. Compact spaces proposed: 0 4. Off-site parking proposed.: No 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Direct lot access to Franklin Road is to be prohibited. Access to future development is as proposed with pubic stub streets at multiple locations to the east. Potential commercial cross access through the C-C district lies both east and west at the shaven parking lots. An additional stub street to the east at "public road No 2" will not be rewired. The applicant has agreed to make all changes as required by the attached ACHD staff report. The Meridian Police and Fire Departments have submitted requirements which exceed the standards as recommended by the UDC PIG Committee for the TN-R district. The Planning Department is recommending approval of the minimum standards as set forth Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-OS4/PP-0S-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 412 512 0 0 6 by ordinance in the TN-R District. For a detailed report on the public streets and access points to public streets, please the attached staff report from the Ada County Highway District (Exhibit C). 7. AGENCY COMMENTS MEETING On November 10`~ 2005 staff held an agency corments meeting, all agencies attending provided comments as attached in Exhibit B. Staff has included all carnments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in. the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject site is designated `Mixed Use Regional' on the Meridian Comprehensive flan Future Land Use Map and the applicant has generally drawn the annexation requests for the TN-R and C-C district to meet the goals of the Mixed Use Regional District. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, this designation is defined in part as an area that is situated in highly visible or transitioning parts of the City where innovative and flexible design opportunities are encouraged. The MU-R has no upper limit on the square footage ofnon-residential uses and is intended to allow a broad range of uses. The proposed density (9-13 d.u./acre) is within minimum target density of 8 to 15 d.u./acre for Traditional Residential Neighborhoods witbim a mixed use development, staff finds that the proposal conforms to this stated purpose and intent. Higher density subdivisions north and west of Linder Road have provided smaller lots in the "High and Medium Density Residential" areas which have been at or above eight dwelling units to the acre. Other subdivisions south and east of the site along Linder Road and Franklin Road have been closer to the 3 to 5 d.u./acre with zoning designations of R-8 or primarily Rte. Similar projects to the Traditional Neighborhood concept Franklin and Ten Mile Roads vicinity have Commercial designations (Neighborhood Commercial, Community Business, and Limited Office) under the Meridian City Code where a mixed commerciallresidential product was not available under the Meridian City Code, but is being applied through the TN-R District. The properties east of the site at Harks Garner are also zoned C-C where the restaurant/bar uses share the existing water feature amenity on the site. Staff finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application (staff analysis is in italics bedowpolicy): • 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 properties. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the fallowing manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire .Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • 7'he subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Ojjice. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-~S-OSS/CUP-05-051 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 7`he northern roadway adjacent to the subject lands is currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Kaghway District (ACID). 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 and Zoning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. • "Restrict curb cuts and access points an collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal TV, Objective D, Action item 2) In accordance with this Goal oral Action Item, the applicants design only allows collector (commercial/local street) road access to Franklin Road. These collector roads are designed with landscape lots and oriented as to only allow vehicular traffic flow to the public road system, No lots within Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision are provided lot access to a collector or arterial street. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B: Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area. Staff finds that the site is designated for MU-R on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Although a wide range of commercial uses has not been planned for this property, the identity of MU-R in the area of the Ten Mile Interchange would tend to become more commercial as the area transitions to the future interchange. The project integrates a residential/Community Business component into the design and staff finds the TNR products provide an appropriate transitional use to the more intense commercial uses along Franklin Road. More intense commercial/high density developments are anticipated for the Ten Mile Interchange and the TN-R complements existing uses in Harks Corner and bu, f,~"ers the Community Business aspects closer to Franklin Road from the residential uses south of the site. Therefore Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision meets the general policies for the mixed use regional comprehensive designation. • Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action 5: Locate new Community Business areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. Franklin Road is classified as arterial roadway. The applicant is proposing access from the adjoining areas from micro paths, sidewalks and shared (cross access) streets which will provide future connection to residential/commerciat areas east, west and south of the site along Franklin Road and across the Ten Mile Creek. Staff believes that the Traditional Neighborhood areas proposed compliment the existing and planned residential areas in the vicinity. • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D: Encourage appropriate land uses along transportation corridors. Staff believes that the proposed land uses are appropriate along the adjoining transportation Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-OS-O51 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING bEPAR'1'MENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING 17ATE OF 4/25!2006 corridors (Franklin Road and Linder Road). • "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) As depicted on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, the applicant is proposing to construct a 25 foot wide landscape buffer with a perimeter fence and dense vegetation along Franklin Road. The applicant is also proposing to construct a 1 S foot wide landscape buffer along the western boundary where there is an existing single family residence. Sta, fJ`'is supportive of these widths, as long as the entire buffer lies outside the ultimate right-of-way. See Site Specifec Condition in the Preliminary Plat section below in Exhibit C • "Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and walking in all land use decisions." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, #3) This publication encourages jus isdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. The additionral rights of way for Franklin Road wild be large enough to accommodate future pedestrian walkways and possible bicycle lane as weld as interconnection of sidewalks along arterial roads. ?'he urban design of the TN-R district includes larger open spaces integrated into the front yards of all blocky in this district. These larger open spaces will all include pedestrian traffic routes connected to the arterial roadways. The applicant has indicated that a bridge will be provided for access to the south through Whitestone Estates where the future Ten Mile Creek Multi-use Pathway will be located. The applicant shall band for the multiuse pathway and bridge with this development to ensure compliance with the future pathway system. • Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1) The properties adjacent to the subject site are designated for a wide variety of uses. North of the site is planned for Industrial uses, east and south of the site are existing comrreercial/residential developments not expected to change, and west and south of the site are continuations of the mixed use regional uses on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The project provides a transition from the intense commercial and industrial uses along Franklin into a mix of residential densities from the C-C District to the TN-R District. • Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities (Chapter VlI, Goal IV', Objective C, Action 10) The subject property is designated Medium Density Residential on the Meridian Future Land Use Map which identifies this area as an appropriate area for residential development. This proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan definition of medium density, with a gross density of 9 to 13 dwelling units per acre. Staff has reviewed Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision under the Traditional Neighborhood Residential designation which supports residential densities from 8 to IS dwelling units to the acre (PIG Group recommendations). Staff anticipates the housing types for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision to be very diverse due to the lot sizes, Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-OS-O51 PAGE 8 GiTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI;ARIN(3 DATE OP 4/25/2006 attachments and varying integrated designs. These projects as a neighborhood meet the variety needed to be a, fJered within residential designations. The project also concentrates the higher density housing within the TIVR district and transitions to a larger open space area as the subdivision flows south and into the R-4(medium density) designation. • "On-street bikeways should be incorporated on all future Collector streets: ' (Chapter VI, Figure VI-5) Figure VI-S on page S7 of the Comprehensive Plan designates a bikeway on alt collector roads and arterials. The proposal will provide a local road connection from the site to Franklin Road which will provide interconnection to future collector streets. Intereonnectivity between subdivisions will also provide for a multiuse pathway connection through Subdivision for pathway access to the 7'en Mile Creek pathway systems. The subject property dies within the immediate vicinity for apark/pathway connection in the area north of I-84 and Linder Road and future connection alt the way to .I-84 along the Ten Mile Creek. Currently no pathway exists in the near vicinity. No bike lane is proposed for Franklin Road. See ACh07 report. • The following standard applies for all Mixed-Use Regional developments proposed within 300-feet of an existing residence or school require a conditional use permit. (Chapter VII, Pgs 97-98) The applicant has submitted a Conditional Use Permit CUP-OS-OSI to comply with this section. The applicant's conceptual plan provides for an additional fifty units shown as condominiums as well as future open space and a pathway connection along the Ten Mile Creek. Staff supports the canceptual site plan dated July 19, 2005 as submitted but will require assurances that the future amenities wild be provided in a timely manner as to be able to be used by future residences contained within the associated plat. Sta~'finds that the proposed zoning and subsequent uses (Community Business / sin~.*le-family homes) will be generally harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: 11-2D-2 (TNR) lists Single Family Residential (attached and detached) as permitted uses in the TNR and C-C zoning districts. Furthermore, limited office/commercial uses are allowed in the TNR district, also listed in UDC 11-2D-2. 11-2$-2 (GC) lists many limited commercial uses as permitted as well as many more intense uses as conditional in the Community Business district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT (C-C) the purpose of the commercial districts is to provide for 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 the mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to the streets and highways: Community Business Districts offer allowed uses of Larger scale and broader mix of retail, office, and service uses with access to arterials or nonresidential collector streets. TRADTTIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (TN-R): The purpose of the TN-R District is to provide for a variety of residential land uses including attached and detached single-family Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-OS$/CUP-05-051 PAGE 9 CITX OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FpR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 residential, duplex, townhouse, and multifamily. A TN-R District includes open spaces and promotes pedestrian activity through well-designed and varied streetscapes that also provide far the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic. Most dwelling units should be accessed from alleys. The maximum density of the TN-R District is fifteen (15) units per acre. The inininnum density is six (b) units per acre. Density should decrease away from the center and closer to conventional residential districts. The TN-R District should be generally located: adjacent to a TN-C District, along a transit corridor, or within a mixed use neighborhood. For the purposes of this Title, the term. residential district shall also include the Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. c. Traditional Neighborhood standards: UDC 11-2D-6 -The standards of the Traditional Neighborhood District are to be negotiated by the Planning Commission and the City Council. The following is a draft of standazds developed by the 2005 Process Improvement Group (PIG) group. Options for Street Sections in the TN-R District: The width of the allowed street section shall be determined by how the properties are accessed and whether or not a parking pad is provided that has minimum dimensions of twenty feet (20') by twenty feet (20') as measured from the paved surface of the alley or street to the face of the garage door. For alley accessed properties that provide a parking pad, the following shall apply: a. The parking pad must meet the dimensional standards noted above. b. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20') right-of--way with a minimum of sixteen feet (16') of paving. c. The applicant shall be allowed to have a reduced street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back-of--curb to back-of-curb) with parking on both sides. 2. For alley accessed properties that do not provide a parking pad, the following shall apply: a. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20')right-of--way with a minimum of sixteen feet (lb') of paving. b. The applicant shall provide a street section of thirty-three feet (33') (measured from back- of-curb to back-of-curb) with pazking on both sides. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-b is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. c. The applicant may request a street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back- of-curb to back-of-curb) with parking on one side where the street only provides residential access on one side of the street. For example, where one side of the street has homes on it and the other side of the street is a dedicated open space lot. Such request shall be approved by Council with the preliminary plat. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. 3. For street accessed properties, the following shall apply: a. Although street accessed properties are allowed in this district, it is anticipated that only properties on the perimeter of a TN-R development would be street accessed. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design meets the purpose statement of the TN-R district. b. All street accessed properties must provide a parking pad as detailed above. c. The applicant shall be allowed to have a reduced street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back-of-curb to back-of-curb) with pazking on only one or on both sides. 4. Block lengths shall meet the standards as set forth in Section 11-6C-3F2. Although block lengths are allowed to exceed five hundred feet (500'} when a pedestrian pathway is used to break up the block, it is anticipated that most blocks will not exceed the five hundred-foot {500') requirement. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design meets the purpose statement of the TN-R district. Harks Canyon Cr~k Subdivision AZ-05-054/PP-OS-058/CiJP-05-051 PAGIr 10 CITY of MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 Tn addition to the standards as set forth in Section 11-3A-7, the following restrictions shall apply to fencing within the TN-R district: 1. Front yazd. Fences shall be wrought iron or similar of similar quality and appearance and shall be no greater than three feet (3') in height. 2. Side yard. a. Side yard fences that follow the side yard property line shall only be allowed where the side setback is five feet (5') or greater. The portion of a side yard fences that extend from the building to the side yard property line shall be setback two feet (2') behind the enclosed portion of the front of the building. b. Side yard fences that extend from one building to an adjoining building are allowed where the adjoining houses have use easements on the side yard area. Such fences shall be setback twa feet (2'} behind the enclosed portion of the front of the building adjoining the fence. 3. Rear yard of alley accessed properties. Fences shall be setback a minimum of seven feet (7') from the alley {measured from back of paved surface of the alley}. 4. The maximum fence height shall not exceed six feet (6'), subject to the provisions set forth in Sections 2 and 3 below. 5. On corner properties, the maximum fence height in the required street side yard shall be six feet (6') above the grade {as measured at the property line), and the minimum setback shall be ten feet (l0') from the street side property line. See Figure 11-3A-3. 6. Where the rear yard of one property adjoins the front yard of another property, the fence along the rear and side yards where they adjoin the adjacent front yard shall be flush or angled at forty-five (45) degrees to provide continuity with the adjoining fence and property line. See Figure 11-3A- 3. 7. Additional height shall be allowed for arbors, arches and/or other architectural appurtenances extending over gates and/or other entryways Such appurtenances shall not exceed five feet (5') in width and/or eight feet (8') in height. 8. Additional height shall be allowed for gate posts. Such gateposts shall not eight feet (8') in height. Lighting. In addition to the standards as set forth in Section 11-3A-11, the following standards shall apply within the TN-R district: All dwelling units shall have a minimum of two (2) lights at tlae front of the unit. All dwelling units on alley accessed properties shall have a tninirni~m of two (2) lights along the alley. All lighting required in this section shall be on a photocell that activates the lighting at dusk and turns it off at dawn. 10. ANALYSIS 10a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation 1. ANIVEXA,TION & ZONING ANALYS)S: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-0S-0SS/CUP-05-051 PAGE l 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN4 DATE OF 4!2512006 Development Code, staff believes that this is a good location for the proposed Single Family Residential products. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. 1.1 The annexation legal description subnoitted with the application (stamped on October 13, 2005 by Todd R. Waite, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the Gity of Meridian. 1.2 Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. 1.3 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. 1.4 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, fiunes, glare or odors. 1,5 UDC 11-SB-3D2 provides the P&.Z Commission and City Council the authority to require a property owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City of Meridian that may require soiree written commitment for all future uses. Due to the mixed use nature of the c~mmercialloffc~est~~uses, the size and scope of the project, the undetermined location of amenities. pathway location, undeveloped areas of Lot 19 Block 3, and the variable sSandards of the TN-fit district as defined by the Meridian City Unified Development Code, staff believes that a Development Agreement is necessary to ensure that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation and does not ne ag tively impact nearby properties. If the Commission or Council feels additional development agreement requirements are necessary, staff recommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer being required. A Development Agreement (DA) will be required as part of an annexation of this property. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a DA shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, the property owner(s) {at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 8~-4433 within 18 months of Council approval to initiate this process. The DA shall incorporate the following: • 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 Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-05-Q54/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/2006 operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glaze or odors. • The applicant shall provide a surety agreement for of the construction of the multi-use pathway and bridge in accordance to UDC 11-SC unless a development application has been submitted for Lat 19 Block 3 prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy in Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision. • The applicant shall coordinate with the Meridian Parks Department and Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to define the location of the multiuse pathway, bridge maintenance, and landscaping along the Ten Mile Creek. • The applicant shall maintain Lot 19 Block 3 in a state free of accumulation of junk, noxious weeds, and shall fence the perimeter of Lot 5 Block 3 to limit public access to the waterway. • The applicant has agreed that all of the TN-R residential units will be constructed with fire sprinkler systems to mitigate for the 5' setback to alley required by the Meridian Fire Department as discussed on Apri14, 2006. • That the applicant shall provide trash pickup/refuse pads at the end of the dead end - shortened alley as shown on the site plan and discussed on Apri14, 2006. 