Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-20~IXGisi 1OS'~ 7U~' ~U ~J~C`G /V °~~f, ~~G/h(=~ r CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 20, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. `Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba Charlie Rountree Joe Borton Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Kohler with the LDS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Recognition /Appreciation to Jacob Walters, Joanna Walters, and Johnathon Sullivan: 6. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 16, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 06- 008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~ ~ Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 043 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.51 acres from R-R to R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06-045 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 73 residential building lots consisting of 46 attached single-family units and 27 detached single-family units and 6 common/other lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 06-020 Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block length allowed under UDC 11-2D-3C for Spurwina Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: G. Approve Transfer of Owner Applications for Dave Edmark dba Andrades at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue to Dave Edmark dba Super Pollo Mexican Grill at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue: H. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Waltman Court /Ten Mile Drain: I. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irriaation District for Sutherland Farm No. 3 /Ridenbauah Canal: J. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irriaation District for Sutherland Farm No. 5 and No. 6 /Ridenbauah Canal• K. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irriaation District for Sagecrest Subdivision /Hunter Lateral: L. Award Bids and Approve Contracts for 22 Packages for New Water Department Building: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • M. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile, Nine Mile, and Ten Mile Drains: N. Approve Comments Letter to ACRD regarding Five Year Work Program• O. Award Bid and Approve Contract for Mower Bid for Parks Department to Campbell Tractor Company for $40,785.00: 7. Department Reports: A. Police Department: 1. Discussion of Department Re-organization: 8. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: 9. FP 07-002 Request for Final Plat approval of 120 single-family residential building lots and 13 common lots on 34.74 acres in an R-8 zone for Solitude Subdivision No. 2 by Solitude Development, LLC -SEC of McMillan Road and Meridian Road: 10. FP 07-003 Request for Final Plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 7 common lots on 12.00 acres in an R-8 zone for Shepherd Creek Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc -West side of Meridian Road, approximately'/2 mile south of Overland Road: 11. Continued Public Hearing from February 13, 2007: MI 07-001 Request fora Miscellaneous application to Modify the existing Development Agreement to allow all C-N permitted uses on lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 25 of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 6 for Cedar Springs Professional Center by Lynn Brown - 710, 730, 750 & 790 West Ustick Road: 12. Public Hearing: RZ 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O-T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Pro a by Paradigm Real Estate Holding - 39 W. Pine Avenue: 13. Public Hearing: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O-T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 - 911 N. Meridian Road: 14. Public Hearing: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 15. Public Hearing: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi-family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi-family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common /other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L-O zone for Waverlv Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: 16. Public Hearing: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for amulti-family development in a L-O zone for Waverlv Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • a j ~; R~~~:, . .~ r CITY OF 8` It• ~ ~ 3. _~ •~ ~Y1'G~IG~"YI ~~ ~y IDAHO ,j s ~j e~, e,"~ ~TRr..tiyZmeV1~Y f6~GI. LJ CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, February 20, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. `Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter." 1. Roll-call Attendance: _~ David Zaremba ~_ Charlie Rountree 2. Pledge of Allegiance: Joe Borton Keith Bird ~_ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Kohler with the LDS Church: ~r,PJ~f-r~-- 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~~rmv~C d ccS !^ev~~cd~ 5. Recognition /Appreciation to Jacob Walters, Joanna Walters, and Johnathon Sullivan: ~,~~~ ~~ Ch~lc~ l~i,,,aLc~.r~ 6. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 16, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting: ~~rv„a~ B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 06- 008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Ofi•ice /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: ~~vw~ C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: ~,~~~ D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 043 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.51 acres from R-R to R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: w~~ E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06-045 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 73 residential building lots consisting of 46 attached single-family units and 27 detached single-family units and 6 common/other lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: ~v~c., F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 06-020 Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block length allowed under UDC 11-2D-3C for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: a?r'I~'r~H-cam G. Approve Transfer of Owner Applications for Dave Edmark dba Andrades at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue to Dave Edmark dba Super Pollo Mexican Grill at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue: ~~~~ H. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Waltman Court /Ten Mile Drain: ~l~..o~ I. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 3 /Ridenbauah Canal: aye J. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 5 and No. 6 /Ridenbauah Canal: ~~ K. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sagecrest Subdivision /Hunter Lateral: ~;~'~ v~ L. Award Bids and Approve Contracts for 22 Packages for New Water Department Building: w~~,,~0~ Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • M. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile, Nine Mile, and Ten Mile Drains: ~-o~ N. Approve Comments Letter to ACHD regarding Five Year Work Program: c~r~r~- O. Award Bid and Approve Contract for Mower Bid for Parks Department to Campbell Tractor Company for $40,785.00: .~p~~-- 7. Department Reports: A. Police Department: 1. Discussion of Department Re-organization: ~ , d,~r~~w~.c... acc.~p7i mac. re~~..cd'¢ ~~ /~-Or~an~ ~ 8. Items Moved from Consent Agenda: 9. FP 07-002 Request for Final Plat approval of 120 single-family residential building lots and 13 common lots on 34.74 acres in an R-8 zone for Solitude Subdivision No. 2 by Solitude Development, LLC -SEC of McMillan Road and Meridian Road: ~p~,,,~ h~ ~ ,~- 6 `p ~ 10. FP 07-003 Request for Final Plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 7 common lots on 12.00 acres in an R-8 zone for Shepherd Creek Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc -West side of Meridian Road, approximately'/z mile south of Overland Road: ~y~,~,h,'° v,.,~ 11. Continued Public Hearing from February 13, 2007: MI 07-001 Request fora Miscellaneous application to Modify the existing Development Agreement to allow all C-N permitted uses on lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 25 of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 6 for Cedar Springs Professional Center by Lynn Brown - 710, 730, 750 & 790 West Ustick Road: ~~~®v~- 12. Public Hearing: RZ 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O-T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Pro a by Paradigm Real Esta a Holding - 39 W. Pine Avenue: Ce~~.-~i'h~-c. ~ ~ti. ,/.~ 2 - 2~ -v 7 13. Public Hearing: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O-T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 - 911 N. Meridian Road: C vri7~r+.vi.v ~Ol~i., ~ 2- Z 7... 0 7 14. Public Hearing: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: C~Yrti~•-v ~!~ fo 2-Z~~O7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 15. Public Hearing: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi-family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi-family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common /other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: ~~.~,.,;u,~, `~ 16. Public Hearing: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for amulti-family development in a L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: «-~ih,~w~Blt- {~ 2-2 ?-0 7 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -February 20, 2007 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. • • Meridian Citv Council Meeting February 20, 2007 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:10 P.M., Tuesday, February 20, 2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Joe Borton, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and David Zaremba. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Bill Musser, John Overton, Ron Anderson, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Charlie Rountree X X Joe Borton X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. We will go ahead and call this meeting to order. Thank you all for joining us here tonight. It is Tuesday, February 20th. It's five minutes after 7:00 o'clock. We are joined tonight by Flat Jake. Flat Jake is from Covina, California, and he's been hanging out with me today. So, just if -- in case you wondered who our friend is up here, it's just Jake. We are recording this. Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, kick us off with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item 2 is our pledge of allegiance. Tonight we are going to go be pled or lead -- pled -- by two young gentlemen who are accompanying their dad tonight, Bishop Jeff Kohler and his sons -- and I didn't get their names. Dallen and Seth. If you will all rise and join Dallen and Seth in the pledge of allegiance. (Pledge of allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Bishop JefF Kohler with the LDS Church: De Weerd: Dallen and Seth, I do have some pencils and, of course, Councilman Bird always gives candy to our young helpers. So, I will give you the healthy stuff. He will give you what your daddy gives you permission to do. Thank you so much. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by the father of those two young gentlemen, Bishop Jeff Kohler with the LDS church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Kohler: Our Father in Heaven, as we begin this City Council meeting this evening, we give thanks to thee for the blessings of our lives. We are thankful to live in this community and we are thankful for the relative peace and prosperity which we enjoy as Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 2 of 31 • citizens here. We are thankful for this land in which we live that allows us the freedom to assemble and the freedom of worship. We are thankful for the blessing it is to be citizens of this United States of America. As this meeting begins tonight, Father in Heaven, we ask thee to bless our Mayor and her associates here on the City Council with wisdom as they guide our city and lead us. Bless that the discussions and reports tonight will be civil and respectful and that we will all work together towards improving the quality of life here in this fine city in which we live. We ask thee to bless those men and women who are serving our country overseas and in harm's way, that they will be protected and that our leaders will be able to make this a world of greater peace and love without so much war. We say these things and we ask this prayer in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you, Bishop. If I could, I have a gift for you as well for joining us. It's not a pencil. It's a -- thank you. Okay. Item No. 4 is the adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On our regular e under Department Reports, Mr. Rountree would like a Council department report, so we will have an Item B there. Item No. 9 has been asked to be continued to March 6th, 2007. And, Item 12, has been asked to be continued to February 27th, 2007. And with that I move we approve the revised agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as revised. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIES: ALL AYES. Item 5: Recognition /Appreciation to Jacob Walters, Joanna Walters, and Johnathon Sullivan: De Weerd: Item No. 5. I think you all might have read about this story in the newspaper, that we would invite Deputy Chief Silva or Chief Anderson. Anderson: Madam Mayor, Council, we are honored tonight to recognize three of our own local heroes from here in the community and I'd like to tell you a little bit about what these three individuals did -- or two of the individuals and Darcie is the fiance of the third individual. But on February 6th at approximately 4:40 p.m., 13 year old Jacob here was on his rollerblades on his way over to his friend's house. While he was en route to his friend's house he saw smoke coming from the garage of a neighbor's house. He went back home and convinced his mother that she needed to come look for herself, C~ Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 3 of 31 because she didn't believe him. So, I'm assuming that she might have questioned him a little bit there. When they amved back at the house and confirmed that there was, indeed, smoke coming out of the house, then, Joanna returned back and dialed 911 and called the fire department. In the meantime, there was another gentleman who lived in the neighborhood, who was on his way home from work and that was Jonathan Sullivan and he saw Joann and Jacob in the street looking a little frantically, so stopped his pickup and got out to see what was wrong and found out that the house was on fire. So, he first looked through the front window and saw that things were array and so he entered the house and low and behold the occupant Dawn Tucker, was back in the bedroom and was sound asleep. Didn't know that her house was on fire. So, Jonathan quickly made it through the house and found Dawn and woke her up and both her and her dog exited the home and about that time the fire department and the police arrived and in the haste of starting to attack the fire nobody got Jonathan's name and Jonathan, being kind of a shy individual, he just kind of disappeared and he got in his car and left and so, then, the search was on for this heroic individual who had stopped and rescued this woman from this burning house fire. And so we ran an ad in the paper and a couple days later we found out who that hero is and, unfortunately, again, Jonathan -- I don't know if this is on purpose or not, but he couldn't be with us tonight, so his fiance Darcie is here to accept a plaque of our appreciation on behalf of him. So, first of all, it's to Jacob and, Jacob, you are exactly the kind of young citizen that this community loves to see and we appreciate all you did and thank you for your heroic action. And, mom, thank you for getting involved and for believing in Jacob and thank you for calling 911. And, Darcie, if you'd take this home and give this to Jonathan and give him a great big thank you from the fire department. De Weerd: We would certainly like to echo the sentiments of Chief Anderson and thank you for joining us here tonight and thank you for getting involved. It's too often that people turn a blind eye to what's going on to not get involved and, Darcie, I think the Statesman appreciates that you read the stories and that you're willing to turn him in. So, we appreciate it. It does take an entire community to continue to make this a premier place to live and it's citizenship like has been demonstrated in this story that makes Meridian the place it is. So, thank you for joining us tonight and we appreciate what you have done. And thank you. Item 6: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of January 16, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 06- 008 Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 to C-N zone for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU 06-002 Request for Modification of the approved Conditional Use • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 4 of 31 Permit /Planned Development to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition by Farwest, LLC -south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06- 043 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.51 acres from R-R to R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 06-045 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 73 residential building lots consisting of 46 attached single-family units and 27 detached single-family units and 6 common/other lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Spurwina Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 06-020 Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block length allowed under UDC 11-2D-3C for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership -Northeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard and west of North Spurwing Way: G. Approve Transfer of Owner Applications for Dave Edmark dba Andrades at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue to Dave Edmark dba Super Pollo Mexican Grill at 2031 E. Fairview Avenue: H. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Waltman Court /Ten Mile Drain: I. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 3 /Ridenbauah Canal: J. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 5 and No. 6 /Ridenbauah Canal• K. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sagecrest Subdivision /Hunter Lateral: Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 5 of 31 L. Award Bids and Approve Contracts for 22 Packages for New Water Department Building: M. Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile, Nine Mile, and Ten Mile Drains: N. Approve Comments Letter to ACRD regarding Five Year Work Program• O. Award Bid and Approve Contract for Mower Bid for Parks Department to Campbell Tractor Company for $40,785.00: De Weerd: Okay. Council, Item No. 6, our Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published and the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest on all papers Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba: yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Department Reports: A. Police Department: 1. Discussion of Department Re-organization: De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 under Department Reports. We will tum this over to the Chief. That's Chief Musser. The other Chief. Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my report consists this evening of informing you of some planned changes I have been looking at in the police department and in getting your approval to go ahead move forward. Just as an update, I have met with the Mayor on this and with my Council liaison at this point and with our HR director as well, through the planning stages. The chart that I have up right now is currently how Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 6 of 31 the police department is organized. I have a fairly flat organization with four lieutenants right now -- De Weerd: This flat? Musser: Just about that flat. And what I'm looking to do is to start moving forward, so that I take the patrol division, which is on the far side over here, almost kind of shaped like our little guy that you have right there, and combining them in with the detective division, which is over on the far right-hand side of the diagram, and combining that division into one division that will be known as field services. There is a couple of reasons why I'm looking at doing that right now. Number one, I would like to have watch commanders available on the shifts. This will allow us to have lieutenants that we could place directly out as watch commanders on the shifts. So, for instance, the lieutenant that would be on the day shift would be responsible for all the day teams, the sergeants would report to him, and he would be the guy there in charge to be able to follow up on complaints and that type of thing as they come in. Just expand it out for us as we continue to grow. Same thing on the swing shift. And, then, finally, into the graveyard shift as a -- as we get there. What I'm looking to do at this point -- if we can go to the next chart -- is from March what I'd like to be able to do is to initiate the first of what will be three phases with this reorganization and as you can see, field services now has all of the patrol folks combined in there with the detectives at this point. I will still have a criminal investigating -- criminal investigations lieutenant at that point. Currently that position is occupied by Lieutenant Gene Trakel, who has made his intention quite clear that he intends to retire come July 20th and what I'm doing is holding him in that position at this point with that unit as we move forward. In the meantime, the watch -- the watch commander position for the day, I'm looking at Lieutenant Bob Stowe occupying that. And, then, my other lieutenant would be from a promotion, would be Staff Sergeant Tracy Basterrechea, who we had -- I had come before this Council about ayear -- a little over a year ago and requested to be able to promote him to a staff sergeant position so we could begin training him and getting him ready to move into an eventual position as a lieutenant with the department. After Gene retires out of his position as the CID lieutenant, I will be looking to come forward into the next fiscal year to be able to fill his position, that open lieutenant's position, and with what will be the final lieutenant to round out that area. In the meantime, utilizing the services of Lieutenant Overton with community services, his area won't change a whole lot, except that it really continues to grow with all the different things that we are doing in town and he's been doing an outstanding job with that section over there. A lot of our bread and butter, though, right now is in-field services, so I'm looking to change that structure and I would like to promote a captain. We still have a captain's position within the city. It hasn't been filled for about a year, year and a half, maybe as long as two -- two years at this point, but I need to be able to bring that back in, because what I'm looking at is as the field services area grows and we continue to spread out over time, I need to have a good operational manager in there and I do have a lieutenant tabbed for that appointment at this point and that would be Lieutenant Jeff Lavey for that captain's position. If we could go to that third chart, Anna. The third chart that I have here shows ultimately where I plan to be able to get to as we enter into our third phrase on this. As Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 7 of 31 you can see, we do have the three watch commanders across the top. The light colored one there is the grave watch commander. We have the team structured out and one of the things that we are looking to do with detectives is to separate out the detectives, so that we have both day coverage and a swing coverage, so we have better investigative resources available around the clock. We are not just relegated to 8:00 to 5:00, Monday through Friday on it. I'm also looking at moving the SROs under the community services area. It is a community services project that we have with the SROs. That area will continue to grow. We have another middle school coming on this fall and my budget will so reflect the expansion we will need to be looking at in that area as well. Ultimately, this is what we had been envisioning. In looking at -- I started on this project back in September to look at the different mechanisms that were available, see how best to realign the department in terms of where we needed to go down the road. Considering that the City of Meridian is continuing to grow, even though the residential may be down a little bit, we are continuing to grow and we will continue to see an upswing in other growth coming in, in particular in the commercial arena, and looking forward to when the Ten Mile interchange is in and the development that will bring that changes a couple of corridors in town to a whole different focus for the police department. So, part of what I'm doing is being able to set the stage here at this time to put some key folks into place to be able to set the structure up as we grow, so that we can also accommodate that new focus as we become much more of aself-sufficient city by 2010. And what I mean by that is that in the past we have to rely upon some commercial and industrial items from other cities, Nampa and Boise in particular, but we are starting to see it come in in the Ten Mile corridor with the new interchange, will allow us to have that and it changes how we do policing here in the City of Meridian. Predominately it's been residential policing that we have had to do and what I'm trying to do is set the stage so we can plan for that future and be able to accommodate the different types of growth that we are going to have and different types of problems that we will see at that time. Now, the bottom line -- and I know you'll like the bottom line on this -- is what it's going to cost. Overall what I'm looking at at this point is I can implement this and be able to go with the two key promotions that I need, which would be Lieutenant Lavey and Staff Sergeant Basterrechea to implement this here in March. And the initial cost that I have on that at this point is just under 10,000 dollars. As I do the 10,000 dollars and I plug that into our financial budget sheets that we have from our financial department, with the FICA, the PERSI, the workmen's comp, all of that added in there, the overall expenditure that we are going to be looking at is roughly 14,970 dollars. I can accommodate it in the current budget that we have set at this point, because of the number of officers that were authorized for hiring in the first two months out of this year. We did not have all those officers on. I already have over 60,000 dollar savings within the current budget and that is something I did address with finance on it, they don't feel that an amendment would be necessary at this point, as long as the authorization to move forward within our current budget was approved by the Council, which is part of the reason why I'm here tonight, to present this to you and see in this is the direction you would like to see me go or not. And I'd stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 8 of 31 Borton: I have none. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Chief, all I can say is if you want to go this way, let's go with it. You've got the money in the budget, I'm for it. Musser: Okay. I appreciate that Councilman Bird. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, my comment would be that you're ability to look ahead and forecast what you need is excellent and appreciated. Musser: Thank you, Councilman Zaremba. I appreciate that as well. De Weerd: And I think the chief has sat down with his senior management and they have tried to work out all the bugs and I think there were bugs, but they have been worked out and I think this is a good, strong, positive forward step and one that will accommodate and respond to the direction the city is going. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I don't know if we need a motion or not, but it is on and appreciating what Bill's put together prior to my taking over the liaison position with the police department, it's kind of nice to have all of this hammered out already, but I would move that we accept a request from the chief to move forward with the reorganization structure and with the budget proposed and start the implementation process. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the structure as presented. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba: yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. City Council Report by Councilman Rountree. De Weerd: Okay. Item B is a City Council report by Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I received a letter from the Idaho Transportation Department requesting Meridian to become a participating agency in the Idaho 16, I-84 to Idaho 44, Environmental Study. What that, essentially, means is that we would participate in that process in the coordination meetings, development of the coordination plan, which includes the scheduling of the project activities, provide comments on purpose and need, the range of altematives and practicability of various altematives and also the Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 9 of 31 • identification of what issues that alternatives might have for the City of Meridian. In any other planning activities that we might be involved with it could either affect or aid any of the proposals that they are bringing forward. I bring this forward, because it was a letter requested -- written to me and it's also been cc'd to the planning department and just get a read from the Council on whether or not you want us to be a participating agency and, if so, they have requested that we respond in writing either way, I guess, whether we are or are not going to be a participating agency. I don't think there is any financial requirement, other than some staff time and I have already been volunteered to be the coordinator with the agency meetings on this anyway, so Pete and I have been going to the meetings that they have already held kicking this off and would continue to do so. So, any feedback? De Weerd: Council, any comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I have no problem. I think it's a good idea. I mean it's going to impact us tremendously and we need to -- we need to definitely have a voice in it. After it hits Chinden it's ours and I think that we do need to be involved and if Charlie is volunteering to do it, I think that's great. De Weerd: Me, too. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, two comments, if I may. One, I think we have all received notice of it, but tomorrow ITD is having an open house at the Idaho Center. I believe the hours are from 3:00 to 7:00. Rountree: 3:00 to 7:00. Zaremba: Something like that. And at a quarter after every hour they are going to have groups get together and discuss this very subject separately. I intended to go on my own to one of those sessions. We are all invited to it. And I think it's excellent that they are starting. That's my first comment. My second comment is that back somewhere near a year and a half to two years ago now, when the Planning and Zoning Department had an open public house regarding expanding our area of impact to the north and the west, a lot of people along the McMillan comdor came to that meeting and were very interested in Meridian being involved in making the decisions that -- even though the actual projects may be a long way off, they want to know what's going to happen with their property. So, I do encourage Meridian to participate in this any way we can. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Rountree, you are -- • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 10 of 31 Rountree: I take that as a go, so if I could have Anna's ear, possible have Pete respond in the affirmative, that we will participate and you can identify who on your staff would be attending and I assume it will be Peter Mapp and myself and anybody else who wants to tag along. De Weerd: I will stick with 20-26. Rountree: Okay. One's enough. De Weerd: And Ten Mile. Locust Grove. Thank you. I appreciate, Mr. Rountree, your interest and willingness to be involved. Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 9: FP 07-002 Request for Final Plat approval of 120 single-family residential building lots and 13 common lots on 34.74 acres in an R-8 zone for Solitude Subdivision No. 2 by Solitude Development, LLC -SEC of McMillan Road and Meridian Road: De Weerd: And Item 9 has been requested to continue to March 6th. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, do we need a motion for that? De Weerd: Yes, please. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I'm move we continue FP 07-002 to our regularly scheduled meeting of March 6, 2007. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 9 to March 6th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10: FP 07-003 Request for Final Plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 7 common lots on 12.00 acres in an R-8 zone for Sheuherd Creek Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc -West side of Meridian Road, approximately'/2 mole south of Overland Road: De Weerd: Item 10 on FP 07-003. I do have a letter from the applicant agreeing with staff conditions. Anna, do you have anything you would like to add? Canning: No, ma'am. • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 11 of 31 De Weerd: Okay. Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Director Canning, I need clarification. Since this last left the Planning and Zoning Commission, where it was I last saw it, the Planning and Zoning Commission was very concerned that the roadway should connect to Meridian Road, State Highway 69, and that does not appear to be required by what we are looking at. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, the City Council did decide not to require that connection to Meridian Road. So, the final plat that's before us tonight is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. Zaremba: All iright. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve FP 07-003. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from February 13, 2007: M107-001 Request fora Miscellaneous application to Modify the existing Development Agreement to allow all C-N permitted uses on lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 25 of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 6 for Cedar Sprincts Professional Center by Lynn Brown - 710, 730, 750 & 790 West Ustick Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 is FP 07-003. Bird: That's what we just approved. De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. Continued Public Hearing on MI 07-001, Item 11. Anna. Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 12 of 31 Canning: Madam Mayor, just for the record, too, there was a mistake on that former one that referenced Item 9. It was Item 10. I think it got to that, though. This is the Cedar Springs Professional Center project. It's located on the north side of Ustick and east of Venable Lane, the blue highlighted parcels you see there. They are currently zoned C-N. The request before you tonight is a modification to their development agreement. The applicant requests that all principally permitted C-N uses be allowed on Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8. And, again, those are highlighted for you. You can also see them probably in the landscape plan. Those four buildings kind of rimming this side of this project. Currently only office uses are allowed, despite the C-N zoning. So, they are requesting now the C-N zoning, which is in line with the neighborhood center concept. Certainly, the applicant proposed the office uses as a restriction upon themselves at the time that it went through, but we ask for the C-N zoning to allow for additional uses as time went on. So, those structures -- we do have building permits, just so you know, on all of them. This is the one that faces Meridian (Road. And, then, this is an elevation of that one as well. And, then, these are the elevations of the other three units. So, they have begun construction on all of these and they do have valid, active building permits at this time. So, the proposal that's being -- the change that's being proposed is to modify the development agreement, Section 4.1, to add the phrase: In addition to office uses, all principally permitted C-N neighborhood business uses shall be allowed on Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 25, of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 6. That's the only change. Staff is recommending approval. To our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council and we have received no written testimony since the staff report. And I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Just a comment. This is a nice development. I mean it is -- I was probably not one of its biggest fans when it came through with the Maverick and it is -- it is a very nice development. Is the applicant here? If you could pass on my comments to your clients. It's turned out to be a very nice asset for our community. Fluke: Thank you. I'm happy that you like it. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Darin Fluke, JUB Engineers, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, representing the applicant. When we initially went through it was intended and anticipated that all of those four buildings that you see there would be strictly office. Those buildings are about 5,000 square feet, which allows them to be quartered into spaces of about 1,200 square feet, more or less, as sort of flex office space and many of the -- many of those buildings or many of those spaces will still get used as office space. My client just seeks some additional flexibility in allowing other uses that are allowed within the C-N zoning designation, to be allowed in there. I don't recall how we got to that point where we said there would only be office in there. That's what they intended at the time for those four buildings, but, apparently, market conditions are such that they'd like a little additional flexibility. That's for my client. What the city gets in return is a more complete commercial zoning designation in this location. It will allow other things, like small specialty retail shops, such as a video store or a coffee shop or a pastry shop, whatever, to go in more in line with -- in keeping with what the C-N zone is intended to do, which is to make it so that people don't have to get in their car every time they need to get a gallon of milk or they want to go to the bookstore, they can walk there from Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 13 of 31 where they live. It's a high quality development in terms of appearance, as you have noted, and that will not change, of course, with this. What you see is what you get. As far as the buildings go, this is just to allow a wider diversity of land uses within those buildings that are being built. So, we'd simply ask for your approval and I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Fluke: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to offer testimony on this application? Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Not hearing anymore, I move we close the Public Hearing MI 07-001. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 11. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. If there is no discussion, Council, I need a motion. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve MI 07-001. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba: yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian Ciry Council February 20, 2007 Page 14 of 31 • Item 12: Public Hearing: I~Z 06-013 Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to an O-T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Pro a by Paradigm Real Estate Holding - 39 W. Pine Avenue: De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 also has been requested to continue. I will go ahead and open the Public Hearing on RZ 06-013 and I believe this was a request by the applicant; is that correct, Anna? Or posting? Canning: Madam Mayor, it was a posting error. The site is posted for next week currently, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 12 -- or continue Item 12 until 2/27/07. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 12 to next week. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: RZ 06-014 Request for a Rezone of 15.58 acres from an R-4 zone to an O-T zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 - 911 N. Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 13 is a Public Hearing on RZ 06-014. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Joint School District No. 2 project. It is around their administrative offices, which are located at the northwest comer of Meridian and Pine, as you know. The application before you tonight is for a rezone from the R-4, as shown here, to Old Town and that would be rezoning 15.58 acres. The purpose being to sell a portion of the property for commercial and office uses where the existing offices are now. I don't have my laser pointer out. Sorry about that. These are the existing offices along Meridian Road. And, then, this is the old Pine Street school, which I will discuss in a moment. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their January 18th, 2007, Public Hearing. Shari Stiles spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition. Wendell Bigham from the school district commented. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 15 of 31 • relocation of the old Pine Street school house onto the elementary site. I think what was proposed at the Planning and Zoning Commission was that there was an older home on the site that would be removed and they could move this old Pine Street school onto that property. They also discussed a change in address for the elementary school from State Street to West 1st Street. So, here is 1st Street coming into the property that basically provides the entrance. State Street is over here and, actually, the school does not have frontage on State Street currently. Or -- yeah. State Street. So, the key changes from stafFs initial recommendation were to require a development agreement. The provisions of that development agreement would be -- there is just two of them. The first one would be that the old school house building shall be moved and maintained on the Meridian Elementary School parcel prior to development of the parcel along the northwest comer of Pine and Meridian. And that re-addressing of Meridian Elementary shall be coordinated with emergency services and planning staff with the address change happening after school lets out for the summer of 2007, prior to school resuming in the fall of 2007. So, those are the only two provisions of the development agreement. Just before the hearing the applicant's representative did inform me that they would like to not have a development agreement, so there is that as an outstanding issue before City Council. And we have not received any written testimony since the staff report. With that I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, what's your thought on a development agreement? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, given that it is another public agency, it seems awkward at times to require a development agreement with them, but I think that the Planning Commission did recognize two issues associated with the site that did need to be addressed. If there were something else to tie them to, that would be a possibility, but I don't think that the school district has any definite times on when they'd like to move the old Pine School house and, then, the readdressing is just kind of the right thing to do regardless and I think we could probably get to that one in another fashion, but the applicant did point out that we are currently in a -- have an agreement regarding the Pine school building and that may just need to be redone and we could just trust that the readdressing gets done, because it's the right thing to do for everyone involved. De Weerd: You're mumbling and -- Canning: I'm song, ma'am. De Weerd: -- Dean doesn't like that. Meridian Ciry Council February 20, 2007 Page 16 of 31 Bird: I was going to say, you're becoming a very good politician there. You're circling the question. We are supposed to do that, not you. Thank you, Anna. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary, do you have anything you would like add on that point? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that was discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mr. Bigham was there. He didn't have an objection with it. I agree with Mrs. Canning that sometimes with public agencies it ends up being awkward and we end up re-titling it or something else that suits their purposes, but if you're comfortable that we can get those few things taken care of, that's certainly within your prerogative. If you want to make sure that it gets accomplished in some reasonable fashion, a DA is really your only method to do that, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to comment? Stiles: Shari Stiles, Engineering Solutions, 1029 North Rosario in Meridian. De Weerd: Oh, you have moved. Bird: Beautiful office, too. De Weerd: Finally opened. Stiles: Open for business. De Weerd: When is the ribbon cutting? Stiles: Spring. So we can have our barbecue out and get the bar set up and everything. De Weerd: Okay. Welcome to Meridian. Stiles: Thank you. De Weerd: Or welcome back to Meridian. Stiles: Thank you. I do have a copy of the agreement. Unfortunately, I didn't get copies made, but that agreement was entered into in May of '94 between Grant Kingsford and Dan Mabb and the reason we would like to dispose of the development agreement requirement is this is pretty specific. It does have a clause at the end that either of the parties to this agreement may terminate it by first giving the other party 60 days prior written notice of intent to terminate the agreement. This is the only fashion in which this agreement may be terminated. And it sets out that -- what the school will do and what the city will do. I don't know if any of you recall that agreement, but it probably needs to be either terminated and rewritten or -- we would hate to encumber the plat with a development agreement, because that shows up in all the title reports. The city Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 17 of 31 and the school district may decide that's not the place that they want it in the future, it's not all that visible there, and, you know, you may have more of a historic area that you want to relocate with museums or something like that. But, yeah, it is an encumbrance on the property. I thought that we could take care of it -- that the Mayor or her designee would amend that agreement and work together to come to an acceptable agreement. I don't know if you need to come back before Council or -- but we would like to do that. I think we have a good working relationship with the school district. Of course, we have no problem getting that new address figured out. We will get Tricia Shindel in Public Works Department and get a new address for that, so they are prepared, so they can print new checks and letterhead and all that. I think those were, really, the two issues that we would really not -- we would really appreciate not having to have a development agreement. Of course, the other reason being that by the time that property is sold and someone wants to get a building permit, it's all going to be done, you know, and it's -- that's my reasoning for requesting that we not be required to have the development agreement. De Weerd: Okay. Stiles: That's it. If you have any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Shari, I guess the addressing issue I don't have a whole lot of heartburn with. The agreement that you referenced, really, isn't an agreement or a contract at all. So, my only concern is as we sit here now there is no assurance as to what's going to take place with that school house. I don't know what type of authority you have to bind the district, so to speak, but at this time about what he's willing to agree to and if there is something that needs to be written up between the city and the district, not necessarily a development agreement, but a redo of what you have referenced. Do you have anything you can comment or offer on that or -- Stiles: Well, it is very specific as to what will be done. You're saying that this is not an agreement. Borton: Well, if you can terminate it -- Stiles: For no reason -- Borton: I mean we agree to it, unless we don't agree to it, and, then, we don't agree to it. De Weerd: Leave that to an attorney to point that out. • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 18 of 31 Stiles: Mayor de Weerd, Councilman Borton, Councilmen, I guess I would hope that the city felt comfortable enough that they would get this resolved without unnecessarily encumbering their property that's no longer going to have this -- I mean it's got to go somewhere. Borton: Right. Stiles: And they were -- you know, if the city owns the school and it's on their property, but to forever say that they are -- that that lot is encumbered by instrument number whatever, recorded in Ada County, and they go and look at it and say what are you talking about, it's a school. I mean if this is something that you would like to wait a week or put it out a week, so Wendell can be here and make adefinite -- I don't know what the Mayor's schedule is like. I'm sure they want to get it taken care of as soon as possible. Borton: I don't necessarily have -- I don't have any problem with it, I was just curious what your response was and what your position was. I feel comfortable with that situation. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: And, Ms. Stiles, I guess my question would be -- I agree that between public agencies, you know, a hand shake and a smile probably should be good enough. I'm assuming -- maybe I'm reading more into this -- for one thing, this agreement, apparently, is 12 years old and nothing has happened. There is no deadline or timeline on it, I guess. But, then, the other thing that I'm assuming is that the school district plans to separate this parcel off and sell it separately. Is that -- is that what's happening? Stiles: Councilman Zaremba, Mayor de Weerd, Council, they are doing a properly line adjustment. I don't know if you had a copy of it in your -- in your packet, but it -- do you happen to have that, Anna? Zaremba: Yeah, I do have that. It does say that they would like to offer the property for sale. So, I guess my comment would be we would not be encumbering the school district, we would be encumbering this new piece of property and I personally don't have a problem with that. Stiles: I don't believe they would be able to sell it with a building that is not owned by them. Zaremba: So, you're saying they have to move the building anyhow in order to -- • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 19 of 31 Stiles: Yeah. I mean there is no choice. Zaremba: Yeah. I can see that point also. De Weerd: And, Council, I guess if it remains a question, we could have myself and maybe Mr. Nary get together with the school district and try and bring something back to you next week, if that -- if that puts this particular item to rest, we could come back with more details and -- on what could possibly happen. But I would look for your direction on that. Certainly, this could be continued to answer some of those questions. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess my take on this -- it's a matter of timing. Shari indicated in something in her testimony that it's going to happen. I don't know what that means in terms of timing, if it's going to happen in the next six months, I'm sure a development agreement isn't necessary, but if it happens, like all good things happen between two governmental entities, and it's five years from now, who is going to be here to remember who agreed to do what? And that's my concern, so -- Nary: Me and Will. Me and Will will be here. Rountree: Will and Bill. Bird: Will and Bill. You might be close to being senior by then. Rountree: So, I don't have a bit of a problem if we can work out an agreement with the school district, so we have records of what the agreements were, but I know Councilman Bird and I have some stories about agreements past that have not proved out too well. So, whether it's a development agreement or refreshment of the language that was done 12 years ago and turning it into an agreement about this property. I'm fine with that, so if you want to wait another week or two, that's great. De Weerd: I do like your terminology of refreshment. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would agree with Councilman Rountree, because we have been bit a few times. I'm sure people say we bit them. I could wait a week. Let's get this thing worked out. I think you offered up a great suggestion. You and Bill get together with whoever they want, their attorney and something, let's get one drawn up that's pretty in the sand. I just want to make sure that it happens and gets done. I don't want to be five years from now, you know. Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Anna. ! ~ Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 20 of 31 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if Mr. Nary might comment for us. Is it okay that the Mayor be part of that discussion, since this is an open application? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think if all we are talking about is just this particular piece of it, I'm not too concerned that the Mayor sit in on that discussion with the superintendent. I think we will be okay. The only suggestion, Council -- I mean one week is probably adequate, other than this is a short week and I don't think The Mayor may have time the rest of this week and I don't know about the superintendent. So, it might be two weeks would probably be wiser just to make sure we can have the opportunity to meet and discuss it. De Weerd: Okay. Does that work for you? Stiles: Mayor De Weerd, Council, they are anxious to get it rezoned, so I mean they have got signs up saying that it is already zoned OT, but -- and I'm sure that they would like to get this done sooner, rather than later, but I don't know if it would help if we came back with some proposed language for an agreement or -- I mean I guess I'm asking you do you think that's the best place for it and do you think it will always be there? Because a development agreement would require that it -- you know, that goes forever, unless you amended or terminated or -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I don't -- you know, they are going to set it around where they got the portables now, is that what I understand? Stiles: I believe so. Yes. Bird: It depends on what's built in there. You just brought up a very good point to me. Is that going to be the best location for that. I don't know, to be truthful with you. Depends on what they build and whoever would buy it and what they built in there. If they built something that blocked it off, you know, an office building -- an office building wouldn't, because we kind of like it out where people can come to it. You brought up a subject I didn't think about of the location. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Perhaps maybe you or Mr. Nary can clarify the issue for me, but it's a matter of the school house is owned by the city; correct? On the district property? Or owned by the district and maintain by the city, but -- Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 21 of 31 Bird: I got news today. I thought it was owned by the district and maintained by the city. That would be part of it. I can't remember, to be truthful with you. De Weerd: Mr. Berg? Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. It was a centennial project jointly done with funds that was raised for that particular project. Terry Smith could probably give you a longer history than I would, but I believe that it initially is owned by the school district and we had an agreement to help maintain that and keep it so that it was available for the public to use for special events or elementary schools to tour it or historical society to have special meetings or something of that nature. You have the other part of it, the history people part, that I'm sure would want to play some roll in to what they could utilize it for, especially if it's located in a unique spot. I wish I could call some of the other people, the guy that signed the agreement, I'm sure I could ask him a couple of questions. But I don't believe that -- you know, that it was kind of a community, everybody took part of it, but I think the school district really owned it, because it was sitting on their property. We did a lot of work to get it up to where it was. Bird: That's what I thought, too, Tammy, and I was on the committee. I felt that that was -- it was school district property -- on their property and we raised the money. There wasn't any city funds that went into it, it was strictly raised by our committee, as I understand -- as I remember, so -- but I think we can weed out some kind of agreement. I'm like Mr. Rountree, let's go back and get the thing and come back and I don't think we need a development agreement. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Not to muddy the waters, but, of course, I'm the one that always goes sideways with suggestions. Considering the apparent purpose for the refurbishment of the building and the possible future uses, if you're going to go to the effort to lift a building and put all the wheels under it and get it ready to move, the difference in cost in how far you move it I don't think is all that great and I wonder whether it might make more sense to move the building to a city park where people would be more aware of it and that it could be available for others uses, even if it became a museum. De Weerd: Well, I do believe that we have looked at that and of consideration in Meridian Settlers Park that the parks department did come back with. So, that has been an item of discussion. It seems that we probably should just see if we can get together by next Tuesday and -- I don't know what my calendar looks like, but I don't have to be at the meeting, if we just got staff together, too. So, let's see what we can do between now and next Tuesday and with both sides committed to getting together and discussing this. Okay? Bird: I'm for that. Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 22 of 31 u De Weerd: Okay. Does that seem reasonable, Shari? Stiles: Yes, it does. De Weerd: Okay. Stiles: Mayor de Weerd, Council, I just briefly would like to go through what the school is paying for or what this agreement said, since, I'm sorry, you don't have copies of it. The school pays for fire and casualty insurance, electrical power, and maintenance, water, winterization of water and sprinkler lines, janitorial service of minor maintenance, vacuuming, dusting, snow shoveling, et cetera. Scheduling of use as a Pine Street school, which includes key, checkout, opening for guests. Pine Street school groups, collecting deposits, if necessary, et cetera. The city's responsibilities were lawn care and upkeep, including mowing, edging, fertilizing, sprinkler repair, et cetera. Maintenance and upkeep, including care for the schoolhouse, outhouse -- is there an outhouse? De Weerd: I think it's the outer building. Stiles: Playground equipment, signs, steps, and ramp, repair of wear and tear, vandalism damage, window breakage, furniture repair, painting repairs, et cetera. Intermountain gas costs, liability insurance, janitorial services, exterior window cleaning, step and ramp cleaning, receiving calls for repairs or reports of damages, et cetera, which shall be relayed onto the school and shall be monitored by the school. So, there may be liability issues that, you know, they go on that you might want to look at and I will get this copy to Will, but I did get it on your website, which is fantastic. I don't think a week will make or break it, so -- I know they do have people interested in it, you know, that's a pretty high visibility comer and I don't know what's going to be left after ACRD gets ahold of it, but that's all I had. De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is nothing further for Shari -- Bird: No, I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Stiles: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Council, it looks like a continuance is in order. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 23 of 31 Rountree: I move that we continue Item 13 until 2/27/07. Bird: Second. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. You know, it is a motion that doesn't have discussion, so I will first ask for action on the motion and, then, ask for your comments. Bird: We have a second on it. De Weerd: We did have a second, Mr. Rountree. The motion is to continue Item 13 to next week on the 27th. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: It, actually, was not discussion on the motion, but I assume that it needed to be made before the motion was completed. Maybe not. My question was can somebody enlighten me on the pathway to find this document? De Weerd: Yes. You go under the clerk's ofFce and, then, you would have to go into the documents. I'd have to go in and do it myself. So, Mr. Berg will sit over there and walk you through the process. Zaremba: I will talk ofFline with the clerk and get that information. Thank you. Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 06-047 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.3 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: Item 15: Public Hearing: PP 06-049 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 6 multi-family residential building lots consisting of 24 multi-family units, 1 clubhouse building lot and 3 common /other lots on 5.3 acres in a proposed L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: Item 16: Public Hearing: CUP 06-030 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for amulti-family development in a L-O zone for Waverly Place Subdivision by Vacation Village Villas, LLC - 2510 E. Magic View Court: De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Council, Items 14 and 15 and 16 are public hearings on AZ 06-047, PP 06-059 and CUP 06-030. I will open these three public hearings with staff comments. • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 24 of 31 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Waverly Place project. It's Lot 6, Block 1, of Magic View Subdivision, which is located at 2510 West Magic View Court. It's this properly here. The applications are for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and conditional use approval for amulti-family development in the L-O zone. The highlights of the proposed development include annexation and zoning to light office, preliminary plat approval of six multi-family residential building lots. This is our best. And one clubhouse building. This is the clubhouse building. Maybe this is a better one. Here is the clubhouse building. And three common area lots. And, then, Conditional Use Permit approval is for 24 multi-family residential dwellings at six four- plexes. So, this is one set, two, three, four, five and one in the middle, so six. The gross residential density is 5.1 units per acre. It's 6.4 net density. There is a public road that comes in and loops around the project and, then, two common drives, one going by the clubhouse and one going to the northwest comer of the property. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this property is office. That designation reads: This designation will provide opportunities for low impact business areas. These would include offices, technology and resource centers. Ancillary commercial uses may be considered, particularly within research and development centers or technological parks. And, then, the last sentence of that designation as it applies to this property is additionally, as noted in the residential district section of the Comprehensive Plan, light office uses may be appropriate in limited circumstances and at the discretion of City Council. Prior to staff accepting this application we sought advice from Council. We felt that this application did not require -- that it did require a Comprehensive Plan amendment, so we brought that language to you and the Council felt that the last sentence was ambiguous enough that we needed to accept the application for you to consider as -- as itself. So, that is why it is before you tonight. Kind of as an aside, that just after you made that determination that I needed to accept this, I did submit a Comprehensive Plan text amendment that removed that last sentence that was approved and that sentence is no longer part of our Comprehensive Plan. But this application preceded that one. So, as it applies to this project that last sentence is still there. But -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have just heard from the applicant that the representative Mrs. McKay is not able to be here tonight, so they are requesting to defer the application. Do you want me to continue with the presentation or would you like me to redo this presentation at a later time? De Weerd: Council, I think we have a lot of people here tonight that are interested in this application. What would be your direction? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Did I hear you correct to defer to the applicant? Canning: Yeah. I think they want to continue it. I was not -- they had not stated a date. De Weerd: I guess, Mr. Nary, if you could give us what the options are and -- Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 25 of 31 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, certainly it's not uncommon and you have had some items on your agenda tonight that they have asked for a deferral or a continuance to a later date for a variety of reasons, sometimes it's posting, sometimes it's other reasons. It's not as common to get that after the presentation has begun, but it is within your discretion either way. Certainly, if I heard Mrs. Canning correctly, what was stated to her was that Mrs. McKay isn't delayed, she wasn't able to be here tonight and I guess I'm not certain why that wasn't brought to your attention prior to the meeting, but if she's delayed we can certainly take a recess, but if it's a fact that she's unavailable this evening, that's, again, within your discretion to hear this matter or continue it to another time. You certainly have the ability to hear the testimony of the folks that are present, but it does tend to be a little difficult from the Council's perspective to make a decision when you hear part of the testimony and, then, have to come back. So, it's solely your decision. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, apparently it is a delay. We can try and meet -- try and reach Mrs. McKay on her cell phone and have a time estimate for you if you'd like, but we don't have that information yet either. De Weerd: Okay. Well, why don't we call a fove minute recess. We will be able to better know what the time elements are. We will reconvene at 8:20. (Recess.) De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and reconvene the City Council meeting. We are considering Items 14, 15, and 16. The applicant's representative is not able to be here, she had another hearing, but I guess at this point we do have a room full of citizens who would like to provide testimony. If you would like to provide testimony this evening, we will certainly ask to have that testimony for the public record, with the understanding that this will be continued per the applicant's request to take their testimony at the next meeting. So, I guess I would just leave it to the citizens and provide them the venue to provide testimony this evening, just with the understanding that the decision will not be made tonight. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I might be alone in this particular perspective, but with respect to the citizens that are here, I've not necessarily decided one way or another whether I agree to continue it, in light -- and maybe we need some explanation on the record with what's taken place. If it's a situation where, you know, a couple of items got scheduled a week ago to be on the same night and it could have been something that we and the citizens could have been warned might create a conflict and cause problems scheduling, I'm particularly sensitive to that and I'm not necessarily in a rush to continue it, while I might be inclined to do so, I'd be curious to have -- and maybe Ms. Stiles can make some Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 26 of 31 C7 comments on the record really as to what took place and where Mrs. McKay is and how that schedule got crossed and sometimes there is traffic issues that make you late and sometimes there just might be poor planning, so if you could give us just a nugget of really what -- the cause of the snafu here. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Borton. I would never say that I would make a decision for you. Stiles: Shari Stiles, Engineering Solutions. Councilman Borton, Mayor and Council, unfortunately, Becky and I were in Council meetings in separate cities the same night. One thing got continued to the 20th and she also got her job in Star continued to the same night. She was first on the agenda in Star tonight. She wasn't -- didn't know how many neighbors would be out. She knew that she did have some opposition. We were hoping that we could get our presentation and go on. We have most of the people that have signed up are for the project. I do believe we have one or two or three people that are not in accord with the -- like, for example, the subdivision association for Woodbridge and the people immediately adjacent to the north. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I don't mean to belabor the point, but was it a situation where, you know, Mrs. McKay had intended to be in Star tonight the entire night or was it the intention that she was going to be in Star the first part and, hopefully, be here by 8:25, to do this one tonight? I mean was there any intention for her to be her tonight? Stiles: Yes, there certainly was. Yes. She wanted to make the presentation and she's all prepared, because it's been a long time since we submitted this application. So, I guess I'm asking if you will allow the people that know the project intimately, they have been involved for many many months on this -- with this project, they don't really need a presentation as far as the people that are pro this project, but in order to give the full presentation and may perhaps deal with some questions -- I'm not sure what would come up, but we would like to have them speak and get that on the record, so they don't have to come back another time. But it definitely was her intention to be here tonight. Borton: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Well, Council, if you feel comfortable taking care of -- or taking citizens testimony prior to the official presentation by staff and applicant, we can do that and perhaps Mrs. McKay will join us. Perhaps. Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? Was Anna -- was she done with her presentation? Let's let her finish her -- De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 27 of 31 Nary: Madam Mayor, just as long as it gets -- the public, if they choose to testify, the intent of the Public Hearing is to give them some opportunity to both -- if they have some rebuttal testimony in opposition to the project or if they have testimony in favor of the project, as long as the people that are in opposition recognize that if they choose to testify tonight, without the full presentation by the applicant, without a thorough discussion by the applicant, they are not going to get another chance to testify later. So, if they want to testify tonight, they won't have another opportunity to rebut whatever is brought up by the applicant, because they will have exhausted that time tonight, that's up to them. But I mean their -- as long as they understand that when they choose to do that out of order than what the normal course would be. De Weerd: Okay. So, as long as that's clear. If you provide testimony tonight, that that would be your testimony provided. That is what you said, Mr. Nary? Nary: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Nary: Sounds just like a lawyer, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Oh, frightening. Stiles: Mayor and Council, I really appreciate your indulgence and I do apologize. It is a nice project. I really like this project and Iwould -- the neighbors are very happy and it's a very good product and I think that the product is needed in that area. So, thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I think we have been clear as mud so far. But the general order or the typical order of our process is the staff introduces the project, the applicant presents the project in detail and, then, we ask for citizens comments, both for and against. Because the applicants' representative or spokesperson is not here to give their full presentation, we are kind of going about this disjointedly, but we want to recognize and respect your time. For those citizens that would like to provide testimony this evening, we certainly will accept public testimony, with the understanding that this will be your public testimony if it's continued, again, until next week, that this is your one and only chance for that testimony. So, with that said, is there any members of the public this evening here tonight that would like to provide testimony on this application? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, can I ask a question? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Perhaps it would help the individuals make the decision whether they want to speak tonight if we committed to the date we intend -- or at least expose the date we intend to continue it to. If we are talking about next week and somebody is aware that Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 28 of 31 they are not going to be available next week, they may want to speak tonight. If that's the date that we are aiming for, I think it would help them decide whether or not they can come next week. De Weerd: Okay. Mrs. Canning, did the applicant give an indication as to when they would like it continued? Canning: No, ma'am. Also, I would like to finish my presentation before the public testimony, just so that they are briefed what the project is. De Weerd: Without the representative here to hear it? Canning: Yes, ma'am. I don't know how they'd comment on the application without understanding what it is. De Weerd: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Maybe what would be the easiest is if you took -- if you had anybody who indicates that they wish to speak tonight, based on the proposed day of the week, if that's what they -- and, then, you could make the motion to continue and you could still -- after knowing -- and taking -- excuse me. Then, taking Mrs. Canning's statement and the testimony. If no one here wants to speak tonight, you could set it all over and we could be done in two minutes. But if there are folks out here that do want to speak, then, at least we would know. De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony this evening and would like the staffs presentation first? You don't want staffs presentation first, but you would like to provide testimony? Okay. Then, please, come forward. If you will, please, state your name an address for the record. Beers: Sure. Thank you, Mayor. My name is Matt Beers and my address is 669 South Crosstimber Avenue in the Woodbridge Subdivision. De Weerd: Thank you. Beers: Thank you. De Weerd: I'm sorry to make this so complicated. Beers: That's okay. It's not too complicated. You know, I think on the list when I was signing in I was the only one who signed up against and my reservations are pretty limited in knowledge, so, you know, I don't have a whole lot of data to really back it up, Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 29 of 31 but I will say that from a homeowner standpoint, the only meeting that I was aware of and able to attend was in the fourth quarter of last year and it was at the Meridian Police Department with the builder and he brought along another builder who had a proposal that would be contingent on this project going through and it was -- so, we had these vacation village that would come in and I think the catch would be that we would have some assisted living that would go in immediately to the south, in the property to the south. So, one of the concems I have as a homeowner is that there is a domino effect that potentially could go through if the zoning changes. You know, first of all, we may not have any guarantees that what vacation village is proposing will actually transpire and, then, secondly, that, you know, we -- I think -- at least from what I heard at the police department was that this idea of assisted living, which sounds really great, you know, low rise building, all the things that we hope and desire, sounded more like it was targeted specifically for, you know, our benefit without any real -- you know, it's not part of this proposal or application you're going to get, so I was nervous about that and immediately skeptical. And, then, as far as, you know, what I have heard in terms of notification so far, we had a brief flyer that got posted at the entrance and exit to the Woodbridge Subdivision and I got something on my door that has a pros only list and I imagine they are all in business in some way or another and, you know, a pros only list is immediately something to bring caution to mind. When I first moved into the subdivision three years ago I had an expectation that, you know, this would be zoned as the office space zoning that it is today and it was part of the decision, certainly not the whole decision, as to why I moved in there in the first place, but it was part of the decision as to why I wanted to live there. I thought that that would be the buffer between me and Eagle Road. You know, having another housing subdivision, even if it's 25 units, that's an additional 50 cars, roughly, that may come back now through my subdivision on the weekends when my kids are out playing or, you know, when I'm commuting, the same time I'm commuting in the morning and the evening and those are all undesirable factors given the traffic situations we already have today, entrance -- ingress and egress in and out of our subdivision. So, those are concems that I have. I think, you know, the way it's been presented so far it's all pros, no cons. I certainly don't have a problem with the 35 foot -- as it was described in here, 35 foot tall buildings, two story structures, if they are medical in orientation, you know, I think like the last time you guys had a proposal to approve or not approve housing in that area, I don't have a problem with that. It's what my expectation was originally. These aren't view homes, so what we would be looking, you know, unnecessarily, is more interior to the subdivision, not exterior or outside of it. I think that that's originally what, like I said, I signed up for, what I hoped for, and what I hope you all decide for in terms of where we are going. So, I don't know if that's right for comments or not, but this is the first time I have ever testified to a group like this, so -- De Weerd: You did just fine. Beers: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Did the applicant have a date desired to continue this to? • Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 30 of 31 Canning: The applicant is requesting one week. De Weerd: Okay. Again, to the public, we apologize for the day. I will offer another opportunity if there is anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application, we would entertain your comments. Okay. Seeing none, Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: In continuing it would it be appropriate to ask that it be the first hearing on the agenda? De Weerd: It certainly would. Mr. Berg, can you accommodate that? Berg: Yes. De Weerd: Good answer. Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we continue the public hearings for AZ 06-047, PP 06-049, and CUP 06-030, all pertaining to Waverly Place Subdivision to our regularly scheduled meeting of February 27th, 2007, with a request that they be placed as the first public hearings on the agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 14, 15 and 16 to next week on February 27th. All those in favor say aye. Borton: No. De Weerd: I haven't asked for no yet. All those opposed please indicate. Borton: No. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. De Weerd: Okay. Council that is the end of our agenda. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. r: Meridian City Council February 20, 2007 Page 31 of 31 Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:35 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: \\\11,~IIIIIII~r~~~ `~ `~. MAYOR MY de WEERD ;' ~~~ ~~` ~~;~~,~~`~~ ~ "" ~:,r: -,; ~g-~.~ .~ A TED• • 3 ~ 2~~ 07 DATE APPROVED ~® ~~~ ~ 9~~ ~A~I G. BERG Jet., ,~~l~~flill 1111111\' CLERK • February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. S REQUEST Recognition /Appreciation to Jacob Walters, Joanna Walters, and Johnathan Sullivan: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~,~,,, ~- ~~~ ~~ OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. • Meridian Fire De artment • P Memorandum Date: February 13, 2006 To: Mayor and Members of the Council ~;~ From: Joseph Silva, Deputy Chief EEC 9 ~ ZOQ7 RE: Citizen Action on February 13, 2007 City of Meridian City Clerl~ ®~gioe Madame Mayor and Members of the Council The Fire Department would like to recognize three citizens whose quick thinking and swift actions prevented a fire that had started in the garage of a house located on 1967 NW 11 ~' from becoming a fire with a possible fatality. On February 6, 2007 at approximately 4:40 pm, 13 year old Jacob Walters was on his roller blades on his way over to a friend's house to play. While he was enroute to his friend's house he saw smoke coming from a garage of a neighbor's house. He went back home and convinced his Mom that she needed to come and look for herself if she didn't believe him that he thought the house was on fire. She got to the house and banged on the front door, then called 911. At this time Johnathon Sullivan was driving home on NW 11~' when he saw a woman and a boy looking a little frantic. When he noticed the smoke coming from the garage he jumped out of his truck to see what was going on. He asked the boy is there was anybody inside, Jacob responded that he wa.s unsure. Johnathon ran to the front door and looked through the window to see exactly what was going on inside of the house. When it looked ok to enter he did so and began yelling for anyone who maybe in the house. At that time he only heard the dog barking, so he started to do a room by room search. As he opened the first bedroom door a woman appeared from her room at the end of the hallway. He told her that the house was on fire and she needed to get out. After a short delay to grab her car keys, she and the dog followed him out to the front yard. At about this time, Johnathon left the scene to go home without speaking to the Fire Department or Police Department. The swift actions of these three individuals insured the timely evacuation of the house and prompt notification of the Fire Department. With that, their actions prevented the possible loss of a human life. Therefore on behalf of the Meridian Fire Department and the City of Meridian we proudly present these certificates of appreciation for a job well done to Jacob Walters, Joanna Walters and Johnathon Sullivan for their quick thinking and decisive actions in preventing a possible fatal fire on this day February 6, 2007 • • Page 1 of 1 Sharon Smith From: Joe Silva Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 3:00 PM To: Sharon Smith; Will Berg; Tara Green Cc: Ron Anderson Subject: Citizen Recognition for Fire on NW 11th Attachments: Citizen recognition Letter NW 11th by Chief Silva.doc 2/15/2007 February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of January 16, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. February 16, 2007 RZ 06-008 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT FarWest, LLC ITEM NO. 6-B REQUEST Findings for Approval -- Request for a Rezone of 8.96 acres from R-4 to C-N zones for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial Addition -- south of Chinden Boulevard and west of North Linder Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Attached Findings 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 • N i ~_ ;4 e('QV -rid j~ k it f b _'_ ~ 1 `. ~~~ ,~~, ~~•. - In the Matter of the Request for Rezone of 8.96 acres from R-4 to L-O (7.20 acres) & C-N (1.76 acres) zones and Conditional Use Permit Modification to Remove the Requirement for Detailed Conditional Use Permit Approval for Development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, by Farwest, LLC. Case No(s). RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 For the City Council Hearing Dates of: January 23, 2007 & February 6, 2007 (Findings on the February 20, 2007 Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 ~ ~ 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Elevations, and the Conditions of Approval, all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Rezone as evidenced by having submitted legal descriptions for the L- Oand C-N zoned properties, stamped by Wayne K. Barber, PL5 and dated 12/21/06, is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The applicant's Conditional Use Permit modification to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, is hereby 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 February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 ~1 1L _ ~ M By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~© ~ day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED__~~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED-~~~~v COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIltD VOTED_~~~~-' MAYOR TANIMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., Copy served upon Applicant, Attorney. .~~~~~~ Mayox,~ de Weerd ~~~` .> '- v A ~® ~~~a ;rk ~ ~ ~' ., ~ \o, The Planni4~g, ~~~ ~~ ~„~~'gx~;~~ublic Works Deparhnent and City By: ~ Y l ~1.~1 ~~ ~1'1~`~,~ ~J Dated: (~ Z~ ZZ~`l City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 i T ~. , - ,~' STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: February 6, 2007 ~ <'FT~w aa~ I~~ ~t ;: (Continued from January 23, 2007) = ~ ~~ ~~ ~ .,~ a TO: Mayor & City Council , tin'-~~, ~~ i, ~ ~~ FROM: Sonya Wafters ~~~F~~ ~~ Associate City Planner +, Meridian Planning Department 884-5533 SUBJECT: Lochsa Falls Office/Commercial Addition (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Sub. 12) • RZ-06-008 Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 (Medium-low Density Residential District) to C-N (Neighborhood Business District) zone. • MCU-06-002 Modification of the Conditional Use Permit approved for Lochsa Falls Subdivision to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12. 1. SUIVIMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Farwest, LLC, is requesting approval to rezone Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, from R-4 (Medium-low Density Residential District) to C-N (Neighborhood Business District) so that the zoning will reflect the future commercial uses. Four of the subject lots (Lots 42-45) were conceptually approved in 2002 for office uses and one was conceptually approved for commercial use (Lot 41) through a land use exception under the Planned Development for Lochsa Falls Subdivision. In addition to the rezone application, a modification to one of the conditions within the approved conditional use permit/planned development (CUP-02-012) is also being requested to be removed by the applicant. Currently CUP-02-012 requires detailed conditional use permit approval on these lots. The applicant is proposing to remove this requirement for CUP approval. The site is located on the south side of Chinden Boulevard, west of N. Linder Road. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area and within the current city limits. These lots are within the existing Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 plat. 2. SiJMMARY RECOA~IIVIENDATION The subject applications (RZ-06-008 and MCU-06-002) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis regarding the requested Rezone and Conditional Use Permit Modification applications below. The Planning & Zoning Commission should make a recommendation to City Council on the requested Rezone and Conditional Use Permit Modification applications. Staff recommends that Lot 41 be rezoned as requested to the C-N zoning designation but that Lots 42-45 be rezoned to L-O for the following reasons: 1.) The Development Agreement approved for this subdivision allows for the construction and development of 11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" (Note: Staff interprets "buildings" to mean "lots") for the commercial portions of the development. Since the Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 C-N zone would allow for office uses as well as restaurant, retail, and a number of other non- office uses, the uses allowed in the C-N zoning designation would not comply with those approved in the Development Agreement. 2.) The Planned Development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and commercial use on Lot 41. Staff has discussed with the applicant the option of applying for a modification to the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to change the requirement for "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" to "commercial lots," which would comply with the C-N zoning designation; however, the applicant does not wish to do so and would rather pursue the zoning designations as Staff has recommended herein. Staff is recommending approval of a Rezone to C-N on Lot 41 and to L-O on Lots 42-45 instead of the requested overall C-N designation, and approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit Modification to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval on Lots 41-45. Please see Sections 8 and 9 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis, and the Findings listed in Exhibit D of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 21, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Brian McColl (Applicant's representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Jay Anderton (Representative of Challenger Schools who owns Lots 41 & 42 iv. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters v. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Cross-access to property to the east (Knight Hill Center Sub ) ii. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. Provide cross-access to the property to the east d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) (see Exhibit B condition 1.4) The Meridian City Council heard these items on January 23 2007 and February 6 2007 At the public hearing on February 6 2007 they approved the cuhiect R_7 anr~ CU reauest per the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the staff report a, i. favor: Brian Mc o 1- (ann i ant'c renre entativel ii. In onno, ition: None iii. Cowmen 'nom: None iv. Written testimony: None v. tall nresentin~ ann ication: nna a nine vi. ther staff co mentin on ann ication: None IL ev Issues of Di cu ion by o ~ncil: i. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) ii. Cross-access to property to the east (Knight Hill Center Sub.) ~. liev ~;oLnc~~ i. L~Lonc Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA1`~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers RZ- 06-008 and MCU-06-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers RZ-06- 008 and MCU-06-002 as presented during the public hearing on February 6, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the development agreement modification and/or preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: South side of Chinden Boulevard, approximately 700 feet west of N. Linder Road; Section 26, T4N, Rl W. b. Owner: Lochsa Falls, LLC 4487 N. Dresden Place, Ste. 102 Garden City, ID 83714 c. Applicant: Farwest, LLC 4487 N. Dresden Place, Ste. 102 Garden City, ID 83714 d. Representative: Justin Martin e. Present Zoning: R-4 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Community g. Applicant's StatementlJustification: The applicant states that the proposed rezone of the subject lots from R-4 to C-N zone that were originally approved for commercial office uses with the Planned Development for Lochsa Falls Subdivision will be less confusing for prospective buyers, sellers, and anyone involved in the development of this land and will allow for small-scale retail as well as office uses. The applicant further states that the proposed modification of the conditional use permitlplanned development to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval would reduce the number of unnecessary public hearings for both the Planning Commission and prospective buyers of the subject properties while still allowing for design review by Staff with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application (please see applicant's submittal letter). 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a rezone and modification to the conditional use Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 permit/planned development as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: September 18 and October 2, 2006 (Commission); January 1, 2007 and January 15 2007 (Gifu Council) c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 8, 2006 (Commission); December 29, 2006 (Gifu Councill d. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 25, 2006 (Commission); January 8, 2007 (City Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Vacant land. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The area along this portion of Everest Lane (private lane) is developing with office uses. Residential uses to the south and west of the site are rapidly being constructed. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Currently agricultural land, approved Knight Sky Estates Subdivision, zoned R-4, TN-C and C-C. 2. East: Currently agricultural land, approved Knight Hill Subdivision, zoned C-G. 3. South: Single-family residential in Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. 