2. PRELIlVLINARY PLAT SPECIAI. CdNSIUERATIONS ~.1 Public Streets and Access: Connectivity (future developments): Local stub streets for future development west of the site shall connect from "Public Street #2" west of the site at the location shown. Cross access shall be provided to the property west of the site adjacent to Lot 1 Block 1 from the parking lot as shown. Cross access shall be provided to the property east of the site adjacent to Lots 22 and 23 Block 3 from the parking lot as shown to connect with the existing Harks Corner Development. An additional public or private street to the south shall be provided in the general location of Lot 5 Block 3. The public or private street shall be for addressing and unobstructed access to future development in Lot 19 Block 3. See Exhibit B below. No direct access will be allowed to Franklin Road. 2.2. Landscaping_ Staff is generally supportive of the landscaping design with the following considerations: The 25 feet of right-of--way landscaping on Franklin Road shall be .maintained by the Business Owners Association. The landscape buffers along these arterials shall be designed in accordance to UDC 11-3B-7. The landscape buffer shall be measured from the back of sidewalk if attached sidewalks are used. Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-05-058/CUP-0S-051 PAGE 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25!2006 The landscaping along Franklin Road shall be installed prior to final plat signature. The landscaping slang Franklin Road shall be contained in a separate lot or an a permanent easement which will be maintained by the business owners association. Common Lot 22 Block 3 shall be maintained by the business owners association and not by the home owners association. All parkway trees shall be Class II trees. All parking lots adjacent to the TN-R district shall provide a minimum of one tree at the end of each parking aisle; the parking lot landscaping shall comply with the design standards as listed in UDC 11-3B-$. The applicant is not showing the required 25' landscape buffer between uses in this location. The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the required buffers or submit a new landscape plan with an application for alternative compliance to the director. If the director fails to approve the request for alternative compliance the applicant shall provide the required landscape buffers as detailed in UDC 11-3B. See Exhibit B. A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman. responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to City Council signature of the Final Plat. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. 2.3 Tree Miti agation: 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 are removed. The applicant should coordinate a tree protection/mitigationp!an with Elroy Huff at the Meridian Parks Deparhnent. 2.4. Ditches. Laterals. and Canals: 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_ Nampa Meridian Irrigation District has adjacent laterals on this site but has not commented on the proposal. Staff has applied the standard NMID conditions to this site. 2.5 Pressure Irri atg ion: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle--point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3B-6. See Site Exhibit B below. 2.6. encin :The applicant is not showing fencing on the submitted amenity and landscape plan. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat or prior to City Cauneil if required. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. All fences should taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-0SS/CUP-OS-051 PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/25/200b feet of all right-of--way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code in effect at the time the permit is issued. The landscape architect shall draft the landscape plans to meet the standards of UDC 11-3B. See Exhibit B, Condition 1.5 The Meridian Police anal Fire Departments have indicated that fencing shall have gates and there shall be no side yard fencing, the fencing requirements shall comply with the standards of UDC 11-3B. Perimeter fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3B and maintained by the adjacent (home/business) owners association. Temporary fencing shall be provided along Lot 5 Block 3 until a development application for Lot 19 Block 3 is approved. All fencing along the Ten Mile Creek shall be installed with non-combustible materials. 2.7 Unimproved Right-of-Wav: Meridian. City Code requires a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder abutting right-of--way where the unimproved portion of the right-of--way is greater than 13 feet (measured from the edge of pavement to the edge of sidewalk or property line), and Franklin road widening is in the ACRD Five Year Work Program and is scheduled for widening in ZO10. The remainder of the unimproved right-of--way should be landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. Franklin Road abutting this site appears to meet the warrants for the 10-foot wide gravel shoulder requirement listed above. Therefore, the applicant should be required to construct a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder on Franklin Road, with the remaining portion of the right-of--way being landscaped with lawn or other vegetative groundcover. 2.8 Multi-Use Pathwav: The applicant is not showing but will be required to install a multiuse pathway in accordance to the Comprehensive Plan and installed according to UDC 1 I -3A-8 along the Ten 1ltlile Creek in a location to be agreed upon with the Parks Director and Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. Currently, NMID owns the property upon which the applicant is proposing to install the pathway. All NMID standard conditions shall be applied to this site and all pedestrian access easements shall be enacted. Staff has required the applicant to bond for improvements to the multi-use pathway with this application. The pathway connection is listed as an amenity to the residents of the site and will be essential for pedestrian connection from the school site, Whitestone Estates, and Mallard Landing Subdivisions south of the Ten Mile Creek. Therefore, the pathway shall be a priority to be completed as soon as practical with the future development of Lot 19 Block 3. 2.9 Private Streets: The applicant is proposing to use Lot 5 Block 3 to provide future access to Lot 19 Block 3. Staff will require at a minimum the North/South legs of Lot 5 Block 3 to be a private street (if not public} to provide addressing and maintained connections to the future residential area south of Lot 5 Block 3. The applicant has not submitted a Private Street application as required by UDC 11-3F-3. The private street standards are listed in UDC 11-3F. The applicant shall design and construct the private streets in compliance with the standards listed for Private Streets in UDC 11-3F Private Streets and UDC l l -2D Traditional Neighborhood Residential. See Exhibit B Condition 1.11 The Meridian Fire and Police Departments are requesting a minimum of 24' paved sections for alleys which shall not apply to the TN-R districts as this would exceed the standards set forth by ACRD and the Process Improvement Group for the TN-R district. Harks Canyoa Creek Subdivision AZ-05-Q54/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 15 CITY OF MER1bIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FpR THE HEARLNG DATE OF 4/25/2006 2.lOCommo en S ace: The applicant has a qualified application meeting the requirements of UDC 11-3G. The proposal is showing 4.3% of qualified open space which does not meet the requirements of a minimum of 5% open space. The applicant has provided landscaped Parkways in compliance with UDC 11-3G-5 but these calculations have not been provided by the applicant and not added to the overall required open space. Staff is confident that the minimum of 5% has been provided with the presented design but with the off site improvements and parkway streets 2.11 erliti :The applicant is required to provide one amenity per 20 acres. The applicant is showing qualified site amenities as follows: 11-3G-3C-1- Quality of life amenities -Picnic azea/Gazebo in Lot 22 Block 3 11-3G-3C-2 -Recreation amenities -Nona shown at this time, however the applicant is proposing to tie the landscaping and pathway improvements to the Ten Mile Creek pathway system to this development. 11-3G-3C-3 -Bicycle circulation amenities -Several blocks are connected with an internal S' pathway which will be required to connect to the required Multi-use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. Amenities are generally located centrally and in common lots. 'These common lots shall be maintained by the Harks Canyon Creek (Home or Business) Owners Association. The landscape azchitect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet of lawn has been provided on the landscape plan. 2.12Tr~;ditional Nei borhood Residential_ The standards as defined in the TNR district UDC 11-2D-6 are currently defined as "determined by Council upon annexation and/or rezone". The standards listed under section 8 of the Harks Canyon Creek Staff report dated January 5, 2006 have been drafted by a working group specifically for TN-R projects to be used as a guideline. The applicant has designed the project in accordance to these standards and shall comply with the street sections, dimensional standards, lighting and fencing requirements as contained in this report. 2.13~treet Sections: Conditions 3.23 and 3.09 of Exhibit B from the Meridian Fire Department Conditions of Approval will not apply to the street sections within the TN-R District. These standards exceed the street sections proposed by the UDC process improvement group. ACRD has reviewed the street sections and if the applicant complies with all ACHp conditions of approval then the street sections will meet all standards as set forth by policy. 1Qb. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of AZ-05-056/PP-05-058/CUP-OS- O51 for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision as presented in the staff report dated January 6, 2006 based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subject to the conditions of approval as listed in Exhibit B as attached to this report. Staff has prepared findings consistent with this recommendation. 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: October 2005) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: October 1Q, 2005) 3. Conceptual Site Plan (dated: July 19, 2005) Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-0S-OS 1 PAGE X6 CITY OF MERTDTAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF 4/2S/2006 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Pazks Department 6. Sanitary Services 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Nampa Meridian Irrigation District C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision AZ-OS-054/PP-OS-058/CUP-05-051 PAGE 17 A Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat dated: actaber 20Q5 (' ~. '• ~' •r. f /. ~ ' i ~ I , i Diu':. ~:`._ C:~ f-' ~~ ~ • ~ ., 1 ,; I1~.I ~ U i ~~ t~ e ! i 'I31 i ~'~ I ~ gg,j•Ne 4 j ~ ' ~ a ~ ; t i.. ' ~, I J ~ ;a; Jd ~8~1 c~ j LY Gi $ i . ~!'Y~P ,;. ..w , ~~ i~ l ~- ~ f ~67 ~E~~6.y Ct 1~igj~Q~g~ ~~1 .>~. F ~ - ~~ ~ ' ~~~ r , "E ~ ^~ i J ~ 9 , '~~. - .~~%" t rte, ~, ` 6 • 't .N ~ ~ , I ,~ ° c~ ^ _- , ~, ~~ / , .Q »z _ ~ I ~~ 1 `~ r a~ I m " I ~ k m ~ i ' 4 ~( 0 ~ Harks Csnyon Creek Subdivision Exhibit A Page 1 ~ ~ - . ..:• ~~if _ i ' t` ~ ••! .~ • • q ~ 4 ~~ + ~ ..~ t I ~ ~ r ?` .. ~~ i ~ Y a" I 4,~ sY '' 4' ~ r ~~ .ls ' d / fi•%~ ;~ ' ~ ;; --. Sys ~~ S 4u !~, '~!i a i t{' ~`' ~~ '~' ... p.~ • r~ ~ ; ~ i t ~ ! 1. , fir ~ -• ~ - ;, ~r-~ i ••pq - 9 •i, i t f~ r . ~ ~~i M .: .-0.h ws- a.. ~'~. • -. _J ~ - .. '- .. ' .a _r . ~~{y,~dq (•, ,-fir ... .. ~ . r'~~j ~' 1 ~; ~ 7~ ~ I I~', _ __ ' ~ _... ._ _.., ~•_---• -. ~ f~ J } ~.. ~ 7ll ..,-- - t~ • ... pp} i ~ ~ fly f F ' f ~. i r t ~ . ' , i;' ~ ~ • ~ ~If ~ i ~, !~~ +f',~ °,r '. ~S ., ~ 1,J 2. Landscape Plan (dated: October 14, 2005) -J ~-~. ~ II /.~---': ~wir os~eyu~'n +a~rw « •~•arr ar.mrr,. raria~.n~e.wa ~ rwN.MV~rtr~we'w.c { 4Y~i~~s~ISMlrtw00 ~~ tiq~1rNi~~y 1 ~q 1' I ' ~I 11` , ~. I 11' ~1 ,.1~, ~ ~J._ /^~_~' .~` I ~ ~ ~ f" ~ ~ ~~ps~ ~ ~~' ut ~~ ""f ~iY~y~~~ ' IYar i~a~ev~ ~,/ AIYM} .~ ,,.~`` ,yam .~- ! ~,...~.~. 1 .....,.~ ~~.~ r4 ~a+ ra °~•^~ ru e y.warewaru ~++~ ray ti.nrrr rm -'+~+ ra ~v+a. ra r ~x~~~. -----_ ~ ,..~,...~, ~.o.,,,_~ Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Exhibit A Page 2 3, Conceptual Site Plan {dated: July 29, 2pp5) Harks Canyon Cheek Subdivision Exhibit A Page 3 1 - .~.i ~'' r-n~ur_cos!~AL S1T.~.P18N \~/ hW ~PIlUM011At lrip6 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT 1.1 The preliminazy plat labeled as Preliminary Plat dated October 2005 prepared by Claiborne Waite Consulting, Inc. is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments/conditions of the accompanying Annexation/Zoning (AZ-05-056) and Conditional Use (CUP-0S-051) shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05-058). 1.2 The applicant has proposed a 25-foot landscape buffer along Franklinx Road. The Landscape buffer shall be designed and installed in accordance to UDC 11-3B-7 and certified as installed prior to final plat signature (UDC 11-3B-14B-3. The sidewalks within the buffer shall be placed as to line up with future buffers in neighboring developments. 1.3 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of no direct lot access for any lots adjacent to the arterial roads of Franklin Road as required by ACRD. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Franklin Road 1.4 The applicant shall provide cross access to all commercial lots within the subdivision and to the property west of the site adjacent to Lot 1 Block 1 and to the east from Lots 22 and 23 Block 3 as required by ACHD. 1.5 A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to final plat showing the landscaping in relation to the changes required by this report. The submitted landscape plan prepared by Terry Hammons, A to Z Sprinkler and Landscaping., dated October 14, 2005 is not approved until re-submitted with changes outlined in this report and in compliance with UDC 11-3B. 1.6 The applicant shall revise the site plan to reflect the required buffers or submit a new landscape plan with an application for alternative compliance to the director. If the director fails to approve the request for alternative compliance the applicant shall provide the required landscape buffers as detailed in UDC 11-3B. 1.7 Maintenance of all residential common azeas shall be the responsibility of the Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Homeowners' Association. (Lots 9 and 12 Block 2, Lots 10 and 14 Black 3) 1.8 Maintenance of all other common areas shall be the responsibility of the Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision Business Owners Association. (all required street and use buffers, with Lot 21 Block 3) 1.9 k'or alley accessed properties that do not provide a parking pad, the following shall apply: a. All alleys shall have atwenty-foot (20') right-of-way with a minimum of sixteen feet (16') of paving. b. The applicant shall provide a street section ofthirty-three feet (33') (measured from back of-curb to back-of-curb) with parking on both sides. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. c. The applicant may request a street section of twenty-nine feet (29') (measured from back- of--curb toback-of-curb) with parking on one side where the street only provides residential access on one side of the street. For example, where one side of the street has homes on it and Exhibit $ Page 1 the other side of the street is a dedicated open space lot. Such request shall be approved by Council with the preliminary plat. The requirement for off-street parking as set forth in Section 11-3C-6 is waived for alley accessed properties in such circumstances. 1.10 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the azea being subdivided shall be tiled per UDC 11-3A-b, unless otherwise approved. by the City and the Irrigation District(s). 1.11 If the southerly duected portions of Lot 5 Block 3 are not dedicated to the public, the applicant shall at a minimum submit a private street application to the Planning Director with the Final Plat application if the applicant chooses to provide private streets for future connection to the south along Lot 5 Block 3. 1.12 The applicant shall contact the Meridian Parks Director to define a location for the Multi-Use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek as shown an the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 1.13 The applicant shall install aMulti-Use Pathway along the Ten Mile Creek or other location a.s agreed upon by the Meridian Parks Director construction shall be in accordance to the standards as listed in UDC 11-3A-8. 1.14 The landscape architect shall certify that one tree per 8,000 square feet of lawn has been provided on the landscape plan. 1.15 All road drainage shall be contained on site in the drainage swales/azeas as depicted. 1.1 b The applicant shall comply with the dimensional standards, street sections, lighting, and fencing requirements as outlined in this staff report far the Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. There shall be no modifications to the dimensional standards of the C-C Medium Density Residential District or other operating standazds as contained in the Meridian Unified Development Code. 1.17 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.1.8 The applicant shall be allowed a 5' alley setback to garage/structure for all TN-R lots. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIlVIINARY PLAT 1.18 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. if the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.19 The applicant shall submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision. If permanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain Exhibit B Page Z debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. ,All fencing should be installed in accordance with City Code. 1.20 Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being .the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 1.21 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, unless otherwise approved by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. 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 not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 1.22 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.23 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is to being proposed via extension of mains stubbed in the southwestern portion of this property. These mains flow to the Whitestone lift station. The applicant shall be responsible for any upgrades to the lift station that may be required to handle the extra influent. 2.2 The applicant shall install mains to and through this development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and. execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Mixumum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.3 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in Franklin Road. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.4 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). The easements shall not be dedicated via the plat. The description shall be consistent with the graphically depicted easements on the plat but be recorded as a separate document using the City of Meridian's standard forms. Submit an executed easement (supplied by Public Works), a legal description, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXIID3TT A) and an 81/2" x 11"map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. DO NOT RECORD. Add a note to the plat referencing this document. 2.5 The applicant has indicated the pressure irrigation system in this proposed development is to be an extension of a private system in Harks Corner. If it is to be maintained as a private system, plans and specifications will be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the construction plan review. A "draft copy" of the operations and maintenance manual will be required prior to plan approval with the "final draft" being r~uired prior to final plat signature on the last phase of this project. Exhibit B Page 3 2.6 Prior to signature on the plat by the City Engineer the applicant shall submit a signed agreement granting permission to use the existing private pressurized irrigation pump station. 2.7 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized. irrigation systems be supplied by ayear-round source of water (UDC 11-3B-6D). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.8 All existing structures nvt meeting new setbacks shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.9 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.10 If the stub streets to the south are going to be private streets, then Public Works will review and inspect the storm drainage systems. The applicant will be responsible for all review and inspection fees associated with this. 2.11 If this project is to contain private streets, the applicant shall address mairxtenance of the private streets prior to signature on final plat by the City Engineer. 2.12 As each commercial lot develops they shall be required to retain storm runoff on site. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Stonao~ water treatment and disposal shall be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. 2.13 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.15 All development improvements for each phase of this development, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approval prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.16 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution OZ-374. 