4. West: Future office buildings in Lochsa Falls (Hastings) Subdivision, recently rezoned to L-O. d. History of Previous Actions: - On January 21, 2003 the City Council voted to annex this property into the City of Meridian with an R-4 zoning designation (AZ-02-010). - On January 24, 2003, a Development Agreement (DA) was recorded (Instrument # 103012598) for this property. Section 4, Uses Permitted by this Agreement, of said DA allows the construction and development of 856 single family dwellings, 171 multiple family dwellings, 11 office buildings, 1 commercial buildings, 1 city park, 1 private park, and 1 future fire station lot, consistent with the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff interprets the office cP~ commercial "buildings" to mean "lots ".) - On December 17, 2002, the City Council approved a Preliminary Plat (PP-02-009) for Lochsa Falls Subdivision containing the subject property. - On December 17, 2002 the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development (CUP-02-012) for Lochsa Falls Subdivision containing the subject property. This allowed for a land use exception under the old Meridian City Code for office and commercial uses in the R-4 zone in certain areas specified on the Planned Development conceptual site plan. Condition of Approval A.3. of CUP-02-012 states: "The office lots in Block 1 and the office/commercial lots in Block 54 shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends each of these two (2) areas be submitted as an overall detailed Planned Development, which upon approval, would allow each individual lot/building to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with the overall PD concept." The conceptual site plan for this development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and a Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 commercial use on Lot 41. - On September 7, 2004, the City Council approved the final plat for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12. (NOTE: The two commercial lots directly to the west of the subject lots, Lots 46 & 47, are also within Lochsa Falls Subdivision and were recently rezoned to L-O as well. Lots 46 and 47 were also re-subdivided, and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP-06-008) was approved for the construction of eight buildings on theses lots consisting of a total of approximately 38,500 square feet of office space.) e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: There is a sewer main in Everest on the south side of this property. Location of water: There is a water main in Everest on the south side of this property. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: N/A 3. Flood plain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches/Irrigation: The Simpson Lateral which runs through Lot 43 on this site has been tiled. All other irrigation ditches, laterals and canals that bisect or lie within this site should be covered. 5. Hazards: None 6. Proposed Zoning: C-N 7. Size of Property: 8.96 acres f. .Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): 35-feet along Chinden. This landscaping has already been installed. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: N/A 4. Other landscaping standards: Other landscaping standards will be evaluated with future CZC applications on this site. g. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: A common area landscape buffer lot separates the subject commercial lots from Chinden Boulevard and no direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard is proposed or approved. Access will be provided from existing curb cuts on W. Everest Lane, a private street. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On September 15, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. No significant comments were received from any agencies or departments. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOAL5 The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as "Mixed Use Community". 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-C has an upper limit on the square footage ofnon-residential uses and is intended to allow a focused range of uses in close proximity of residential uses. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that maybe provided at the public hearing when determining the most appropriate zone for this property. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): • "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action item 5) The applicant will be required to construct landscaping which complies with the Un~ed Development Code, when the future office%ommercial buildings are constructed.. A 35 foot wide landscape buffer has already been installed adjacent to Chinden Boulevard. • "Permit new ...commercial development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of fmal approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter 1V, Goal I, Objective A, Action item 6) The subject site can be serviced by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer and water systems. • Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action item 5) The future office%ommercial uses on these lots will be accessible internally by the residents of Lochsa Falls Subdivision and indirectly by passerbies from Chinden Boulevard. The structures on these lots will be required as a condition of approval on the subject conditional use permit to be compatible in appearance with the surrounding residential properties. Stafffinds that the proposal is harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. UNI)H"IED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC Table 11-2B-21ists several uses as permitted (P) and conditional uses (C) in the C-N & L-O zoning districts. Sample uses in each of these districts are as follows: C-N: Animal care facility (P); indoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility (P); building material; garden equipment and supplies (C); church (P); group daycare (P); drinking establishment (C); financial institution (P); private/public education institution (P/C); fuels sales facility (C); health care or social services (P); hotel and motel (P/C); information industry (P); laundromat (P); mortuary (C); nursery or urban farm (C); nursing or residential care facility (C); personal or professional service (P); public or quasi-public use (P); restaurant (P); retail store (P); vehicle washing facility (C); vertically integrated residential project (C); and stealth wireless communication facility (P). L-O: Animal care facility (C); indoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility (C); church Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 (P); daycare center (P); group daycare (P); private/public education institution (P/C); fmancial institution (P); health care or social services (P); hospital (C); information industry (C); light industry (C); Laundromat (C); multi-family development (C); nursery or urban farm (C); nursing or residential care facility (C); personal or professional service (P); public or quasi-public use (P); restaurant (C); vertically integrated residential project (C); wireless communication facility (C); and stealth wireless communication facility (P). b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to streets and highways. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation REZONE ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting a rezone primarily because City staff requested that the zoning match the future uses on the property. The applicant is currently entitled to office and commercial uses as designated on the previously approved conceptual development plan, subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. The applicant has requested a rezone from R-4 to C-N zone for all of the subject lots; however, staff recommends a rezone to L-O for Lots 42-45 and C-N for Lot 41 for the following reasons: 1.) The Development Agreement approved for this subdivision allows for the construction and development of "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" (Note: Staff interprets "buildings" to mean "lots") for the commercial portions of the development. Since the C-N zone would allow for office uses as well as restaurant, retail, and a number of other non-office uses, the uses allowed in the C-N zoning designation would not comply with those approved in the Development Agreement. 2.) The Planned Development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and commercial use on Lot 41. Staff has discussed with the applicant the option of applying for a modification to the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to change the requirement for "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" to "commercial lots," which would comply with the C-N zoning designation; however, the applicant does not wish to do so and would rather pursue the zoning designations consistent with the approved Planned Development. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting and no one submitted objections or attended the meeting. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the Mixed Use Community land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, Staff believes that the rezoning of Lots 42-45 to L-O and Lot 41 to C-N is in the best interest of the City. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. The rezone legal description submitted with the application (prepared on May 22, 2006 by Wayne K. Barber, PLS) shows the property within the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. However, the submitted rezone description only proposes the C-N zone. Prior to the rezone ordinance approval, the applicant should be required to submit new legal descriptions for this property, one for the L-O properties and one for the C-N property. Prior to the City Council hearine the applicant submitted revised legal descriptions for the L-O and C-N zoned properties (see Exhibit Cl Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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 (or modify an existing Development Agreement) with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses. If Council approves the applicant's requested rezone to C-N, Staff believes that a Development Agreement modification is necessary, and the applicant should be required to file a Miscellaneous application prior the rezone ordinance being recorded. If Council approves Staff s recommendation to rezone Lots 42-45 to L-O and Lot 41 to C-N, Staff believes that a Development Agreement modification is not necessary. If the Commission or Council feels additional requirements are necessary, staff recommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer be required, and be included within the CUP conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, staff believes that a modification to the existing conditional use permit to eliminate the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval for these lots should be allowed. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. This CUP modification request is to modify Condition #3 from CUP-02-012 to read as follows: "The office lots in Block 1 shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends °°°~ °r 41-°°^ ~twe-F~ this areas be submitted as an overall, detailed Planned Development, which, upon approval, would allow each individual lot/building to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with the overall PD concept." Note: CUP-06-008 for Lochsa Falls Commepcial eliminated the Yequire~rtent for Lots 46 & 47, Block 49 (formerly Block S4) to obtain detailed CUP approvab Staff is including the above-mentioned modified condition along with previous CUP conditions of approval that are still applicable to the Lochsa Falls development in Exhibit B (1.11) of the Staff Report. Additionally, Staff has added conditions of approval that shall apply only to Lots 41-45, Block 49 (Exhibit B,1.1-1.10). Sidewalk: Per UDC 11-3F-4B2c, sidewalk is required along W. Everest Lane, a private street. Earlier this year at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing for the rezone and easement vacation for Hastings Subdivision, which is directly adjacent to the site (originally platted as Lots 46 & 47, Lochsa Falls Sub.), the Council required a 5-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to Everest Lane. Sidewalk was not required with the Lochsa Falls preliminary plat, but the Council decided it was appropriate to require pedestrian access within the Hastings development, in the form of a 5-foot wide sidewalk, between the commercial lots adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and the residents of Lochsa Falls Subdivision. The owners of Hastings Subdivision, directly to the west of the subject property, agreed to construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of W. Everest Lane on the south boundary of the property. As a result, Staff believes that the subject property should also construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the south boundary of the property that ties into the sidewalk in the Hastings Development and the sidewalk required within the Knight Hill Center Development to the east (see Exhibit B). Hours of Operation: In the applicant's submittal letter, the applicant does not address the hours of operation for the proposed development. Since this development is adjacent to residential properties and future uses permitted in the C-N zone such as restaurants could create a noise disturbance to the residents, staff is recommending that the hours of operation for businesses on the lot to be zoned C-N, be limited from 6 am to 10 pm as a requirement of the subject Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA,NNII~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE I • G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 application (see Exhibit B). Staff doesn't feel that a limitation in the hours of operation for the L- O zoned property is necessary due to the less intense uses permitted in that zone. Building Elevations/Construction Materials: The applicant has submitted some sample pictures for potential buildings for this site (See Exhibit A). All of the building elevations are very different in design (i.e. one story, two story, stucco, stucco with stone accents, wood beams, etc.). Any new structure(s) on this site should be generally compatible in appearance and bulk with the surrounding residential properties and the submitted pictures, as determined by the Planning Director or otherwise approved through a Conditional Use Permit. Note: Future building elevations were approved with the Hastings Development (Lochsa Falls Office Park, CUP-06-008) directly to the west of the site that are one-story and appear to be stucco with some brick or stone accents; the Commission and Council may consider requiring the applicant to maintain this look on this site as well. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance will be required for all new construction on these lots. Since the subject lots are located on an entryway corridor as designated on the Comprehensive Plan, the design standards in UDC 11-3A-19C are applicable. This enables Staff a detailed review of the site and ensures that the development will comply with design standards prior to issuance of building permits. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds the Rezone (RZ) and Conditional Use Permit Modification (MCU) applications substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of the Rezone of Lot 41 to C-N and the Rezone of Lots 42-45 to L-O, as these zoning designations are consistent with the Development Agreement and Conditional Use PermitlPlanned Development in effect for this site. Staff further recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit Modification application with the conditions shown in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 21 2006. At the public hearing thev moved to recommend approval he Meridian itv ounc~l h ese items on anuarv 2 2007 and February 6 2007 A he nub is hea 'n on F hrnarv 6 2007 ev approved the ubiec 7 and M reaue per the con ition ist d 'n hihit B of the a 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Final Plat showing subject lots proposed to be rezoned 2. Sample Elevations of Future Buildings (3) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAST. DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEG DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Final Plat showing subject lots proposed to be rezoned (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) wevss vaus uc Nad+v+~7.F~ ~. as m°",~.... ~ - A m a ~ ~ ~iarm ~ n43 FLAT 6F LflCHSA FALL StTBD1VISI0IY N0. 12 /~~~P~~} 1 ePG&Irom~AiE b2 t/t ~8ECt9+78 j` : iaa cmmrv. moo -_,__-- ~ soas _ _ _ ~ _ _ ~ EI i^i~Cua Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Sample Elevations of Future Buildings yam, ~,+'~,~~ ~` ~+-+~. '~ - r ~ T^~ ~ ~ ' ~ - .~ w' y ~ ~~ A~,. rrr ti: Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLASDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 4 ~~ ~t gyp{ ,,, ~u r ~,.. ..- ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ,•?~r~a.., ,rte. ~~°~~m~M=~~; ~ `~ Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA,IVNI~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 The applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approval for Lochsa Falls Subdivision (Development Agreement Inst. No. 103012598 and Addendum Inst. No. 104022054, AZ-02-010, CUP-02-012 & PP-02-009) as part of the subject Conditional Use Permit Modification (MCU-06-002) and Rezone (RZ-06-008) approval. 1.2 The applicant shall comulete across-access agreement with the uronerty owner to the east. 1.3 All future uses on this site should comply with the provisions of the Unified Development Code in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 1.4 All future buildings on this site shall be setback in accordance with ITD's right-of--way requirements for Chinden Boulevard (currently 100-feet from centerline) and the City's requirements for landscape buffers adjacent to Chinden Boulevard (35 feet). 1.5 All future buildings on the site shall substantially comply with the elevations shown in Exhibit A of the Staff Report, as determined by the Director. If it is determined that any future building does not substantially comply with the approved elevations, it shall be subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. 1.6 No building or other structure shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building, structure or land be established or changed in use without a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). 1.7 All future structures on the subject property, which are adjacent to an entryway corridor (Chinden Blvd.), shall comply with the Design Standards in UDC 11-3A-19C. 1.8 Hours of operation for businesses located in the C-N zone shall be limited from 6 am to 10 pm. 1.9 Construct afive-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of W. Everest Lane on the southern boundary of the subject property, as none currently exists. 1.10 Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 shall not be subject to detailed Conditional Use Permit approval as previously required by CUP-02-012. 1.11 The previous conditions of approval for CUP-02-012 that are still applicable to the Lochsa Falls development are as follows: • Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the preliminary plat (PP-02-009) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit. • The proposed 171 unit multiple-family housing project within the development shall be required to apply fora detailed Conditional Use Permit fora Planned Development prior to submitting for building permits. • The office lots in Block 1 °~- ~~° °'~° ~ee~erc-iar.lets--~ B:eEk~q shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends eae~h-e€~hese tie-E3) this areas be submitted as an overall, detailed Planned Development, which, upon approval, would allow each individual lot/bnilding to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA1`~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 the overall PD concept. Note: CUP-0(x008 eliminated the requirement for Lots 46 8~ 47, Block 49 (formerly Block 54) to obtain detailed CUP approval • The office/commercial lots in Block 1 and Block 49 (formerly Block 54) shall be required to submit for a Planned Sign Program prior to construction of any signs on these lots. The number of future office/commercial signs along Chinden shall be restricted to no more than two (2) signs and the number along McMillan shall be restricted to no more than one (1) sign. All signs for office or commercial use shall be limited to the L-O standards in the Sign Ordinance. • All site improvements (landscaping, irrigation, etc.) for the C~acre park/pond area in Lot 1, Block 39 shall be complete prior to the issuance of the 250th occupancy permit for the subdivision. • The applicant shall be required to maintain the pond(s) in a manner that will prevent the water from becoming stagnant or public nuisance (a mosquito breeding ground). • All development shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 This property currently has sewer and water mains installed along its frontage and the mains were sized for the uses being proposed. Public Works has no concerns with the rezone applications. 3. FIItE DEPARTMENT 3.1 The 5 office%ommercial lots will have an unknown transient population and will have an unknown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2612 responses in the year 2004. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service are projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the year 2010. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLASdNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 C. Legal Description DESCRtPT10N FOR REZONE LOT 41, BLOCK 48 TO ZOAtE C-AI LCICNSA FALLS SUBQMSbN N0.12 Deeember 21, 2t1~ A PARCEL OF LAND LC?GATED IIV THE NE 1B4 4F SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 4 NC)RTFI, RANGE 1 WEST OF THE BOISE MERIDIAN, CITY OF MERIDIA4V, ADA COUNTY. IDAHO, 9EINti MORE PART{CULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEING LOT 41, BLCKiK 49, OF LOCHSA FALLS SUBDMSICJN N0.12, AS t~tf^=CO/eR~d~ED IVNryy~~y~O~K92 OF PLATS, AT PAGES 1TO it~0, RECORDS OF eWA 4LYNT i e IMJVIO. SAID PARCEL CC)NTAINS 1.76 ACMES.. 3btORE OR LESS. WAYNE K BARBER, ~svi-t +av f P.L.S. No. 8448 Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 DESCR~TtON FOR REZONE LOTS 4~rtS, BLOCK AB TO ZONE L-0 LOCHSA FALLS SUBDMSION N0.12 Oecsemtfet 21, 20x6 A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NE 48'4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSWIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 4 WEST OF THE BOISE MtRID1AN. CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY. IDAHO. BEING MORE PARTICULARI~t DESCR1Bt~ AS F®LLOWS: BEING LOTS 42 THROUGW 45, BLOGK 49.OF LOCHSA FALLS SUBDIVISION NO. 42, AS RECORDED IN BOOK 32 OF PLATS, AT PACES 1t?95I3 TO 4Qf3~0, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTi~, IDA~. SAlD PARCEL CONTAINS 7.2Q ACRES. MORE OR LESS. WAYNE K BARBER. P.L.S. No. a ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~- ~3t~8w~3-ItE1Q\`Ir-L--O.i Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 ~y~~'° a~~ vi~~t r ~r ~r®6aA°~ a f/! r r h ~~~ s~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ro ty t,~. s~ °'~~ EXHIBIT B ~1.4t~tQ iAkB WAY~~ '~ ~I~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ _ ~ r~i~ I .~ ~ ~` ~ ~e a` jj "~ ` ` .+~ ~~ ~ ~. ~ `~'° `a. `. '. f {!, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~, ~y~~`` , ®~ fit` ~ I ~ y ~ p 6 \ . ~~) ~ ~ °a ~~ !~ ~~ ~~ I ~~~ E- -~- '~1°+.oa t~q BR~G~S ~G9Ng641l~G. ~~9Ce BR1~G~ exor,a~+ a~a• Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance 1. Rezone Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to C-N. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan, but not with the previous AZ and CUP approvals on this site. A rezone to C-N for all of the subject lots would not comply with the uses shown on the conceptual site plan that was approved with the Planned Development. Rezone of the property to L-O for Lots 42-45 and C-N for Lot 41 would be consistent with the previously approved uses on these lots, as well as 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; The City Council fmds that professional and personal services (offices), financial institutions, and health care and social services are some of the principal permitted uses within both the applicant's requested zoning district of C-N and Staff's recommended L-O district. The Council finds that the site is large enough to contain the required parking and landscaping. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that 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, The 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. Please see Exhibit B for additional comments from service providers in this area. 2. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The future uses on the subject property shall meet all dimensional and development regulations of the designated zoning district. Parking stalls are required at the ratio of one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area in commercial districts (UDC 11-3C-6). Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely on Staffs analysis, and any oral or written public testimony provided when determining if this site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council finds that the designation on the Comprehensive Plan for this property is Mixed Use Community. The property is currently zoned R-4 with a use exception for commercial uses on these lots. The proposed elevations and future uses are generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (see Sections 8 and 10, above for more information regarding the requirements for this use.) 3. 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 City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the uses in this development should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed uses will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission and Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently available to the subject property. Main line services to this site were previously reviewed and approved with the Lochsa Falls Subdivision development. The City Council fords that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. 7. 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 the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN~G DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEA~G DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of future uses in this location; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The City Council does not anticipate the future uses will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff finds that the proposed uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. 8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a naturaIl, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this use proposal that should be brought to the Commission's or Council's attention. The City Council fords that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Exhibit D February 16, 2007 MCU 06-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Farwest, LLC ITEM NO. 6-C REQUEST Findings for Approval -- Request for Modification of the approved CUP/PD to remove requirement for detailed CUP approval for development in lots 41-45, block 49, Lochsa Falls No. 12 for Lochsa Falls Office /Commercial AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Attached Findings Contacted: 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 • ~ ' ~~, ,' r s~'`~~J er:~ j'~ril--~~ +,~` ~ -~:~= ~f ~ ~.~ h ~~,~ ~x . In the Matter of the Request for Rezone of 8.96 acres from R 4 to L-O (7.20 acres) & C-N (1.76 acres) zones and Conditional Use Permit Modification to Remove the Requirement for Detailed Conditional Use Permit Approval for Development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, by Farwest, LLC. Case No(s). RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 For the City Council Hearing Dates of: January 23, 2007 & February 6, 2007 (Findings on the February 20, 2007 Council agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Elevations, and the Conditions of Approval, all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Rezone as evidenced by having submitted legal descriptions for the L- O and C-N zoned properties, stamped by Wayne K. Barber, PLS and dated 12/21/06, is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The applicant's Conditional Use Permit modification to remove the requirement for detailed Conditional Use Permit approval for development on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, is hereby 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 February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference. D. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 ~~ ~~ By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of ~ 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_~~ 'C~. COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED_1~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED_~~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__Z~G~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayo~r,,'f ~dg,~Weerd s ~ Attest: ~` ~~ ~ '~~ `'~ s i Y~ s ~ ~ P~..Ls_:'uL~ William G. Berg, Jr., City ler = ~ ~~' ~~ ~ ~ e~ ' p4~~. v ~ oa Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning ~ ~°~'ublic Works Department and City Attorney. I,, ) By: DV IGi,~) ~1~ z~~.. Dated: dZ,-~Z-~`? City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 r: STAFF REPORT Hearin Date: Feb +' r r~' ~} F~ g niary 6, 2007 rr~a~~ ~arl'i~~#;~~. (Continued from January 23, 2007) • ~-~ TO: Mayor & City Council ~ ~a 4 ~ FROM: Sonya Wafters ~*"~, Associate City Planner ~~ Meridian Planning Department 884-5533 SUBJECT: Lochsa Falls Office/Commercial Addition (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Sub. 12) • RZ-06-008 Rezone of 8.96 acres (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) from R-4 (Medium-low Density Residential District) to C-N (Neighborhood Business District) zone. • MCU-06-002 Modification of the Conditional Use Permit approved for Lochsa Falls Subdivision to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval on Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12. 1. SiJMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Farwest, LLC, is requesting approval to rezone Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12, from R-4 (Medium-low Density Residential District) to C-N (Neighborhood Business District) so that the zoning will reflect the future commercial uses. Four of the subject lots (Lots 42-45) were conceptually approved in 2002 for office uses and one was conceptually approved for commercial use (Lot 41) through a land use exception under the Planned Development for Lochsa Falls Subdivision. In addition to the rezone application, a modification to one of the conditions within the approved conditional use permitlplanned development (CUP-02-012) is also being requested to be removed by the applicant. Currently CUP-02-012 requires detailed conditional use permit approval on these lots. The applicant is proposing to remove this requirement for CUP approval. The site is located on the south side of Chinden Boulevazd, west of N. Linder Road. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area and within the current city limits. These lots aze within the existing Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 plat. 2. SiT1VIlVIARY RECONIlVIENDATION The subject applications (RZ-06-008 and MCU-06-002) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Staff has provided a detailed analysis regarding the requested Rezone and Conditional Use Permit Modification applications below. The Planning & Zoning Commission should make a recommendation to City Council on the requested Rezone and Conditional Use Permit Modification applications. Staff recommends that Lot 41 be rezoned as requested to the C-N zoning designation but that Lots 42-45 be rezoned to L-O for the following reasons: l .) The Development Agreement approved for this subdivision allows for the construction and development of 11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" (Note: Staff interprets "buildings" to mean "lots") for the commercial portions of the development. Since the Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 PAGE 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAR~DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 C-N zone would allow for office uses as well as restaurant, retail, and a number of other non- office uses, the uses allowed in the C-N zoning designation would not comply with those approved in the Development Agreement. 2.) The Planned Development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and commercial use on Lot 41. Staff has discussed with the applicant the option of applying for a modification to the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to change the requirement for "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" to "commercial lots," which would comply with the C-N zoning designation; however, the applicant does not wish to do so and would rather pursue the zoning designations as Staff has recommended herein. Staff is recommending approval of a Rezone to C-N on Lot 41 and to L-O on Lots 42-45 instead of the requested overall C-N designation, and approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit Modification to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval on Lots 41-45. Please see Sections 8 and 9 of the Staff Report for detailed analysis, and the Findings listed in Exhibit D of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 21. 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Brian McColl (Applicant's representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Jay Anderton (Representative of Challenger Schools who owns Lots 41 & 42) iv. Staff presenting application: Sonya Watters v. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Cross-access to property to the east (Knight Hill Center Sub ) ii. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation• i. Provide cross-access to the property to the east d. Outstanding Issue(s) for Citv Council: i. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) (see Exhibit B condition 1.4) The Meridian City Council heard these items on January 23 2007 and Fphrnarv ~ 2007 At the public hearing on February 6 2007 they annroved_ th_e cnhipct R7 and MCU reauest per the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the ctaff rennrt i. favor: Brian Mc o 1_ (ann ican ' repre entative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: None v. tall presenting ann ication: Anna a pin vi. Other staff commenting on application: No__ne ~_ Kev Issues of Discussion by ouncil: i. Building setback from centerline of Chinden Boulevard (135 feet) ii. Cross-access to property to the east (Knight Hill Center Sub.) ~. ltev f:ouncu i. None Lochsa Falls Office Pazk RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 PAGE 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING~PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers RZ- 06-008 and MCU-06-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers RZ-06- 008 and MCU-06-002 as presented during the public hearing on February 6, 2007, for the following reasons: (State specific reasons for denial of the development agreement modification and/or preliminary plat request.) Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Numbers RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: South side of Chinden Boulevard, approximately 700 feet west of N. Linder Road; Section 26, T4N, Rl W. b. Owner: Lochsa Falls, LLC 4487 N. Dresden Place, Ste. 102 Garden City, ID 83714 c. Applicant: Farwest, LLC 4487 N. Dresden Place, Ste. 102 Garden City, ID 83714 d. Representative: Justin Martin e. Present Zoning: R-4 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed Use -Community g. Applicant's Statement/Justification: The applicant states that the proposed rezone of the subject lots from R-4 to C-N zone that were originally approved for commercial office uses with the Planned Development for Lochsa Falls Subdivision will be less confusing for prospective buyers, sellers, and anyone involved in the development of this land and will allow for small-scale retail as well as office uses. The applicant further states that the proposed modification of the conditional use permitlplanned development to remove the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval would reduce the number of unnecessary public hearings for both the Planning Commission and prospective buyers of the subject properties while still allowing for design review by Staff with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application (please see applicant's submittal letter). 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a rezone and modification to the conditional use Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 &MCU-06-002 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE ~ DATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 permitJplanned development as determined by City Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code Title 11, a public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. b. Newspaper notifications published on: September 18 and October 2, 2006 (Commission); January 1, 2007 and January 15, 2007 (Gifu Councill c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 8, 2006 (Commission); December 29, 2006 (Gifu Councill d. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 25, 2006 (Commission); January 8, 2007 (Gifu Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Vacant land. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: The azea along this portion of Everest Lane (private lane) is developing with office uses. Residential uses to the south and west of the site are rapidly being constructed. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Currently agricultural land, approved Knight Sky Estates Subdivision, zoned R-4, TN-C and C-C. 2. East: Currently agricultural land, approved Knight Hill Subdivision, zoned C-G. 3. South: Single-family residential in Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. 