2.17 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting Exhibit B Page 4 that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.21 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered hackfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.22 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.23 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior tv commencing installations. 3. FYre Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require afire-flaw of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %i" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. g. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above fuush grade. h. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the 1FC Section 509.5. 3.4 Entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide. 3.6 For all Fire Lanes, paint the curb red and provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.7 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.8 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.9 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one Exhibit B Page 5 side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.10 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the In~ternatiorral Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed. per Appendix D. 3.11 The proposed 29-lot subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 87 residents at build out. 3.12 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within, 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 3.13 The 7 officeJcommerciai lots lot will have an unlmown transient population and will have an unlmown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department lies experienced 2612 responses in the year 2004. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010. 3.14 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with ppticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.15 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.16 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy 3.17 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.18 OVhere a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire appazatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). Far Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.19 R-2 occupancies with 3 or more ututs shall be required to be fire sprinkled, unless specified by the UDC. 3.20 Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 3.21 Gates shall be provided on the front and rear of the property, if fenced. 3.22 Side yard fences shall not be allowed in the C-C district. Exhibit B Page 6 3.23 Alleys shall be at least 24-feet wide and there shall be no parking on alley streets. 4. Police Department 41 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used for fencing on common lots. 4.2 The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for the commercial azeas, which uses walkways and landscaping to direct visitors to the main entrance and away from private azeas. 4.3 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. Prior to the Final Plat, the applicant shall meet with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to discuss features that increase visibility, including but not limited to: doors and windows that look out on the public areas, front porches,- and adequate nighttime lighting. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 4.4 The pedestrian access to the proposed clubhouse%ommunity entrance is not well-defined. T'he applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan that uses walkway paving materials and landscaping to alert motorists to the pedestrian traffic. 4.5 The loading areas shall be separated from all public parking areas. 4.6 Please contact the Police Chief for detailed review of any development proposal and subrn~it stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 5.2 Pathway and Trail standards; The proposed pathway and/or trail shall be constructed in accordance with the Meridian Park Department's requirements. 5.3 Standazd for City to assume Maintenance of a section of Pathway: The pathway must connect from one major arterial to another, and either an easement or ownership deed must be granted before the city will assume the maintenance of any section of pathway. 5.4 Standard plan for protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10.5) will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 Dedicate 45-feet afrfght-of--way at the east property line that tapers to 57-feet in the first 425-feet west of the east property line. From 425-feet west of the east property line to the west property line, the applicant should dedicate 57-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road. abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. The right-of--way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACRD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-of--way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACRD right-of--way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact Exhibit $ Page 7 fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACRD Ordinance in effect at that tithe (currently Ordinance #200), if funds are available. AND Provide the District with a road trust deposit in the amount of $13,280.00 for the construction of a 7- foot wide attached concrete sidewalk. OR Dedicate 45-feet ofright-of--way at the east property line that tapers to the west to 48-feet in the first 425-feet. From 425-feet west of the east property line to the west property line, the applicant should dedicate 48-feet ofright-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. The right-of--way purchase and sale. agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACRD Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-of--way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACRD right-0f--way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breakung ground, in accordance with the ACHD Ordinance in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #200), if funds aze available. AND Construct a 5-foot detached concrete sidewalk within an easement to the District. Locate the sidewalk aminimum of S6-feet from the centerline of Franklin Road. 7.2 Construct public Road #1 to intersect Franklin Road to directly align (centerline to centerline) with the driveway on the north side of Franklin Road. 7.3 Construct North Ward Place to intersect Franklin Road approximately 104-feet east of the west property line, as proposed. 7.4 Construct all of the internal roadways within the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with vertical curb, gutter and 5-foot attached (or 4-foot detached) concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-off way. If the applicant is proposing to construct striped on-street parking on Public Road #2 construct bulb outs at the intersections that provide a minimum of 24-feet (measured back of curb to back of curb} at the throat of the intersection and construct the bulb outs to provide an inside radius of 18-feet (minimum}. 7.5 Construct a stub street to the west property line approximately 255-feet south of the north property line to serve the 2.090-acre parcel and the 76.232-acre site to the west, as proposed. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating, "this road will be extended in the future." 7.6 Construct a 28-foot wide driveway that intersects Public Road #1 on the west side of the roadway approximately 120-feet south of Franklin Road, as proposed. 7.7 Construct a 12 to 30-foot wide driveway that intersects Public Road #1 on the east side of the roadway approximately 75-feet south of Franklini Road. Ensure that a tangent length of 50-feet (minirrn~m) is met on Public Road #1 before a driveway is constructed. 7.8 Construct a 28-foot wide driveway that intersects North Ward Avenue on the east side of the roadway approximately 104-feet south of Franklin Road, as proposed. 7.9 Construct a 28-foot wide driveway that intersects North Ward Avenue on the west side of the roadway approximately 98-feet south of Franklin Road, as proposed. Exhibit B Page 8 7.10 Construct a private road/service drive (or public road if the City of Meridian would like a public road) that intersects Public Raad #2 at the easternu end of Public Road #2 and extends to the south to serve Lot 19. 7.11 Construct a private road/service drive (or public road if the City of Meridian wauld Like a public road} that intersects Public Road #2 at the eastern end of Public Road #2 and extends to the south to serve Lot 19. 7.12 Construct a 20-foot wide "service road" that extends from the west property line to Public Road #1. This service road will function as a private alley, as proposed. 7.13 Franklin Road is classified as a minor arterial. Other than the two public roadways that have specifically been approved with this application, direct lot access to Franklin Road is prohibited. A note stating the access restrictions will be required on the final plat. 7.14 Comply with, all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approved 7.15 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.16 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.17 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borAe by the developer. 7.18 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.19 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.20 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.21 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.22 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.23 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.24 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Impact Fee Ordinance. Exhibit B Page 9 7.25 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACRD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGL]NE (1-$00-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHb right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHb conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.26 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized represe~atative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District, 7.27 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B Page 10 C. Legal Description clc~iborn ~ uuoite consultin9~ Ilc ar~gineers 8. suraE;yurx 12Q IfQlh Gelb Rood BOb~ NI, ~'f06 1~ 3A&A~5 Ffat ~~1429^8962 P No_ 3246 fIAQKS CANYON CI~K SUBDIVISION CC R>~'lOJYB $OIINDARY DISCBIP1701V October 13, 2003 A PARCEL OF LAND llV THE WRR7' 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST U4 Olc THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF BECKON 14, T. 3 N., R 1 W . $.~,, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND BEl1VG MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRI$$p AS POI,1,OVyS: COMME>tTC1NCi AT THH Nf1R17iEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14, TFIENCE N 89°13'19" W ALONO THE NORTH8OUNDARY OF SA1D SECTION 14 AND THE CENTER1,pvE OF FRAIYiCIdN ROAD FOR A DISTANCE OP 14.47 FEeT TO THE BAST HOUAIDARY OF THE WEST 1/1 OF T!~ NORTHEAST U4 OF THId NORTHEAST U4 OF SAID S$GTION 14, TAE R~Ai. AOINT OF $EGINNING; TI~IENCE CONTINIANt1 N 89°13'17" W AIAPP(; SAm NORTH 110UNDARY AND CIIQT~LWg FOR A DISTANC$ OF 664.46 FEET'I~0 TIfiE NO~ggT CORNEii OF THIr NORTHEAST U4 OF THE NORTHEAST U4 OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE S 00°34'18" W ATANQ THB WEST $OUNDARY Op THE NORTHEAST U4 OF TH13 NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14, FORA DISTANCE OF 193.00 FEET; THENCE S 19°13' 17" E FOR A DISTANCE OF 4$1.16 FEEI; T'H$NCB S 00°33 43" W FOR A DLS7'ANCE OF 267.42 FEET; THENCE S 89°13'17" E FORA DI87'ANCS OF 183.34 Fli6!'TO THE P.!!6'1' BtiLINDARY OF T1~ WEST UZ OF TI4E NOR771$AST U4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID S&.TIdN 14. ALSO $EIlWO THB WEST' BOIAVDARY OF VAN HHE.4 SUBDNISIDN; 7'III61VC13 N 00°33'43" E ALONp SAID EAST 8OIJAIDARY F'OR A DISTANCE OF 460A2 FE$I'?O THB REAL POAI'1' OF BHGINNINQ CONTAINIIJfii 4.07 ACRIS4 OF LAND, MORE OR LESS. PREPARED BY: TODD R WAPI'E P.L.S, C:1Pigpc~lY (?246 .d0o- ! - Exhibit C Page 1 claibarn ~ uuaike cansulking, !Ic an~neers ~ ~~~~~ iao ~ CWrlh Road hae) ~~ Project No. 2246 FRANK[.IN CEN17tE, LLC IiARKSCANYON 4~EKSiJBDIV(SION TN-R RPZON>w BOUNDARY DETION OcGo6er 13, 2005 A PARCEL OF LAND 1N THe WBS7' 1/Z OF THE NORT1IEAy^I' 1/4 ~ THENOR7I~.AST U4 OF SECTtlON 14, r. 3 N , R I W.. B.M„ AI?A COUNTY IDAHO AND BBDVG MORE FARTICIJLARLY DESCAIBBD AS FOLLOW& COMMBIVCRYG AT TIC NORI~AST CORD OF SAID SECTION 14, THENCE N 89°13'17" W ALONO Ti63 NORfiH BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION 14 AND THE CEN~LINE OF FRANKLRd ROAD FORA DISTANCE OF 1328.93 FlIE!' TO THE WEST' BOUNDARY OF THE NORTHEAST I/4 OF T1iE NORTHEAST U4 OF SAlt1 SECTION I4; THBIVCB S 00°34'18" W ALONG SAtD WFST BOUNDARY FOR A DISTANCE OF 193.00 FEET TO THI; REAL POINT OF BFXiINNRIIG; TI~NCE COMttVUnvG S 00°34' 18" w ALONG SAiD WEST BOUNDARY FOR A DL4TANCB OF S6S.64 FEET; TRENCH N 7S°07'43" B FOR A DISTANCE OF 689.45 FEETTO THE g~p>RIUNDARY OF 71IB ~T ~ OF THE NORTHEAST 1!4 OF THE NORTFIBAST U4 OF SAID SBCfiON l4, ALSO BEIrf4 THB WEST>~UNDARY OF VAN HESS S176D1VISION; Tlli~iCB N 00°33'43" it ALONG SAID EAST BOUNDARY FOR A DISTANCE OF 112.23 FEET; 174J3NCB N 89°13'17" W FOR A DISTANC$ OF 183.34 F13BI; THEi1Tt,B N 00°33'43" E FORA DISTANCB OF 267.42 FFB7; THENCE N 84°13' l7" W FOR A DISTANCE OF 481.16 FEET TO THE REAL PRIM OF IIFXiR+11VDVG, CONTAQVOVG 6.06 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LBSS. PREPARED HY: TODD R. WA(1'E P.L.S C:IProJedslYariHeeg (2ZA6 „R~„ I , Exhibit C Page Z 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 andlor rezone, the Council shall make the following fmdings: A. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to C-C and TN-R. The Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plaza. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Flan, `mixed use regional' is defined as azeas where commercial/office and residential uses are transitioned between more intense uses, C-C, is harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map this is also consistent with the request for a Traditional Neighborhood Residential designation for the mixed use regional designation as a transitional zone. The density proposed with the preliminary plats are consistent with previous Commission and Council actions and generally conforms to the goals, objectives, and action items contained in the Comprehensive Plan for these transition areas with a request for consistent and transitional densities. The Council fiords that the proposed zoning is in general conformance with the comprehensive plan (please see Section 8 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis of specific comprehensive plan action items that apply to this development). >3. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, speciScally the purpose statement; Concurrent with the annexationz and zoning application, the applicant has submitted a preliminary plat that proposes single-family attached and detached single family residential products as well as vertically integrated products on the subject site (PP-OS-058). The Council does not anticipate that the applicant plans to rezone the subject property in the future if the accompanying PP application is approved. The Council finds that the office/retail uses would be allowed (permitted) within the requested C-C district and single family residential (townhouse) uses would be allowed (permitted) within the TN-R district. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the pnbHc health, safety, and welfare; The applicant has submitted elevations for the proposed attached commercial and townhouse units these units will be designed and constructed to meet similar architecture to the single family detached residences and approved through the Certificate of Zoning Compliance process. The Council believes that the design of these single family attached dwelling units will be coxrzpatible with the adjoining uses and transitional in nature to anticipated heavier uses south and west of the site in the Ten Mile/I-84 Interchange, The Council finds that the proposed development will change the existing character of the area, which is still largely rural. However, the proposed development is generally harmonious with the intended character envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. The Council does not find that the proposed zoningluses will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Further, the Council does not anticipate that the proposed uses will be hazardous as long as the applicant complies with the conditions contained in Exhibit B and all City Code provisions. The Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that maybe provided when determining this finding, D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited Exhibit D Page I to, school districts; and, The abutting roadway, Franklin Raad is within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or C1P (20-year plan) for road widening and scheduled fvr 2010. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of all utilities necessary to serve this proposed development. This development will be serviceable by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer system through future extensions of the sewer and water lines located in Franklin Road. The site lies on a Major Arterial (Franklin Read) and future rights of way have been determined by the commenting jurisdictions. Other urban services, such as water, are near to this site and the applicant should be able to extend such services to the site. The Council finds that the subject site i$ proposed for development in a fashion expected for a transitional region between commercial, industrial and residential uses. The applicarn and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees. ACFID has submitted a staff report with site specific and standard conditions as attached iri Exhibit B7. On November 10, 2005, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. Based on the joint agency/department meeting and other comments received from agencies/departments, the Council finds that except for immediate sanitary sewer, the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by any public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. The Council does not find that there has been a change in the azea that dictates that this property should be rezoned. The Commission and Council rely on staff s analysis, public testimony received and any comments submitted from any other agencies or departments regarding whether this property should be annexed. The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. E. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-5B-~3.E). If the applicant enters into a Development Ag~ceemen (.DAI with the City the Council, finds that the annexation and zonin~of this property to C-C and ZN R would be in the best interest of the Cityy_. 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In detern~ining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission shall consider the objectives of this Title and at least the following: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Please see Annexation Findings Item A above. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate accommodate the proposed development; Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. Exhibit D Page 2 D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Please see Exhibit B for comments and conditions from other agencies and departments. E. The development will not be detrimental to the public heath, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not aware of any health, safety or general welfare problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Council or Commission's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. The Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware, F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Council is not awaze of any natural, scenic or historic features which require preservation. The applicant will be required to maintain, fence, and improve the waterways which are existing on this site. Furthermore the applicant shall define with the Parks Department the location of a multiuse pathway which will further enhance the natural feature of either the Ten Mile Creek 3. CUP Findings: The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and aII yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; The Council finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features, The applicant will be required to subnut for specific conditional use permits for projected commercial uses or at a minimum a certificate of zoning compliance ensuring proper application of the UDC. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; Please see Annexation Findings Item A above. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will. be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the e~sting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; The existing character of the azea will, and is, currently changing. However, the Council finds that the applicant is not proposing to alter the structure or character of the property and the use proposed is congruent with surrounding uses and uses that have occurred an the property in the past. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Zf all Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit B are complied with, the Council does not believe that the proposed use will adversely affect other properties in the vicinity. Exhibit D Page 3 E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; The ACRD has submitted conditions of approval for this development as listed in Exhibit B.7 the Council feels that the conditions applied in Exhibit B show that proper services can be provided to the site. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Please see Annexation Findings Items C and D above G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; The Council finds that this use will not involve activities, processes, materials, equipment, ar operations that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare of auy persons ar property in the area. The proposed use should not produce excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare ar adore. The Council recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any and all public testimony given regarding this finding. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The conditions of approval listed in Exhibit $ and the ACRD comments have addressed that future road connections and roadway extensions shall be designed as not to interfere with the surrounding public streets. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. The Council is unaware of any natural or scenic features of major importance on this site and finds that no natural or scenic features of maj ar importance will be lost or damaged by approving the subject application. The Commission and Council reference any public testimony that maybe presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature(s) of importance of which the Council is unaware. Exhibit D Page 4 March 31,2006 AZ 05-062 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2(~6 APPLICANT The Gables, LLC ITEM NO. 17 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, X06 -- Request for Annexation and _ Zoning of 5.1 l acres from RUT to R-8 zones for Sharp Estates Subdivision -- 2445 North Wingate Lane AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: See Previous Item Packet /Minutes OTHER: See attached Leiter from Ron Sargent and Jenkins / DeCouto Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Mctterk7ls presented at public meetb~ys shop become property of the CHy of Meridkm. 1t~CEIVEL aPR ~ z zoos CI'.~'i~T1~ MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FAC'T;'~C-fl~NCLiTSIONS OF LAW AND ~^ w--- __ -- --~-- -_ _~~ECISION & ORDER --- -- - =~ - - .. 'Cif DIe keO~ce :ri+ ji ,~'~ f'fIY' .'YP ~~ :~ ~. .1-- -- " _ ~ In the Matter of Annezation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R 8 (Medium-Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat approval of 23 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on S.1 ], acres, far Sharp Estates Subdivision, by The Gables, LLC. Case No(s).: AZ-OS-062 and PP-OS-062 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006 and April 4, 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. 02-3$2 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FIlVDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF I,AW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO{S). AZ-OS-(}62 / PP-05-062 - PAGE l of 4 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. - 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat stamped December 1, 2005 by Lance Warrick (Revised 12/1/05) is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the City Council hearing: a. Requiring a Development Agreement in which the applicant agrees: 1. For homes on Lots 1 to 8, Block 2, along the northern boundary of the property, either single story homes or homes with bonus rooms that have windows facing south (street) will be allowed (no second story windows facing north). 2. For Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be at least 60-feet wide. 3. 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 Applicable Time Limits (as applicable} 1. Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record a final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of CITY OP' MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 2 of 4 the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the tenxaixiation of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the birector may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18} months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council maybe granted. With all extensions, the Director or Ciry Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title l l . If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use pemxit 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 tall the time period within. which a petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28} days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & OItD)=R CASE NO(S). AZ-05.062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 3 of 4 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the '~{'~'' day of A 2006. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD ATTEST: VOTED~~~,~, VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED ~- WEERD ~~ `~ 0 di ~m~ - ~~~ ~: ~' ~s~ • ,, Q, ~, ~ ~. ~1 ~ ~\ ~L~~ 'rr~rarrn ui~~~~~ / Applicant, ~-Planning Department ~~-Public Works Department _~/, City Attorney B Dated: ~Q City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-05-062 / PP-05-062 -PAGE 4 of 4 Copy served upon: CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING bEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 3!7/2006 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission `~"'' ''~ ... _: FROM: C. Caleb Hoodc~i~r~t~ C~Zrrent Planning Manager `~ ,, 'c ~•~tica Meridian Planning Department ~ ~'``~:;~~ ~ 208-884-5533 ~~~`~'-+~~ t-ro~.,<. a v_.~° -` ~° SUBJECT: Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062 Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium Density Residential). PP-OS-062 Preliminary Plat approval of 2S single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in a proposed R 8 zone. l.. SUNIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, The Gables, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to R-8 (Medium- Density Residential) for S11 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County, The site is located south of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3, on the west side of Wingate Lane, approximately '/z mile south of Ustick Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home and associated outbuildings on this site. The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SitNIlViARY RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 19, 2006 and February 2, 2006. At the February 2, 2006 public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Ron Sargent (Applicant's Representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: C. Caleb Hood v. Other staff commenting on application: Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Mike Cole b. Ivey Issues of Discassion by Commission: i. Pathway on south of project and to the west and east, ii. Wingate Lane and vacating interest in the easement. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. The Commission voted to amend Condition 1.1.5 of Exhibit B by requiring the applicant to terminate or vacate their interest in the Wingate Lane private road agreement, all the way to Ustick Road. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None The subject applications (AZ and PF) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. The Planning and ' Commission is recommending approval of the proposed Sharp Estates Subdivision (AZ OS-062 and PP-OS- 62 ith the con 'tions li in Exhibit B of the Staff ort. Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-o5-062 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIIVG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 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- 05-062 and PF-05-062 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- 05-062 and PP-05-062 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of Macch 7, 2006 for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for denial of the plat.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ-05-062 and PP-05-062 to the heazing 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: 2445 N. Wingate Lane; approximately'/z mile south ofUstick Road and %z mile west of Eagle Road / 3N1E5 b. Uwner: Dale & Helen Sharp 2445 N. Wingate Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642 c. Applicant: The Gables, LLC 1771 N. Wildwood, #200 Boise, Idaho 83'713 d. Representative: Ron Sargent e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning of the subject 5.11 acres to R-8 and Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family buildable lots and 2 common lots. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family detached. All of the proposed lots conform to the dimensional standards of the R-$ zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 6,30? square feet. The gross density of the project is 4.9 dwelling units per acre. Just over 10% (approximately %z of an acre) of the site is being set aside for open space. The applicant is proposing to construct an east-west, 10-foot wide pedestrian path within the southern common lots. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 1211 /OS Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-052lPP-05-052 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2U06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 11/15/OS h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The subdivision is to have 25 buildable lots on 5.11 sores with .53 acres of open space. A thirty foot wide pathway will be constructed along the south side of the property with the potential to connect from the property to the other street to the west and east. There will also be common area on either side of Devlin Ave. at the southern entrance to the subdivision (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 requires before the City Council on this matter. b. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the Gity Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: January 2"d and January 16~', 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: December 23'x, 2005 (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 asingle-family home and some associated outbuildings on this site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This is an infill development. All of the parcels surrounding this property are part ofcity-approved residential subdivisions. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 3. South: Single-family lots within Kearney Place Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Single-family lots within Chateau Meadows Subdivision, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer. There is currently sewer in N. Devlin Avenue both on the north and south side of this property. Location of water: There are water stubs to the north az~d south of this parcel in N. Devlin Avenue. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: There are several existing trees on this property that need to be protected during construction, or be mitigated for. Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-05-Qb2/PP-OS-062 PAGE 3 CITY Ol~ MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAI+I+ I,tEPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCI-17, 2006 3. Floodplain: NIA 4. CanalslDitches Irrigation: Any open irrigation ditches, laterals and canals, should be tiled when this property develops. 5. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards associated with this property. b. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Helium-Density Residential) 7. Size of Property: 5.11 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 25 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 25 4. Common Lots: 2 S. Other Lots: 0 b. Tata1 Lots: 27 7. Gross Density: 4.9 units per acre (net density is 6.0 d.u./acre) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): Street buffers are not required on any of the internal, local streets. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.53 acres/10.4% 4. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micro-paths should generally comply with UDC I 1-3B-12. Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11-3G-3E2). See Section 10, Analysis below. h. Amenities: Ten percent open space and pedestrian pathways. i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached dwellings to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standards: R-8 Setbacks (in feet) Proposed Required Front Living Area (to sidewalk)* 15 15 Side Accessed Garage (to sidewalk)'" 15 15 Front Accessed Garage {to sidewalk)*20 20 Side 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (garage facing street) SO 50 Frontage (on common driveway) 10 10 Sharp Estates Subdivrsian AZ-OS-062/PP-0S-062 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTNLENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 Frontage (alley loaded garage) N/A 40 Lot Size (garage facing street) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (alley loaded garage NIA 4,000 `See Common Driveway in Section 10, Analysis below for required standards for lots adjacent to a common driveway. k Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A 1. Summary of Proposed Streets andlor Access: Although there are two public stub streets to the property, access is currently taken from Wingate Lane, a private street. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest in Wingate Lane and provide access to the lots in the subdivision via Devlin Avenue stub street extensions from the north (through Packazd Acres} and south (through Kearney Place). All of the internal streets are local streets with either a 34-foot wide or 36-foot wide street section (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain sidewalks that are attached to the back of the curb. Staff is supportive of the proposed street system. For a detailed report on all of ACHD's conditions, please see the ACRD report and Exhibit B. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 30, 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, Meridian Police Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. $. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain between three and eight dwellings per acre (see Fage 95 of the Comprehensive Flan.) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 2S single-family lots on 5.11 acres for a gross density of 4.9 dwelling units/acre. Staff finds that the overall density is within the range of a medium density project. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics below policy): Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service wild be extended to the project at the developer's expense. • The subject lands currently die 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 wild be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-05-062 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE DARING DATE Off' MARCH 7, 2006 • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACRD). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the 11~eridian 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 su, fjer no revenue doss as a -~ - ~` result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee~supported, services wild be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company, Chapter VI, Goal TI, Objective A, Action 3 -Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling amd Walking in all land-use decisions. This pubdication encourages jurisdictions to establfsh bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient Stajj'bedieves that the subject applications comply with the policies listed in the literature noted above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 -Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. The submitted preliminary platproposes to extend two stub streets, one from Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue), and one form Kearney Pdace Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue). There are no undeveloped parcels adjacent to this property. Staff believes that the applicant has done a nice job of connecting and extending existing stub streets to this property. Chapter VI, Goal 1T, Objective A, Action 13 -Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments. See analysis above. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9 -Require new residential development to provide permanent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties. Fencing exists along the north, east and west property lines. There is also existing fencing located approximately 30 feet north of the south property dine (adjacent to the irrigation ditch.) Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and .Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 5 -Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system The applicant is proposing to construct attached sidewalks adjacent to old of the proposed streets, which connect to adjacent properties. The applicant is also proposing to construct a .t 0-foot wide Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 pathway near the south property line. This pathway wild connect with adjacent pedestrian connections in Chateau Meadows to the west and Packard Acres No. 1 to the east. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to adjacent properties. See Analysis below far more information about the pedestrian path on the south side of this property. Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective C, Action 6 -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. See above. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This property does not have access to any classified arterial or collector street. Chapter VII, Goal N, .Objective C, Action 1 -.Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a residential zone. Sta, f)`' finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west are compatible with the proposed development. Chapter VII, Goal N, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories {low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.} for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opporiunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-8 zone. Chateau Meadows, ,Kearney Place and Packard Acres No. 3 all obtained R-8 zoning. Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 obtained R-4 zoning. Staff fonds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. Staff believes that the proposed density (4.9 d.u. 's/acre) and zoning (R-8) for this property is appropriate. Staff'recommends that the Commission grad Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant's zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC)11-2-1 lists single-fat~ily detached homes as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-8 Medium-Density Residential: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opporhmities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types tbat can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard lot size and street Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-05-062 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 frontage requirements of the R 8 zone established in the UDC. No dimensional modifications aze being requested for the proposed development. Staff is recommending an alternative to the standard requirement for landscaping adjacent to the pathway on the south side of the development (see Special Considerations in Section 10 below.) 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on November 14, 2005 by John Goettsche, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. UDC 11-SB-3.D.2 and Idaho Code & 65-6711A provides the City the authority to reciuire a property owner to enter into a Develo»ment Agreement (DAl with the Ci t t m wire some written commi nt for all future use .Staff believes that a DA is necessary to en tree that this property is developed in a fashion that is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation and does not negatively impact nearby properties. At the Auril 4s' City Council meeting the Council voted to ~reauire a Developapa;ent Asreement (DAl for this protects hincluded within the DA should • A provision that limits homes on Lots 1-8 181ock 2 to be either s story or if bonus rooms are provided, they will have windows that face south (towards the streetl with no second story windows that face n on said lots; • A~rovision that reauires Lots 1-8 h8lock 2 to be at least 60-feet wide The applicant shall contact the Ciri Attorney. Bill Narv at 888-0433 to initiate this process. 2. PP Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Common DrivewaX: The applicant is proposing to use a camxnon driveway for Lots 4, 5, is and 7, Block 1. Staff is supportive of the common driveway proposal. UDC 11- GC-3D7 requires setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures to be shown on the plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. Further, UDC 11-3C-6 requires every single-family detached dwelling to have atwo-car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad on the lot. The asphalt for the common driveway should not count towards the required parking pad area. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1 should maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement should be depicted and explained on the face of the final Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-0621PP-OS-062 PAGE S CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 plat. Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-dC-3D. See Exhibit B below. Pathways: The applicant is proposing to construct a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway along the south side of this development. This pathway will tie in with the cinder pathway to the east in Packard Acres No. 1. The cider pathway in Packard Acres No. 1 then connects to an unimproved path along the south side of Carol Subdivision. The pedestrian connection in this area is hindered by some gates, but eventually terminates at River Valley Elementary School to the east. UDC 11-3B-12C requires a S-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 351inear feet on both sides of the pathway. However, due to the uathway being within a Namva Meridian Irri tin i 'ct easement staff is recommending that the applicant be granted a modification of this standard requirement Instead. of trees staff recommends that the applicant be granted alternative compliance from the standard landscape requ~tnent along_nathwavs Staff recommends that the applicant be r uir o ' tall shrubs and other low-1 ' oun er on both sid of the pathv~ay (as allowed b~^.) See the Landscaping section and Exhibit B below. l:,andscaping:, The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15- 05, labeled Sheet L1 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcaver on each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways. • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, at least one deciduous shade tree per every 5,000 square feet of common open space should be planted, and common areas should be improved with lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-38-14. Submit a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). cce :Access to this site is currently provided from Wingate Lane, a private lane. The applicant is proposing to extend stub streets from the north and south as access to this property. Wingate Lane was created with a private road agreement that was created in 1913. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest this property has in Wingate Lane. Staff is supportive of this proposal. Staff recommends that prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the applicant be required to submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-0621PP-05-062 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TFE; I3FARWG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 City's Legal Depalfiment.} Further, the applicant should either be required to depict the existing 'Wingate Lane easement on the face of the final plat, OR terminate/vacate the private road agreement. NOTE: The buildable area of Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, will be significantly affected if the Wingate Lane private road easement on this property is not vacated. Lot 10, Block 1, will only have about a 29-foot wide building pad area. See Exhibits A and B below. Existing ResidencesJBuildinas~ The site currently contains naultaple buildings. Because the existing structures span across proposed lot lines, all buildings shall be removed or relocated, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. See Exhibit B below. Fencine: The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. There is existing fencing along the north, east, and west property lines. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and mioro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision (UDC 11-3A-7A7bi). See Exhibit B below. Co Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Owners' Association. See Exhibit B below. Ditches, Laterals. ~d Canals: There are existing irrigation ditches that run along and through this parcel. Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. See Exhibit B below. Pressure Irri 'on: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water far the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 15 andlYlCC 9-1-28. Densi : At the April 4a' City Council meeting. the Council voted to aoDrove the rsvised slat that is dated March 20.2006, end includes 23 sin~ie-family buildine low. b. StaffRecommendation: Stag' recommends aPproval_ of the subject applications AZ-OS- 0¢2 anc~ PP-OS-062 with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report for the hegriY~ date of Januarv 19, 2006. 11. EX.f~ITS A. Drawings Sharp Estates Subdivision A~-OS-062/PP-05.062 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIlVG DEPARTMENT' STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-45 {revised 3-20-061) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: 11-15-05} B. Conditions of Approval 1. Plamung 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 Unified Development Code Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-05-062 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERD7IAN PLANNING DF.I'ARTMENT STAFF kEPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 A, Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-OS (revised 3-ZO-06~,) X11' ~ .. ii . .. _ ~.~.. ~_ rWt,9 7'n g310M9 ~Ha ~.. i ~ r , ui 1 • _ yp Y~. ~~' ++1 t ~w _ C AIM ~AtK _ 1-0'iBIQ iR Y: ....-. _ w~sww~ ~':t.~ ~~ ~~ ~ i9701dYY `/ _ ~ ~ " t ~ -~ ~ ~j / ~ YiFY~t i F 19 f iii '~tA ~ 'r = k. A~ li F ~kk~~ ~ , ~ ~ }}}`_ r ~ ]~ C11; ~~~~~~ ~`~ JJ//4 I,s~~~6~ 51~8^ t.. Ad!_g~a , ~41 i ~A, 4I~ i~ a {~ ?[i ti tl i . !' r it ! a ~ . fi~F~1 s~~ h~';j ~~~;ill#!!~ ~~~li;~:~~c ;t ~~ A 1 6r ~~ 1 4 ~uF 1 !i_ ii 1,. ~~~•t1-F~,.r,Y I __•,-- 1F F__ ~ ~''`,A: yiPS't't•..~, ._.:~7-,", ,rte ~ ; ~.-- i ~~ i{~l~ "' . e: .~, ,. ~~~~ r y 1, ~ at ; f t ~~ F a I~ { Iz t! ~'1 - _-,_ __. ~ ~ ~~ •yv~-,ate 'i.~ , ~,- ~ ~~1 "-+li^ u i' y~I •. i ,~ e, `n off'-,.~„• ~"'• ~, , ~~` ~~ it °~-'--= :.~ -~ ~ F ~~ f - F ~ -,i. '~ ,; ~ ' ,k ~ '~1 l~ I I F 1 Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY 01:' MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPpRT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF IANUARY 19, 20Q6 2. Landscape Plan (dated 11-15-05) •4wm ~ s' n.~~ d ~ }i/ry/y Y ~ 5f1 a'6~ ~ w ~.~w-fir „~ ~'YY 1iA ' .r ~~ m~ ... dir.. ~~ i ~~ ~ ~ :~, I .~ • I ,,~e . ~. I t ~~ ~pipaa 1 ~ , !: j ,~ -• -~r ~Qp • • ~ ~ ~ _ .~ ~ ~ ti~ ~ I - ~~ -,.. _- ~ ~ i ~ 0 c _' - ..~ ~-. -. ~y • i C .-..-~_ =_~-~ -.:.~ ~ t L U r~--= ~ -_ .._. 1 a i :a _~ . __ ,=~. ilia ~ ~ ~ 1 i e, ,, #~-3 • (~' tl ~j i , L I e a r i _J Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FQR THE HEARING BATE QF JANUARY 19, 2006 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQLTIltEMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-05-062) 1.1.1 The prelinunary plat labeled as Pl, prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, dated December 1, 2005 (revised 3-20-06) is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-OS-062} application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-05-062). 1.1.2 The applicant is proposing to use a common driveway for Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1. Lots 4, S, 6 and 7, Block 1 shall maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement shall be depicted and explained on the face of the final plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lixxes, whichever is more restrictive. In accordance with UDC 11-6C-3D7, depict the required setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures on Lots 4, S, 6 and 7, Block 1, on the face of the final plat. In accordance with UDC 11-3C-6, provide each single-family detached dwelling with atwo-car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad between the garage face and the common driveway (the asphalt for the common driveway shall not count towards the required parking pad area.) Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 1.1.3 UDC 11-3B-12C requires a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 351inear feet on both sides of the pathway. Due to the proposed pathway on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2, being within a Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) easement, the applicant is hereby granted alternative compliance from the standard requirement to install trees along side the pathway. In lieu of trees, the applicant shall install shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on both sides of the pathway (as allowed by NMID.) 1.1.4 The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15-05, labeled Sheet L1 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcover an each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways (as allowed by NMID). • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, install at least one deciduous shade tree per every 8,000 squaze feet of common open space azea, and install lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Submit a copy of said plan with the final plat application. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to occupancy of any buildings. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Exhibit B -Page l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNINQ bEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TIC HEARINCI DATE OF JANUARY I9, 2006 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 proposal by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.1.5 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the City's Legal Department.) Further, the applicant shall terminate/vacate their interest in the private road agreement all the way to Ustick Road. 1.1.6 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all buildings shall be removed from this site or relocated in compliance with the City Code. 1.1.7 The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision. I.1.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Uwners' Association. 1.1.9 Fer UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or Ile within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 1.1.10 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-P1tELIlvIINARY PLAT (PP-OS-062) 1.2.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.2.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC l 1-3A-17. 1.2.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-38. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF M1;RITIIAN PI.ANNIlVG DEPARTMENT $T,~ REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE QF JANUARY i 9, 2006 facility. This may require lasing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACHD, City of Meridian and, all other regulatory requirements at the time of final conshuction. 1.2.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.2.5 Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation and conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.2.6 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Pnblic Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall install all mains necessary to provide service; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum coves-over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall be required to continue the 10-inc$ water main in N. Devlin Avenue as apposed to the 8-inch that is proposed. 2.4 'The applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system in this development is to be owned and operated by Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. A letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 2.S The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a yeaz-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Chdinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.8 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Pina1 Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.9 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.10 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaizung Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORfi FOR THE DARING DATE of JANUARY I9, 2006 certificates of occupancy. 2.11 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 2.12 It shall be the responsibility of floe applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible far application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill. material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum, of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and. quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit froxn the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Deportment 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and. water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %2" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY QF MERIDIAN PLANNIN4 DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR TI->E HEAItINCa~ DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 3.5 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.6 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is at least 20' wide. 3.7 Requirements for dead-end fire apparatus access roads that are between 500'-750' in length. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 26' wide. Streets with less than a 35' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 39' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. Special approval required over 7S0' IFC Table D103.4. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.8 For all Fire Lanes, provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.9 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation_ 3.10 Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6". This includes mature landscaping. 3.11 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.12 To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than SO homes. The two entrances should be separated by no lessthan %Z the diagonal measurement of the full development. 3.13 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Cade for one and two story construction. 3.14 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.15 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and eflxcient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.16 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersections}. 3.17 The Fire Dept. has concerns about the ability to address the project and have the addresses visible from the street which the project is addressed off of Please contact Vicki Heugly at 89&5500 to address this concern prior to the public hearing. 3.18 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the Jnternational Building & Fire Codes. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY QF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATIr OF JANUARY 19, 2006 4. Police Department 4.1 Lot 6, Block 1, creates a residence that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors. Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the platJsite plan such that the housesldwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage interaction between more neighbors. 4.2 Any interior fencing next to common open space shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 SSC will not rovide trash i k-u se 'ces utilizin a common drivewa~The developer s al taII a concrete d at the end f e co on a no m e than five 5 feet b hind th i ew ~e pad shall be Qf sufficient area to accommodate the receptacles of the residences that take access from the common driveway. 7. Ada County Highway District 'fie Speck Conditions o~ nroval 7.1.1 Extend the two existing stub streets, from the north and south property lines, into the site, as proposed. 7.1.2 Construct the internal local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way, as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct the cul-de-sac turnaround with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 7.1.4 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Sta rd Conditions of Approval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 200b 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, getter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's CJtility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 AlI design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised pleas for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required desiga changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities withintheright-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACRD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in farce at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Ex}ubit B -Page 2 CTI'Y 0)! MERiUTAN PLANNING, DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN(} DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 C. Legal Description ~~ c~s7i.avo•nr ~rHc Exhibit A Property bescripiian Sharp Estat~s- The South Hall of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, i'ownship 3 North, Range 1 t:ast, Elpise Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, more particularly descried as toHows. . 88glrtrting at a 5/8 Inch mbar marking the Center quarter Comer of said Section 5; thenrs, along the sewth line of the Southeast Quarter cf the Northwest Cuarter of Bald Section 5, North Sg°39'53" West a distance of t70.titd feet to a 6/13 inch rebar marking the 5outilwest Corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of sa(d Set~ion 5; thertc8, abng the west Ilrre of ttte SouBteast Quarter of the Northwest Qu¢uter of said &adion 5. North 00"2T3g• i~t a distance of 339.92 to Nee Northwest Comer of the South Half of the Sst quarter of the Ncnhwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence, along the north Ilne of the South Half of the Southeast Ciuarter of the ldor~west Quarter at saki t3eciion 5, South 8ti°3t3'08' East a distance ot871.07 treat to a 5t8 inch relbar marking the Northeast Comer of the South Had of the Southeast quarter o1 d,e Northwest Quariler of said Section 5: thence. along the east lire of the Southeast Quarter of the Northareat Quarter of said Section 5, Scum 00°ZB'28" West a distance of 331.b7 teat to tree Poktt M Beginning. Corrtslining 5.11 acren+ more or less. Br~Ct to arty ex-sting easement affecting the at~va described parcel cf land, written, urtwrltten, rgc:orded, ~ utlrecorded, 1•. .I ~~ It584 r P.QhWy L->•arNtlb~vin~S4nrK~4~~rY dattulrn Act 'rrCatitu'r Yarn} f.akeneerv. int.. ''`fifl+t 1 t: utkll,e R I, +•ait: _:U ~~t:r~• t~~H4 ~ t ;`u~n6ar la,zms Exhibit C -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANT,TARY 19, 2006 ~~ !~~ ~ ~~~$ ~~~~~# U~ ~~i ° ~~ ~, ~~ ~~ Exhibit C -Page 2 CrrY OF MT;RIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H)rARING DATF OF JANUARY 19, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings; 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. 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; Council finds that single-family residential uses are allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8. Medium Density Residential permits the establishment of residential uses and is designed to protect the integrity of residential development by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible nonresidential uses. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to the proposed zoning designation. 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 maybe provided when determin;ng ~ ~~g. 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 (LIDC 11-SB-3.E). The R-8 zoning amendment will provide lots that are similar in nature to existing subdivisions in the near 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. 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, Council finds that_ 'on an nin f this to R-8 would be ins the best interest of the City 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings; Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN 1?1.ANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adapted Comprehensive Plan. Council generally supports the proposed plat layout and proposed density as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section $, of the Staff Report. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Council finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord wlth the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Council relies upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See finding "Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings above, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and City Staff originally had some concerns about Lot 6, Block 1, and how the future residence will be somewhat isolated from the rest of the development. Such areas tend to have an increased crime potential. However, this situation is not much different fxom homes at the end of cul-de-sacs, and therefore should not create a safety problem. Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD considers mad safety issues in their analysis. Council should reference any public testimony that may be presented to determi>e whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council Finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Council references any and all public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 March 31,2008 PP 05-062 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 200b APPLICANT The Gables, LLC ITEM NO. 18 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2t~b -- 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: GIN 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 aHached Leiter from Ron Sargent & Jenkins / DeCouto 8< Revised Plat Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER APR 1 22006 City Of Meridian `Cit~lerk Office . , ~~~ -~ -'k;~' -~ a 4s ~ .{~ , 4 u~.~aa~a~4 ~., ~. d~~ ~ . ''~.~ga: f 'T In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) AND Preliminary Plat approval of 23 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres, for Sharp Estates Subdivision, by The Gables, LLC. Case No(s).: AZ-05-062 and PP-OS-062 For the City Council Hearing Date of: March 7, 2006 and April 4, 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-SA. CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 1 of 4 • 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Preliminary Plat, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat stamped December 1, 2005 by Lance Warnick (Revised 12/1/05) is hereby conditionally approved; 2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the City Council hearing: a. Requiring a Development Agreement in which the applicant agrees: 1. For homes on Lots 1 to 8, Block 2, along the northern boundary of the property, either single story homes or homes with bonus rooms that have windows facing south (street) will be allowed (no second story windows facing north). 2. For Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be at least 60-feet wide. 3. 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 Applicable Time Limits (as applicable) 1. Notice of Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that approval of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat shall become null and void if the applicant fails to record a final plat within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 2 of 4 the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of March 7, 2006 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 3 of 4 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of _a~t-1( , 2006. COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD TIE BREAKER MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD ATTEST: VOTED ~}bsen,~, VOTED VOTED~_g_~_ VOTED VOTED ~-' WEERD 4 ~ '~.~~ _ ~ p ~ \ '~ s~ re 9 1~1 P/t~/itea.......eel``ee` Copy served upon: / Applicant, ~-Planning Department ~~ Public Works Department _~ City Attorney B Dated: ~}- 17 ~Qlp City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-OS-062 / PP-OS-062 -PAGE 4 of 4 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 3/7/2006 ~ ~ ~ > ' TO: Planning & Zoning Commission "~~ ~'~ h~ ~~ ~ 1 ~-~» FROM: C. Caleb Hood ~~/ ` '"'" '~ Current Planning Manager ~~,, ~, 'o•~r'~' .r. ~~ Meridian Planning Department `` °°-F~:. . 208-884-5533 '-~~~_a+~,..,L~ ~'a?-=`"°=r SUBJECT: Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062 Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-8 (Medium-Density Residential). PP-OS-062 Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family residential building lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in a proposed R-8 zone. 1. SiJNI1VIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, The Gables, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) to R-8 (Medium- Density Residential) for 5.11 acres of property currently zoned RUT in Ada County. The site is located south of Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3, on the west side of Wingate Lane, approximately %Z mile south of Ustick Road. Currently, there is asingle-family home and associated outbuildings on this site. The site has not been previously platted. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area. 2. SUNIlVIARY RECONIMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on January 19, 2006 and February 2, 2006. At the February 2, 2006 public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Ron Sargent (Applicant's Representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: C. Caleb Hood v. Other staff commenting on application: Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Mike Cole b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Pathway on south of project and to the west and east, ii. Wingate Lane and vacating interest in the easement. c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. The Commission voted to amend Condition 1.1.5 of Exhibit B by requiring the applicant to terminate or vacate their interest in the Wingate Lane private road agreement, all the way to Ustick Road. d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. None The subject applications (AZ and PP) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested Annexation and Zoning and Preliminary Plat applications. The Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending approval of the proposed Sharp Estates Subdivision (AZ OS-062 and PP-OS-0621 with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 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- OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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- OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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 and you must state specific reason(s) for denial of the plat.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers AZ-OS-062 and PP-OS-062 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: 2445 N. Wingate Lane; approximately %z mile south of Ustick Road and %z mile west of Eagle Road / 3N1E5 b. Owner: Dale & Helen Sharp 2445 N. Wingate Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642 c. Applicant: The Gables, LLC 1771 N. Wildwood, #200 Boise, Idaho 83713 d. Representative: Ron Sargent e. Present Zoning: RUT (Ada County) f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning of the subject 5.11 acres to R-8 and Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family buildable lots and 2 common lots. All of the homes within the development are proposed to be single-family detached. All of the proposed lots conform to the dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 6,307 square feet. The gross density of the project is 4.9 dwelling units per acre. Just over 10% (approximately 1/z of an acre) of the site is being set aside for open space. The applicant is proposing to construct aneast-west, 10-foot wide pedestrian path within the southern common lots. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 12/1/05 Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 11/15/OS h. Applicant's StatemendJustification: The subdivision is to have 25 buildable lots on 5.11 acres with .53 acres of open space. A thirty foot wide pathway will be constructed along the south side of the property with the potential to connect from the property to the other street to the west and east. There will also be common area on either side of Devlin Ave. at the southern entrance to the subdivision (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. The subject application will in fact constitute a preliminary plat as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11 Chapter 5, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: January 2nd and January 16d', 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: December 23`d, 2005 (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 asingle-family home and some associated outbuildings on this site. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This is an inf~ll development. All of the parcels surrounding this property are part ofcity-approved residential subdivisions. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 2. East: Single-family lots within Packard Acres Subdivision, zoned R-4 3. South: Single-family lots within Kearney Place Subdivision, zoned R-8 4. West: Single-family lots within Chateau Meadows Subdivision, zoned R-8 d. History of Previous Actions: N/A e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Location of sewer: There is currently sewer in N. Devlin Avenue both on the north and south side of this property. Location of water: There are water stubs to the north and south of this parcel in N. Devlin Avenue. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: There are several existing trees on this property that need to be protected during construction, or be mitigated for. Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 3. Floodplain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: Any open irrigation ditches, laterals and canals, should be tiled when this property develops. 5. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards associated with this property. 6. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium-Density Residential) 7. Size of Property: 5.11 acres f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 25 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 25 4. Common Lots: 2 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 27 7. Gross Density: 4.9 units per acre (net density is 6.0 d.u./acre) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): Street buffers are not required on any of the internal, local streets. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: 0.53 acres/10.4% 4. Other landscaping standards: Landscaping adjacent to micro-paths should generally comply with UDC 11-3B-12. Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11-3G-3E2). See Section 10, Analysis below. h. Amenities: Ten percent open space and pedestrian pathways. i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached dwellings to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standards: R-8 Setbacks (in feet) Proposed Required Front Living Area (to sidewalk)* 15 15 Side Accessed Garage (to sidewalk)* 15 15 Front Accessed Garage (to sidewalk)*20 20 Side 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (garage facing street) 50 50 Frontage (on common driveway) 10 10 Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 Frontage (alley loaded garage) N/A 40 Lot Size (garage facing street) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (alley loaded gazage N/A 4,000 *See Common Driveway in Section 10, Analysis below for required standazds for lots adjacent to a common driveway. k. Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Although there are two public stub streets to the property, access is currently taken from Wingate Lane, a private street. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest in Wingate Lane and provide access to the lots in the subdivision via Devlin Avenue stub street extensions from the north (through Packard Acres) and south (through Kearney Place). All of the internal streets aze local streets with either a 34-foot wide or 36-foot wide street section (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain sidewalks that are attached to the back of the curb. Staff is supportive of the proposed street system. For a detailed report on all of ACHD's conditions, please see the ACRD report and Exhibit B. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On December 30, 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 Pazks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, Meridian Police Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential azeas aze anticipated to contain between three and eight dwellings per acre (see Page 95 of the Comprehensive Plan.) The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 25 single-family lots on 5.11 acres for a gross density of 4.9 dwelling units/acre. Staff fords that the overall density is within the range of a medium density project. Staff fords the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics below policy): Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1 -Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services. When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACFID). This service will not change. The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. . The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no revenue loss as a result of the subject annexation. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 3 -Consider "Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach" from the National Center for Bicycling and Walking in all land-use decisions. This publication encourages jurisdictions to establish bikeway and walkway facilities in new construction and reconstruction projects, in a manner that is safe, accessible and convenient. Staff believes that the subject applications comply with the policies listed in the literature noted above. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 6 -Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow. The submitted preliminary plat proposes to extend two stub streets, one from Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue), and one form Kearney Place Subdivision No. 3 (Devlin Avenue). There are no undeveloped parcels adjacent to this property. Staff believes that the applicant has done a nice job of connecting and extending existing stub streets to this property. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 13 -Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect to local roads and collectors in adjacent developments. See analysis above. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 9 -Require new residential development to provide permanent perimeter fencing to contain construction debris on site and prevent windblown debris from entering adjacent agricultural and other properties. Fencing exists along the north, east and west property lines. There is also existing fencing located approximately 30 feet north of the south property line (adjacent to the irrigation ditch.) Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VI, Goal II, Objective A, Action 5 -Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system. The applicant is proposing to construct attached sidewalks adjacent to all of the proposed streets, which connect to adjacent properties. The applicant is also proposing to construct a 10 foot wide Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 pathway near the south property line. This pathway will connect with adjacent pedestrian connections in Chateau Meadows to the west and Packard Acres No. 1 to the east. Staff is supportive of the proposed pedestrian connections to adjacent properties. See Analysis below for more information about the pedestrian path on the south side of this property. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 6 -Require pedestrian access in all new development to link subdivisions together and promote neighborhood connectivity. See above. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This property does not have access to any classified arterial or collector street. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a residential zone. Sta, ff finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west are compatible with the proposed development. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. The subject application includes a request for the R-8 zone. Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place and Packard Acres No. 3 all obtained R-8 zoning. Packard Acres Subdivision No. 1 obtained R-4 zoning. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site. Staff believes that the proposed density (4.9 d. u. 's/acre) and zoning (R-8) for this property is appropriate. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant s zoning and development request is appropriate for this property. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Schedule of Uses: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-2-1 lists single-family detached homes as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-8 Medium-Density Residential: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standards: All of the proposed lots comply with the standard lot size and street Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 frontage requirements of the R-8 zone established in the UDC. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. Staff is recommending an alternative to the standard requirement for landscaping adjacent to the pathway on the south side of the development (see Special Considerations in Section 10 below.) 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: AZ Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is appropriate for this property. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on November 14, 2005 by John Goettsche, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. UDC 11-5B-3.D.2 and Idaho Code & 65-6711A provides the Citv the authority to reauire 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. At the April 4a' City Council meetine. the Council voted to require a Development Agreement (DA) for this proiect. Included within the DA should be: • A provision that limits homes on Lots 1-8, Block 2, to be either single- storv or if bonus rooms are provided, they will have windows that face south (towards the street) with no second story windows that face north on said lots. • A provision that requires Lots 1-8. Block 2, to be at least 60-feet wide. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary. at 888-4433 to initiate this process. 2. PP Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Common Driveway: The applicant is proposing to use a common driveway for Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1. Staff is supportive of the common driveway proposal. UDC 11- 6C-3D7 requires setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures to be shown on the plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. Further, UDC 11-3C-6 requires every single-family detached dwelling to have atwo-car garage and a 20' x 20' parking pad on the lot. The asphalt for the common driveway should not count towards the required parking pad area. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1 should maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement should be depicted and explained on the face of the final Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 plat. Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. See Exhibit B below. Pathway The applicant is proposing to construct a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway along the south side of this development. This pathway will tie in with the cinder pathway to the east in Packard Acres No. 1. The cider pathway in Packard Acres No. 1 then connects to an unimproved path along the south side of Carol Subdivision. The pedestrian connection in this area is hindered by some gates, but eventually terminates at River Valley Elementary School to the east. UDC 11-3B-12C requires a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 35 linear feet on both sides of the pathway. However, due to the nathwav being within a Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) easement staff is recommendine that the applicant be granted a modification of this standard requirement Instead of trees staff recommends that the applicant be ~xanted alternative compliance from the standard landscape reauirement alone pathways. Staff recommends that the applicant be reauired to install shrubs and other low-l~ing_groundcover on both sides of the pathwav (as allowed by NMID.) See the Landscaping section and Exhibit B below. Landscaping_ The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15- 05, labeled Sheet L1 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways. • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, at least one deciduous shade tree per every 8,000 square feet of common open space should be planted, and common areas should be improved with lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. • A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit a revised landscape plan, reflecting the changes/notes mentioned above, with the final plat application(s). Access: Access to this site is currently provided from Wingate Lane, a private lane. The applicant is proposing to extend stub streets from the north and south as access to this property. Wingate Lane was created with a private road agreement that was created in 1913. The applicant is proposing to abandon any interest this property has in Wingate Lane. Staff is supportive of this proposal. Staff recommends that prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, the applicant be required to submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 City's Legal Department.) Further, the applicant should either be required to depict the existing Wingate Lane easement on the face of the final plat, OR terminate/vacate the private road agreement. NOTE: The buildable area of Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, will be significantly affected if the Wingate Lane private road easement on this property is not vacated. Lot 10, Block 1, will only have about a 29-foot wide building pad area. See Exhibits A and B below. Existing Residences/Buildings• The site currently contains multiple buildings. Because the existing structures span across proposed lot lines, all buildings shall be removed or relocated, prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. See Exhibit B below. Fencine: The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. There is existing fencing along the north, east, and west property lines. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision (iJDC 11-3A-7A7bi). See Exhibit B below. Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Owners' Association. See Exhibit B below. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals• There are existing irrigation ditches that run along and through this parcel. Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. See Exhibit B below. Pressure Irri ation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the fmal plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape areas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 15 and MCC 9-1-28. Densi : At the Apri14~ City Council meeting the Council voted to approve the revised plat that is dated March 20 2006 and includes 23 single-family building lots. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subject applications AZ-OS- 062 and PP-OS-062. with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report for the hearing date of January 19.2006. 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~NG DATE OF MARCH 7, 2006 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-OS (revised 3-20-0~) 2. Landscape Plan (dated: 11-15-OS) 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 Unified Development Code Sharp Estates Subdivision AZ-OS-062/PP-OS-062 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLASDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF MARCH 7 2006 A. Drawings 1. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-1-OS (revised 3-20-06)) ~1 ~531BY9 7H1 aw.~i~~ ter, - 1'.i'1SdQ'®Hi: mss®v°~ vc _ ~~C .{~ a '~ s °', ,P ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. N,~ ~~ a s~ d ~'~ R i ~I,_ - - ~• ~ a LA F I ~ p " Y . -p~ ,YYY. ~_~ @ ; ~ ~_ s ~ ;T i _ ~ ~ _e d ~¢ ~ a ~ T~ ~~e~ ~, ~ ~ ~~; ` F3 3~ . _ b w ~ ~ s a C ,- ~ XX ro ~ 'V t ^ 'w . ~~~ s a -~ ~~ 5 Y r C'" WF ~A~iBPi~ i I5~C~~~~ (I•lI ~i e ^s' ~: - [ ~~ I I'~ 77 s~~Sg4~8~p~ ei~~l~~6~~i~ ~~~;i4t`ii~ i~~@i~o~e~ ~, ~ _~ IAb`2_- __~- _t ~'~-~~ _. -, -- it ~+, - ,.-, _ F6 ~I~I¢¢ gagyy ~-'rs~ 4~ s, ;'I~,~ I. I•~ 7P~r ~ LY w ~ - ~ -=-! . '~ ~g his I a i' ~~ ~ ~j ~I, °' l - ~ ~a~~I' ~ ~ ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t '~` A ~ ~ ~°° ~ -ti-, t ~ i I' , Q ~ ~ tg~~ ' _ ~i !s- ~ b I - w~_ `' ~ ,~ d ale jjCC ~kd I `~~ f t~ [~ ry r~ ~7 ~ F~ I~1 ~ - ~i 1 i -0' F, ~ .~ € i~ ~1 ~~~~ p: ~ A ~-.- Vim. ~-' R} ~ ~ ~tl~ I~~~ ~~~, ~r~ ~ ~6; ~ ~ ~ ~ i CI p4 t 1 f F G L ~V N"AYI y _ - ~ 1 ~yq~qy~~ "s~ ~d~f1r 3i~ ~~ I i 114FF ~I iii I g a ~ ~~i ~ ~ '~F--~ Fo ~ J~~ _ _1-~. _ Jam... ~1 Exhibit A -Page l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 2. Ak J - ~ J P-- s ; ®+ SflB 'y L_~ ~. i Exhibit A -Page 2 Landscape Plan (dated 11-15-OS) _~ - - - - ~ ~ ~~ -rm~+a~a _ ~ s ail 'S3~Vg 3HL - .. r~u ~~.:~~® ~ sew arras ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ I ~~' ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ~' ' ~ •.a a~ m `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M A -- ~~ ~ ~~I~~. ~ L f.: ~ - ~~. l `- - H ~ - ~ .. ~` , -- - ~ t,~' P a ! al a _ __ _ 5 5 ~ 2 I _~ 4__... _ __~~J 541t1 .St { v ~, _ ~ ~ y~T g CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-OS-062) 1.1.1 The preliminary plat labeled as P1, prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, dated December 1, 2005 (revised 3-20-061 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. All comments and conditions of the accompanying Annexation and Zoning (AZ-OS-062) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-OS-062). 1.1.2 The applicant is proposing to use a common driveway for Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1. Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1 shall maintain at least 10 feet of public street frontage (flag) and the common driveway easement shall be depicted and explained on the face of the final plat; building setbacks should be measured from the edge of the common driveway easement or property lines, whichever is more restrictive. In accordance with UDC 11-6C-3D7, depict the required setbacks, building envelopes, and orientation of the lots and structures on Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1, on the face of the final plat. In accordance with UDC 11-3C-6, provide each single-family detached dwelling with atwo-car garage and a ZO' x 20' parking pad between the garage face and the common driveway (the asphalt for the common driveway shall not count towards the required parking pad area.) Comply with all common driveway provisions listed in UDC 11-6C-3D. 1.1.3 UDC 11-3B-12C requires a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of a micro pathway with at least 1 deciduous tree being planted every 351inear feet on both sides of the pathway. Due to the proposed pathway on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2, being within a Nampa Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) easement, the applicant is hereby granted alternative compliance from the standard requirement to install trees along side the pathway. In lieu of trees, the applicant shall install shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on both sides of the pathway (as allowed by NMID.) 1.1.4 The landscape plan prepared by Treasure Valley Engineers, on 11-15-05, labeled Sheet L1 is approved with the following modifications/notes: • Per UDC 11-3G-3A, set aside 10.4% (0.53 acres) of the site for useable open space and provide a 10-foot wide asphalt pathway within common Lot 9, Block 1, and common Lot 18, Block 2, as proposed. • Maintain at least a 5-foot wide landscape strip on both sides of the proposed asphalt pathways on Lot 9, Block 1, and Lot 18, Block 2. As an alternative to trees, construct shrubs and other low-lying groundcover on each side of the proposed 10-foot wide asphalt pathways (as allowed by NMID). • Per UDC 11-3G-3E1, install at least one deciduous shade tree per every 8,000 square feet of common open space area, and install lawn, either seed or sod. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant shall work with the City Arborist, Elroy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. Submit a copy of said plan with the final plat application. • A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to occupancy of any buildings. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Exhibit B -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the prelixnina.ry plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The proceeding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.1.5 Prior to signature of the fmal plat by the City Engineer, the applicant shall submit a copy of a recorded document, a release of dominant parcel interest, for the interest that this parcel has in Wingate Lane (coordinate the drafting of this document with the City's Legal Department.) Further, the applicant shall terminate/vacate their interest in the private road agreement all the way to Ustick Road. 1.1.6 Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, all buildings shall be removed from this site or relocated in compliance with the City Code. 1.1.7 The applicant is not proposing to construct any new fencing with this development. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the fmal plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Fencing adjacent to Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 18, Block 2, shall be restricted to either 4-foot solid or 6-foot open vision. 1.1.8 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Sharp Estates Home Owners' Association. 1.1.9 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, and waterways being used as amenities, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 1.1.10 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-OS-062) 1.2.1 A detailed landscape plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance and as noted in this report, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application(s). 1.2.2 Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.2.3 All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the approved open space are subject to UDC 11- 3A-18 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees. Sand, gravel or other non-vegetated surface materials shall not be used in open space lots, except as permitted under UDC 11-3B. Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. If the stormwater detention facility cannot be incorporated into the approved open space and still meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-18, then the applicant shall relocate the Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN(ri DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.2.4 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.2.5 Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation and conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.2.6 Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via extension mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall install all mains necessary to provide service; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if cover from top of pipe to sub-grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications. 2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains in N. Devlin Avenue. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and through this development, coordinate main size and routing with Public Works. 2.3 The applicant shall be required to continue the 10-inch water main in N. Devlin Avenue as opposed to the 8-inch that is proposed. 2.4 The applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system in this development is to be owned and operated by Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. A letter of plan approval shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. 2.5 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water (MCC 12-13-8.3). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.6 All existing structures shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.7 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 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.8 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.9 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized imgation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.10 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 certificates of occupancy. 2.11 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 2.12 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.14 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.15 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 2.16 All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2.17 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.18 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.19 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights shall be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500 feet apart. International Fire Code Appendix C. 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150 feet in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIIV-G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 3.5 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.6 All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is at least 20' wide. 3.7 Requirements for dead-end fire apparatus access roads that are between 500'-750' in length. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 26' wide. Streets with less than a 35' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 39' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. Special approval required over 750' IFC Table D 103.4. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.8 For all Fire Lanes, provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 3.9 Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 3.10 Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6". This includes mature landscaping. 3.11 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. 3.12 To increase emergency access to the site a minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes. The two entrances should be separated by no less than %z the diagonal measurement of the full development. 3.13 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 3.14 The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 3.15 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 3.16 The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). 3.17 The Fire Dept. has concerns about the ability to address the project and have the addresses visible from the street which the project is addressed off of. Please contact Vicki Heugly at 898-5500 to address this concern prior to the public hearing. 3.18 Provide exterior egress lighting as required. by the International Building & Fire Codes. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING-DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 4. Police Department 4.1 Lot 6, Block 1, creates a residence that will be isolated from their surrounding neighbors. Such areas have an increased crime potential. Prior to the next public hearing, the applicant shall work with the Police Chief and/or Planning Staff to revise the plat/site plan such that the houses/dwelling units in the general area are oriented toward one another and encourage interaction between more neighbors. 4.2 Any interior fencing next to common open space shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 5.2 Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 SSC will not provide trash nick-uu services utilizing the common driveway The developer shall mstall a concrete pad at the end of the common drive no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk. The pad shall be of sufficient area to accommodate the receptacles of the residences that take access from the common driveway 7. Ada County Highway District Site Specific Conditions ofApproval 7.1.1 Extend the two existing stub streets, from the north and south property lines, into the site, as proposed. 7.1.2 Construct the internal local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot concrete sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way, as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct the cul-de-sac turnaround with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 7.1.4 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions ofApnroval 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARI•DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 7.2.12 No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 7.2.13 Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 C. Legal Description Exhebrt A Property Description Sharp Estates The South Hail of tine South®ast 4uarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Bangle 1 East, e~ise Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follaws~ f3~irlning at a 5/81nch rebar marking the Center Quarter Comer of said Section 5; thanes, along the south line of the Southeast Quarter of tine Northwest Quarter of said Section 5, North tig°39°53" West a distance of 670.i3g feet to a 5/8 inch rebar marking the Southwest corner of lira Southeast Quarter of the iorthwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence, along the waist line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 5, North 00°2T3ti~ East a distance of 331.82 to the Northwest Comer of the South Half of de Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Bastion 5; thence, along the north line of the South II-laif of the Southeast Quarter of the Narth~aest Quarter of said Section 5, South 89°38'OBfl t_ast a distance of 871,07 feet to a 5/8 inch n3bar marking tine Northeast Comer of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Narthwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence, slang the east hne of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 5, South 00®28'28" West a distance of 331.57 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 5.11 acres, more or less. Subject to any existing easement affecting the abov®describad par~i of land, written. unwritten, recorded, or unrecxxded. .• d n H. , PLS 9584 e:lSargem:S".p+P' Eslelta111rewingsSurse~4pro~rtr descrackw.Aet 'Frriletr+r 1'~+ISv. I n~~ncvr:. Ixc. ?DR14 h I Cir1~S ~l:1 G_~- `~>iii~ ~~p $~tar~,o 1~58~ Nvvcmber 14,293 h.. ti. I~YlA44f,;. i,'~~Y ,~:;'.ti°; lre?2~t,.-~-niic~;Cr;~ift<cr!~,~:,_~!ri Exhibit C -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 ~. ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~- .~ ~, ~~ ~- ®~ Exhibit C -Page Z CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19, 2006 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone all of the subject property to R-8. 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; Council fmds that single-family residential uses are allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8. Medium Density Residential permits the establishment of residential uses and is designed to protect the integrity of residential development by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible nonresidential uses. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land will be developed with lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to the proposed zoning designation. 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 maybe 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 fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. 5. The annexation is in the best of interest of the City (UDC 11-SB-3.E). The R-8 zoning amendment will provide lots that aze similaz in nature to existing subdivisions in the near 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. 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, Council finds that Annexation and Zoning of this proneriy to R-8 would be in the best interest of the City, 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: Exhibit D -Page 1 CTI'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 19 2006 1. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Council finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Council generally supports the proposed plat layout and proposed density as they comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section 8, of the Staff Report. 2. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; Council fords that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See fording Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings for more details.) 3. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. 4. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; The Council relies upon comments from the public service providers (i.e., police, fire, ACRD, etc.) to determine this finding. (See finding "Items 3 and 4 above under Annexation Findings above, and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B for more detail.) 5. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and City Staff originally had some concerns about Lot 6, Block 1, and how the future residence will be somewhat isolated from the rest of the development. Such areas tend to have an increased crime potential. However, this situation is not much different from homes at the end of cul-de-sacs, and therefore should not create a safety problem. Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis. Council should reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems. 6. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, Council fords that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Council references any and all public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance. Exhibit D -Page 2 March 31, 2t~6 AZ OS-Ob 1 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING Apr114, 2~6 APPLICANT Una Mas, LLC ITEM NO. ~ 9 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing firom March 21,2006 -- Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.55 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Una Mas - 3475 East Ustick 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 $CWOOL 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 PreWoua Hem Packet / AAfnuFes OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented trt public meatin~ shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 31,2006 AZ 05-064 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Tuscany Development, IrtC. ITEM NO. 2~ REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006 -- Request for Annexation and Zoning of 116.81 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision -- south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: OTY 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 Previous Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations /Findings Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: .. Materials presented at public meetings shad become properly of ihs CNy o! Meridian. March 31, 2006 PP 05-0b4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEEtING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Tusc4ny Development, Inc. ITEM NO. Z1 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from March 21,2006 -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 321 building lots and 34 common lots on 116.81 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision -sou#h of W. Overland Rd 8~ west of S. Stoddard 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 Previous Item Pack®t / Mlntrtos See attached Recommendations / Findings Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. March 31,2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Tuscany pevelopment, Inc. ITEM NO. 22 REQUEST Request for a Variance to exceed maximum block lengths in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Greek West Subdivision -south of West Overland Road and west of South Stoddard 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 SCWOOL 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: VAR 05-026 COMMENTS See attached Recommendations / Findings Date: Phone: Staff initials: Materials presented at pubpc meeflngs shall become properly of fhe CNy of Meridian. March 31,2006 VAC OG-00 ] MERIDIAN CIIY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2006 APPLICANT Creek5lde, InC. ITEM NO. 23 REQUEST Vacation of a drainage easement between Lots 2 sand 3, Block 18 of Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 - 2484 East Garber Drive AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: GITY PLANNING bIRECTOR: See attached Findings 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: tdo Comment NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See attached Comments SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubUc meetings shall become properly of the Ctiy of Meridian. • CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~r. ~~~J~®~ ~ ~~ ~ Mp, ~ 3 d 200 ~~ .. ~ ~ r F _~ ''~` f'~"BY' tip ~~~~~ ~ ~' I ~, ~r~ ~ ~~~~ ~a ~u~:ar~c~ '''°'- 4'x1:1;. In the Matter of Variance request to vacate a drainage easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 Case No(s). VAC-06-003 For the City Council Hearing Date of: Apri14, 2006 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of April 4, 2006 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 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-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). VAC-06-003- PAGE 1 of 3 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will impose expense upon the public if proposal is allowed. 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 all in the attached findings in the Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's request to vacate the platted drainage easement located between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 is hereby approved. 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 maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 By tion of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of / Z , 2006. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CA5E NO(S). VAC-06-003- PAGE 2 of 3 L .J COUNCIL MEMBER SHAUN WARDLE COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIItD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) ATTEST: G. BERG, Copy served upon: VOTED ~Jr~/~=~i''`~ VOTED_ ~~~~C/ VOTED__~~~C~ VOTED__~~~ VOTED Mt~YOR"P e ~ f ~~ ~ ~~ ~" ~ ~ s ~ - ~~E JR , C ! CLE *~ s 6 \.c `. /~ Applicant ~~Y~rttoreo aenai~~° ~r Planning Department ~~ Public Works Department / C'ity AttnrnP.V B Dated: ~'- ~.D -~~p City Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). VAC-06-003- PAGE 3 of 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AN~ONING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HG DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: Apri14, 2006 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Josh Wilson and Mike Cole 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 Vacatio • VAC-06-003 . ~ ,,', ~' F~~ r ~s° ~7~ ~t ~ !~ ~` ~ ~ _~ ~~ ; ~ ~. k ,~~, 4;4; n '~r~~ 6 Vacation of a drainage easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, of Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 Staff has reviewed this submittal and offers the following comments: APPLICATION SITMMARY The Applicant, Creekside Inc, has requested the City's consent to vacate a platted drainage easement located on the property line between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision No. 3. The applicant has completed a Property Boundary Adjustment on the subject lot line and in order to keep the property drainage easement consistent with the property line, the current easement must be vacated and a new easement be dedicated. The site is generally located north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road, and the street address is 2484 E. Garber Drive. Creekside Inc and Chambers Construction are the owners of record of the parcels on which the proposed easement to be vacated lies, and both parties have submitted notarized consent for the subject application. The Unified Development Code 11-SA-l, requires the City Council to be the decision making body on vacations applied for in the City of Meridian. SURROUNDING USES North -Agricultural, zoned RUT South -Residential, zoned R-8 East -Vacant Commercial land, zoned C-G West -Residential, zoned R-8 CONDITION OF APPROVAL (VAC-06-002) 1. The City of Meridian Public Works Department has no concerns on the proposed vacation, provided that a new easement is dedicated along the adjusted lot line. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of application VAC-06-003, with the condition noted above. EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS A. Drawings 1. Area requested for vacation Champion Park Subdivision No. 3 Vacation VAC-06-003 PAGE 1 CTl'Y OF MERIDIAN PLANNING ANLj ZONING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HING DATE OF APRIL 4 2006 A. Drawings 1. Area requested for vacation S~ '~~ G 6 Q~ ~ tip0 1..e~ai ®e~cri 'ern yv ~~8 ~ ,~~ of ~, Block 18 - DPainage Easement Wacation G~~y, o,~G ~° Champion P'arPc Scsi~isron h1o. 3 4 ~'~ An easement tying in Lot 2, Block 18 of Champion Pane Subdivision Na. 3, as shown in Book 93 of plats on pages 11149-11153, records of Ada County, Idaho, and lying in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Toworlship 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise AAeridian, Ada County, Idaho, mare partoa~tarty described as followrs: BEGINNING at a % inch diameter iron pin marking the southeasterly comer of said Lot 2; Thence N B6°08'58° W abng the southerlg/ boundary of said Lot 2 a distance of 5.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said southerly boundary N 23°33°50° E a distance of 135.01 feet to a pa~It on the northerly boundary of said Lot 2; Thence S 66°09'00° E along said northerly boundary a distance of 5.00 feet to a inch diameter Iran pin marking the northeasterly comer of said Lot 2; Thence S 23°33'50° W along the easterly boundary of said Lot 2 a distances of 135.01 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 675 square feet and is subject to any other easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC oNP~'-ANo February 95, 2006 I y~ ~ ~~R ~- ~ < a 11118 0 9 r ~ rlo6 s° ,~ <~y rF a F ~9~' S~ ToN W . N~'~ '~'`~~'~ '~~~~~'~~~ Champion Paris LLB ``~~°"'~`~d°"° Lot 2 Easement Vacatlon Job No. tIS-tJ4 Exhibit A - 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AN~ NING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HG DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 L~aO ®~SCPOII~~'®lr8 Lot 3, Block 18 - ~rainag~ Ea~nt ~Pa~fon Champl®n dark guh~ivl~ion too. 3 An easement lying in Lot 3, Bloc 18 of Champion Park Subdivision No. 3, as shown in Book 93 of plats on pages 11149-11153, records of Ada County, Idaho, and lying in the SE 1/4 of Section 32, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, tdaha, more particularly described as folkwvs: BEGINNING at a '/z inch diameter iron pin marking the southwesterly comer of said Lot 3; Thence N 23°33'50" E along the westerly boundary of said Lot 3 a distance of 135.01 feet to a % inch diameter iron pin marlting the northwesterly comer of said Lot 3; Thence S 66°09'00" E along the northerly boundary of said Lot 3 distance of 5.00 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly boundary S 23°33'50" {lV a distance of 135.01 feet to a point on the southerly boundary of said Lot 3; Thence N 66°08'58" W along said southerfy toundary a distance of 5.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 675 square feet and is subject to any other easements exbsting or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC February 15, 2006 ~.~»r1 ~l~.tl;i~rlt~ ~.i imm saes mm c~uurmro Champion Park LLA Lot 2 Easement Vacation Job Na. 06-04 Exhibit A - 2 March 3 ] , 21~b AZ 05-058 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING Agri{ 4, 2006 APPLICANT Todd Campbell ITEM NO. 24 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Annexation and Zoning of 49.95 acres ftom RUT to gn R-8 zone for Keego Springs Subdivision -- 5910 North Black Cat Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See csltached P>EZ Item Packet /Minutes See attached Recommendations /Findings Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. r ~ 1~,ECEI~IE~ MAR 3 1 2006 ~:ity Df i~Ieridiazb ~gty C~~ierk ®ffiice CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ,. ,~ . ~'..'~ --~~~, ~i~~ ~~ s, ir~.~ ~;. °`~~~ In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning of .43 acres from RUT to L-O (Limited Office) by 5trada Bellissima, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-06-002 For the City Council Hearing Date of: Apri14, 2006 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 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-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-002- PAGE 1 of 3 CJ 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 Apri14, 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: The applicants request for Annexation is approved subject to the Development Agreement in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 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 maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. E. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 2006. day of CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-002- 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 VOTED ~'° ~~'~ VOTED--~~'G~ VOTED_ cJ~~~J VOTED__Z~~~-- VOTED MA'YO~.,~' as ®`ede WEERD ATTEST: ~..~`~~,'~~ ~A'''% ~ ~ ~ ~ rye ~ t LIAM G. B RG, JR., L~ ~~ Co served u on: A licant ~'''~~~°~'~~ ' ~+`~~~~,`` pY p pp aaaaraaa! safteet~~ Planning Department Public Works Department ~- City Attorney B Dated: 4" ~ ~ ~d ' Clerk's Office CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-002- PAGE 3 of 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 STAFF REPORT City Council Hearing Hearing Date: 4/4/2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Josh Wilson, Associate City Planner SUBJECT: Strada Bellissima Outparcel • AZ-06-002 ~_ J ~ yyY -t;~~., . C'~' S]B- ~~~A~ f~ j - ~~ ,~ ~ <<~ i. •~~ ~, ~^~, ~~ ~'~e:re ~ -~" T Annexation and Zoning of .43 acres from RUT to L-O zone 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Strada Bellissima, LLC, has applied for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of .43 acres from RUT (Ada County) to L-O (Limited Office). The site is surrounded on three sides by land zoned as L-O which was approved with Strada Bellissima Subdivision, and the annexation and development of this property will complete the proposed office development which was conceptually presented with the subdivision approval. The site is located at 3015 S. Meridian Road, near the intersection of S. Meridian Road (SH 69) and Victory Road. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on March 2, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval. a. Summary of Public Hearing: i. In favor: Chris Hobbs 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 After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number AZ- 06-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of Apri14, 2006, with the following modifications to the proposed development agreement: (add any proposed modifications.) Deny After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number AZ-06- 002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 4, 2006, for the following reasons: (you should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation request.) Continuance Strada Bellissima Outparcel AZ-06-002 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI~ EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number AZ- 06-002 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: 3015 S. Meridian Road Section 24, T3N Rl W b. Owners: Strada Bellissima, LLC 9560 W. Pebble Brook Lane Garden City, Idaho 83714 c. Applicant: Strada Bellissima, LLC 9560 W. Pebble Brook Lane Garden City, Idaho 83714 d. Representative: Chris Hobbs, Pinnacle Engineers e. Present Zoning: RUT f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute an annexation as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-SB-3, a public hearing is required before the City Council on this matter. c. Newspaper notifications published on: February 13 and 27, 2006 d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 8, 2006 e. Applicant posted notice on site by: February 20, 2006 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Existing residence b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Approved as part of Strada Bellissima Subdivision for office uses along Meridian Road, with a single family residential development on the remainder of the property. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Strada Bellissima Subdivision, zoned L-O. 2. East: Strada Bellissima Subdivision, zoned L-O. 3. South: Rural properties, zoned RUT (Ada County). 4. West: Strada Bellissima Subdivision, zoned L-O. d. History of Previous Actions: None. Strada Bellissima Outparcel AZ-06-002 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: Already serviced through Strada Bellisima #1. Location of water: Already serviced through Strada Bellisima #1. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: None. 3. Flood plain: NA 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities. 5. Hazards: None known. 6. Proposed Zoning: L-O 7. Size of Property: .43 acres g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): 25 feet on Victory Road. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: NA 3. Percentage of site as open space: NA 4. Other landscaping standards: NA 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 an existing public roadway (W. Galvani Drive) and commercial drive aisles within Strada Bellissima Subdivision. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On February 10, 2005 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present included: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The subject property is currently designated `Low Density Residential' on the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The City approved Resolution No. 04-0454, which amended Chapter VII, Section 1, of the Comprehensive Plan to include the following language: "At the discretion of City Council, areas with a Residential Comprehensive Plan designation may request office uses if the property has frontage on an arterial street or a section line road and is 3 acres in size or less in size." In this instance, no Strada Bellissima Outparcel AZ-06-002 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 ancillary commercial uses shall be permitted." Staff fmds that the subject property has frontage on an arterial street, Victory Road, and is less than 3 acres in size (.43 acres). According to Resolution No. 04- 0454, the subject parcel is eligible for an office use/zone, if the Commission and Council find the zoning is appropriate for this site. Please see the following facts and circumstances and the Special Considerations below for further analysis of the proposed zoning designation. 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 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 properties. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed in the following manner: • Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the developer s expense. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian Rural Fire District. Once annexed the lands will be under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire Department. • The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Ada County Sheriff's Office. Once annexed the lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD). • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway District (ACFID). This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. • 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. • "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B) Staff believes that the proposed zone, which allows office uses, does contribute to the variety of uses in this area. Provide for non-exclusive residential zoning that allows for low-impact neighborhood commercial areas to develop in residential districts. Develop standards to regulate neighborhood commercial uses to minimize the impact on the integrity of the residential district (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 7). The proposed development will be restricted to professional and medical offices uses through the Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The office uses will have aloes-impact on the Strada Bellissima Outparcel AZ-06-002 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 surrounding properties and will not compromise the integrity of the surrounding residential district. The project will take vehicular access from W. Galvani Drive, and will not disrupt the nature or character of the neighborhood. Staff finds that the proposed L-O zoning designation is harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and the recent Comprehensive Plan text amendment. 9. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists personal and professional services as a Permitted Use in the L-O 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 office development. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. Special Considerations: Victory Road Access: Per the applicant's conceptual site plan, no direct lot access to Victory Road shall be allowed. This will minimise traffic interference and impact on Victory Road. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (prepared on December 12, 2005 by Stephen Lee, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. 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 Citv Attornev Bill Narv at 888-4433 to initiate this process within 18 months of City Council approval of the annexation request The DA shall incorporate the following: • All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. • The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. • Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. • No direct lot access to Victory Road shall be allowed. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of AZ-06-002 for Strada Bellissima Outparcel as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 4, 2006 based on the Strada Bellissima Outparcei AZ-06-002 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 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 fmdings consistent with this recommendation. 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Conceptual Site Plan (dated: December 13, 2005) B. Approval Comments 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 Strada Bellissima Outparcel AZ-06-002 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 A. Drawings 1. Conceptual Site Plan (dated :December 13, 2005) 7.14 SEI~t~.Ag 17/1$~'d ILICOi}iPi:mNF~t~GIa.A~if~Q~7aa.Ix 61Gi®haesad Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIFfG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 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 Citv Attorney Bill Nary at 888-4433 to initiate this process within 18 months of Citv Council approval of the annexation request The DA shall incorporate the following: • All future uses shall not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. • All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. • The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service extension. • Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape imgation. • No direct lot access to Victory Road shall be allowed. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Public Works has no concerns with this annexation. All comments will be reserved for during the plan review process for any proposed development. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %i" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3. All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 4. All common driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide. 5. Provide a ZO-foot wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 6. For all Fire Lanes, provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 7. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 8. Fire lanes and streets shall have a vertical clearance of 13'6". This includes mature landscaping. 9. Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 10. Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction. 11. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards cross section requirements and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. These measurements shall be based on the face of curb dimension. The roadway shall be able to accommodate an imposed load of 75,000 GVW. 12. Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 13. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 14. Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 15. Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy. 16. The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 17. The applicant shall work with Planning Department staff to provide an address identification plan and a sign which meets the requirements of the City of Meridian sign ordinance at the required intersection(s). 18. All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 19. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface as measured around the perimeter of the building. 20. Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 21. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). a. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 22. There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all Fire Department connections. 23. Buildings over 30' in height are required to have access roads in accordance with Appendix D Section D105. 24. Emergency response routes and fire lanes shall not be allowed to have speed bumps. 25. Buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet (9144 mm) or three stories in height shall have at least three means of fire apparatus access for each structure. (Remoteness Required) 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 1. The Police Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 1. Standard for Mitigation of trees: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. 2. Standard Plan for Protection of Existing Trees during Construction: The standard established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance (UDC 11-3B-10) will be followed. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 6. SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY 1. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 1. No comments received. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 C. Legal Description A pazcel of land located in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Baise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at an aluminum cap monument marking the southeast comer of said Section 24; theace along the South line of said Section 24 (also being the centerline of W. Victory Road] N89°20'S2"W a distance of 213.69 feet to a point of curvature from which an aluminum cap monument marking the southwest comer of the Southeast 1/4 of said Southeast 114 hears N89°20'S2"W a distance of 1106.41 feet; thence Ieaving said South line and continuing along said centerline of W. Victory Road along the arc of a 200.00 foot radius curve to the right having a length of 137.23 feet, a central angle of 39°18'48" and a long chord of 134.55 feet bearing N69°41'28"West to a point of tangency; thence N49°37'30"W a distance of 41.65 feet to a 5/$ inch iron rod; thence N49°32'S0"W a distance of 16.41 feet to a 518 inch iron rod marking the POINT OF BEGIIVNING; Thence continuing along said centerline of W. Victory Road and the arc of a 319.41 foot radius curve to the left having a length of 113.32 feet, a central angle of 20°19'39" and a tong chard of 112.73 feet bearing N56°41'35"W to a point of cusp marked by a 5/8 inch iron rod on the boundary line of Strada Bellissima Subdivision No. 1 as shown on the plat thereof, eecorded in Book 93 at pages 11265 through 11268 of plats, Ada County, Idaho; thence leaving said centerline and along said boundary line N00°43' 18"E a distance of 73.24 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod; thence S89°47' 19"E a distance of 189.?8 feet to a S/8 inch iron rod; thence SOS°36'09"W a distance of 56.62 to a 3/8 inch iron rod; thence S28°IO'13"W a distance of 30.42 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod; thence S56°12'13"W a distance of 92.17 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 18,89? sq. ft. or 0.43 acres more or less and is subject to any and all easements sad/or rights-of--ways of record or implied. 0006123 09 ANKEX LEGAL 1121205 ~rLdoc Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA~NNIP"G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 2006 z~ oN f!! <- °m NN _~~ rn ~~ ~a ®,,~ Q< °' Y 6 m EXHIBIT "B" ANNEXATION ®F' A PORTION OF THE SEI/4 OF THE SE !/4 OF SECTION 24 TOIPNSHD? 9 NORTH, RANGE 1 1PEST, BOISE MERIDIAN CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2008 STRADA ®EUJSSIMA SUI3DI1/ISION BOOK 93, PAGES 11265-11268 _ _ _ _ 589_47'19°E 189.78' _ _ m I~1 z ~~ `°1a ;.~~N 18,897 sq. ft. o i min $' ~ 10.43 acres y Z1 ~H ~ Q a c~~~ ® ~ • '~p~•p~ ~ l~,\ ,o:u*~ 3 ~ ~9 m \ 'lfs •L SC o m ' 6 j~~ ~r~ ~~ ~1 ~s~ \ ~/ q I ~ GHi . N39' 7'56°E • ~ 25.09' N49'32'S0'~1t ~ N49'37'30°W ' 16.41 Gf 41.65' r ~ I o~~ c ' I vi ~o ` `~ 3~? qp ~~'d'AS ~~o o s A~ ~B r3 ss. ~_ ,~- - - . 1 fob. 41 _ _ _ - - -f' ~~ 24 19 N89°20'52"~ 1320.10' E1/16 COR 25 130 sECTiON 24 A/892052'2~Y C.P.BcF. 9018193 213.69 ~,~,'+GEND C.P.&F. 9149709 ~ 5N£sf; - _ - CI~CXEU~Y In NNS NATE t2-12-0 X-1 a~~N ~: ~ ~ _ - .. sue: ~ ' _ PG~T-NA. ~ 1 eg0 0 P.p.B. ST SECTION UNE BOUNDARY UNE ROAD CENTER UNE FOUND ALUMINUM CAP FOUND 5/8" REBAR AS SHOWN FOUND BRASS CAP IiD RICHT-OF-WAY MONUMENT CALC POINT (NOTHING SET) POINT OF BEGINNING ADA BELLISSIMA pUT PARCEL ANNE7KATION EXNI®IT Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIIQ'G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF APRIL 4, 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 L-O. City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plant. 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 personal and professional service uses are allowed within the requested zoning district of L-O as a Principally Permitted Use. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; City Council fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 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 fmds 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 (LTDC 11-SB-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, City Council_ fmds that Annexation and Zoning of this property to L-O would be in the best interest of the Cites Exhibit D March 31, 2006 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 4, 2(~6 APPLICANT ITEM NO. Z$ REQUEST Public Hearing -Amendments to the Pawnbroker Ordinance AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER pEPT: 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 Ordinance MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See a#tached Le#ter from Meridian Coin 8 Pawn ~ Bennv's Pawn Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.