4. West: Future office buildings in Lochsa Falls (Hastings) Subdivision, recently rezoned to L-O. d. History of Previous Actions: - On January 21, 2003 the City Council voted to annex this property into the City of Meridian with an R-4 zoning designation (AZ-02-010). - On January 24, 2003, a Development Agreement (DA) was recorded (Instrument # 103012598) for this property. Section 4, Uses Permitted by this Agreement, of said DA allows the construction and development of 856 single family dwellings, 171 multiple family dwellings,ll office buildings, 1 commercial buildings, l city park, 1 private park, and 1 future fire station lot, consistent with the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit. (Staff inteYprets the office & commerCal "buildings" to mean "lots ".) - On December 17, 2002, the City Council approved a Preliminary Plat (PP-OZ-009) for Lochsa Falls Subdivision containing the subject property. - On December 17, 2002 the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development (CUP-02-012) for Lochsa Falls Subdivision containing the subject property. This allowed for a land use exception under the old Meridian City Code for office and commercial uses in the R-4 zone in certain areas specified on the Planned Development conceptual site plan. Condition of Approval A.3. of CUP-02-012 states: "The office lots in Block 1 and the office/commercial lots in Block 54 shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends each of these two (2) areas be submitted as an overall detailed Planned Development, which upon approval, would allow each individual lot/building to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with the overall PD concept." The conceptual site plan for this development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and a Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 commercial use on Lot 41. - On September 7, 2004, the City Council approved the final plat for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12. (NOTE: The two commercial lots directly to the west of the subject lots, Lots 46 & 47, are also within Lochsa Falls Subdivision and were recently rezoned to L-O as well. Lots 46 and 47 were also re-subdivided, and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP-06-008) was approved for the construction of eight buildings on theses lots consisting of a total of approximately 38,500 square feet of office space.) e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works Location of sewer: There is a sewer main in Everest on the south side of this property. Location of water: There is a water main in Everest on the south side of this property. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: N/A 3. Flood plain: N/A 4. Canals/Ditches/Irtigation: The Simpson Lateral which runs through Lot 43 on this site has been tiled. All other irrigation ditches, laterals and canals that bisect or lie within this site should be covered. 5. Hazards: None 6. Proposed Zoning: C-N 7. Size of Property: 8.96 acres f. .Landscaping: 1. Width of street buffer(s): 35-feet along Chinden. This landscaping has already been installed. 2. Width of buffer(s) between land uses: N/A 3. Percentage of site as open space: N/A 4. Other landscaping standards: Other landscaping standards will be evaluated with future CZC applications on this site. g. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: A common area landscape buffer lot separates the subject commercial lots from Chinden Boulevard and no direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard is proposed or approved. Access will be provided from existing curb cuts on W. Everest Lane, a private street. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On September 15, 2006, Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. No significant comments were received from any agencies or departments. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached Exhibit B. Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE ~ DATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as "Mixed Use Community". 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-C has an upper limit on the square footage ofnon-residential uses and is intended to allow a focused range of uses in close proximity of residential uses. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining the most appropriate zone for this property. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply to this application (staff analysis in italics below policy): • "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action item 5) The applicant will be required to construct landscaping which complies with the Un j~ed Development Code, when the future ojj`ice%ommercial buildings are constructed.. A 3S foot wide landscape buffer has already been installed adjacent to Chinden Boulevard. • "Permit new ...commercial development only where urban services can be reasonably provided at the time of final approval and development is contiguous to the City." (Chapter IV, Goal I, Objective A, Action item 6) The subject site can be serviced by the City of Meridian's sanitary sewer and water systems. • Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas. (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action item 5) The future office%ommercial uses on these lots will be accessible internally by the residents of Lochsa Falls Subdivision and indirectly by passerbies from Chinden Boulevard. The structures on these lots will be required as a condition of approval on the subject conditional use permit to be compatible in appearance with the surrounding residential properties. Stajfjinds that the proposal is harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC Table 11-2B-2 lists several uses as permitted (P) and conditional uses (C) in the C-N & L-O zoning districts. Sample uses in each of these districts are as follows: C-N: Animal care facility (P); indoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility (P); building material; garden equipment and supplies (C); church (P); group daycare (P); drinking establishment (C); financial institution (P); private/public education institution (P/C); fuels sales facility (C); health care or social services (P); hotel and motel (P/C); information industry (P); laundromat (P); mortuary (C); nursery or urban farm (C); nursing or residential care facility (C); personal or professional service (P); public or quasi-public use (P); restaurant (P); retail store (P); vehicle washing facility (C); vertically integrated residential project (C); and stealth wireless communication facility (P). L-O: Animal care facility (C); indoor arts, entertainment or recreation facility (C); church Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE DATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 (P); daycare center (P); group daycare (P); private/public education institution (P/C); financial institution (P); health Gaze or social services (P); hospital (C); information industry (C); light industry (C); Laundromat (C); multi-family development (C); nursery or urban farm (C); nursing or residential care facility (C); personal or professional service (P); public or quasi-public use (P); restaurant (C); vertically integrated residential project (C); wireless communication facility (C); and stealth wireless communication facility (P). b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Four Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location of the district in proximity to streets and highways. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation REZONE ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting a rezone primarily because City staff requested that the zoning match the future uses on the property. The applicant is currently entitled to office and commercial uses as designated on the previously approved conceptual development plan, subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. The applicant has requested a rezone from R-4 to C-N zone for all of the subject lots; however, staff recommends a rezone to L-O for Lots 42-45 and C-N for Lot 41 for the following reasons: 1.) The Development Agreement approved for this subdivision allows for the construction and development of "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" (Note: Staff interprets "buildings" to mean "lots") for the commercial portions of the development. Since the C-N zone would allow for office uses as well as restaurant, retail, and a number of other non-office uses, the uses allowed in the C-N zoning designation would not comply with those approved in the Development Agreement. 2.) The Planned Development was approved with office uses on Lots 42-45 and commercial use on Lot 41. Staff has discussed with the applicant the option of applying for a modification to the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to change the requirement for "11 office buildings and 1 commercial building" to "commercial lots," which would comply with the C N zoning designation; however, the applicant does not wish to do so and would rather pursue the zoning designations consistent with the approved Planned Development. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting and no one submitted objections or attended the meeting. Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the Mixed Use Community land use designation on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, Staff believes that the rezoning of Lots 42-45 to L-O and Lot 41 to C-N is in the best interest of the City. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. The rezone legal description submitted with the application (prepazed on May 22, 2006 by Wayne K. Bazber, PLS) shows the property within the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. However, the submitted rezone description only proposes the C-N zone. Prior to the rezone ordinance approval, the applicant should be required to submit new legal descriptions for this property, one for the L-O properties and one for the C-N property. Prior to the City Council hearing. the applicant submitted revised legal descriptions for the L-O and C-N zoned properties (see Exhibit Cl. Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE DATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 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 (or modify an existing Development Agreement) with the City of Meridian that may require some written commitment for all future uses. If Council approves the applicant's requested rezone to C-N, Staff believes that a Development Agreement modification is necessary, and the applicant should be required to file a Miscellaneous application prior the rezone ordinance being recorded. If Council approves Staff s recommendation to rezone Lots 42-45 to L-O and Lot 41 to C-N, Staff believes that a Development Agreement modification is not necessary. If the Commission or Council feels additional requirements are necessary, staff recommends a clear outline of the commitments of the developer be required, and be included within the CUP conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION ANALYSIS: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan and the general compliance of the proposed development with the Unified Development Code, staff believes that a modification to the existing conditional use permit to eliminate the requirement for detailed conditional use permit approval for these lots should be allowed. Please see Exhibit D for detailed analysis of facts and findings. This CUP modification request is to modify Condition #3 from CUP-02-012 to read as follows: "The office lots in Block 1 °~ ee~er~iel~e~ts~~zoe~-5q shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends °^^'~ °~ ~~-^°^ eve-F?~ this areas be submitted as an overall, detailed Planned Development, which, upon approval, would allow each individual lot/building to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with the overall PD concept." Note: CUP-06-008 for Lochsa Falls Commercial eliminated the requirement fop Lots 46 & 47, Block 49 (formerly Block 54) to obtain detailed CUP approva& Staff is including the above-mentioned modified condition along with previous CUP conditions of approval that are still applicable to the Lochsa Falls development in Exhibit B (1.11) of the Staff Report. Additionally, Staff has added conditions of approval that shall apply only to Lots 41-45, Block 49 (Exhibit B,1.1-1.10). Sidewalk: Per UDC 11-3F-4B2c, sidewalk is required along W. Everest Lane, a private street. Earlier this year at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing for the rezone and easement vacation for Hastings Subdivision, which is directly adjacent to the site (originally platted as Lots 46 & 47, Lochsa Falls Sub.), the Council required a 5-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to Everest Lane. Sidewalk was not required with the Lochsa Falls preliminary plat, but the Council decided it was appropriate to require pedestrian access within the Hastings development, in the form of a 5-foot wide sidewalk, between the commercial lots adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and the residents of Lochsa Falls Subdivision. The owners of Hastings Subdivision, directly to the west of the subject property, agreed to construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of W. Everest Lane on the south boundary of the property. As a result, Staff believes that the subject property should also construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the south boundary of the properly that ties into the sidewalk in the Hastings Development and the sidewalk required within the Knight Hill Center Development to the east (see Exhibit B). Hours of Operation: In the applicant's submittal letter, the applicant does not address the hours of operation for the proposed development. Since this development is adjacent to residential properties and future uses permitted in the C-N zone such as restaurants could create a noise disturbance to the residents, staff is recommending that the hours of operation for businesses on the lot to be zoned C-N, be limited from 6 am to 10 pm as a requirement of the subject Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-008 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE ~ ATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 application (see Exhibit B). Staff doesn't feel that a limitation in the hours of operation for the L- O zoned property is necessary due to the less intense uses permitted in that zone. Building Elevations/Construction Materials: The applicant has submitted some sample pictures for potential buildings for this site (See Exhibit A). All of the building elevations are very different in design (i.e. one story, two story, stucco, stucco with stone accents, wood beams, etc.). Any new structure(s) on this site should be generally compatible in appearance and bulk with the surrounding residential properties and the submitted pictures, as determined by the Planning Director or otherwise approved through a Conditional Use Permit. Note: Future building elevations were approved with the Hastings Development (lochsa Falls Office Park, CUP-O6-008) directly to the west of the site that are one-story and appear to be stucco with some brick or stone accents; the Commission and Council may consider requiring the applicant to maintain this look on this site as well. A Certificate of Zoning Compliance will be required for all new construction on these lots. Since the subject lots are located on an entryway corridor as designated on the Comprehensive Plan, the design standards in UDC 11-3A-19C are applicable. This enables Staff a detailed review of the site and ensures that the development will comply with design standards prior to issuance of building permits. b. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff finds the Rezone (RZ) and Conditional Use Permit Modification (MCU) applications substantially conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and UDC standards. Staff recommends approval of the Rezone of Lot 41 to C-N and the Rezone of Lots 42-45 to L-O, as these zoning designations are consistent with the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development in effect for this site. Staff farther recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit Modification application with the conditions shown in Exhibit B. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on December 21 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend anuroval he Meridian City o nc'1 hear ese items on January 2'~ 2007 and February 6 2007 At the nub is hea 'n on Febraarv 6 2007 ev annroved the ubie 7 and M i reane t_ ner he conditions istPd in hihit B of the to 11. E7~ITS A. Drawings 1. Final Plat showing subject lots proposed to be rezoned 2. Sample Elevations of Future Buildings (3) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department C. Legal Description D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance Lochsa Falls Office Park RZ-06-0O8 & MCU-06-002 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Final Plat showing subject lots proposed to be rezoned (Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12) FLAT OF EW~p Li3CHSA FALLS StTBDIVISIOId ~, / P~ t Armn~+u~apf.a~.~/p~i¢Cray7e ~4 ~ - . w. mWm. m+ow - - .. - --- - - - U ;, alrsr L,amm~ zt~na N0. 12 wars rcls tm acrir,:~vm ~'~ e ~ ~~ ~~ '^' k ~ o ~® ,~~~ aHE£r ,ass .~ a-=~ Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEAR~DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Sample Elevations of Future Buildings _ ~ ~~~ _ :;~ , - Y!. c ~ ~~. ~-- Y ~~ K y ~ ~_ a ~r .~^T .,~ . . t ,ham' A. ~, ~w~~ ~ _ i.y ;~ } y ~, Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE • ATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Exhibit A CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE ~ ATE OF FEBRUARY 6 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 The applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approval for Lochsa Falls Subdivision (Development Agreement Inst. No. 103012598 and Addendum Inst. No. 104022054, AZ-02-010, CUP-02-012 & PP-02-009) as part of the subject Conditional Use Permit Modification (MCU-06-002) and Rezone (RZ-06-008) approval. 1.2 The applicant shall complete across-access agreement with the property owner to the east. 1.3 All future uses on this site should comply with the provisions of the Unified Development Code in effect at the time of building permit submittal. 1.4 All future buildings on this site shall be setback in accordance with IT'D's right-of--way requirements for Chinden Boulevard (currently 100-feet from centerline) and the City's requirements for landscape buffers adjacent to Chinden Boulevard (35 feet). 1.5 All future buildings on the site shall substantially comply with the elevations shown in Exhibit A of the Staff Report, as determined by the Director. )f it is determined that any future building does not substantially comply with the approved elevations, it shall be subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. 1.6 No building or other structure shall be erected, moved, added to or structurally altered, nor shall any building, structure or land be established or changed in use without a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). 1.7 All future structures on the subject property, which are adjacent to an entryway corridor (Chinden Blvd.), shall comply with the Design Standards in UDC 11-3A-19C. 1.8 Hours of operation for businesses located in the C-N zone shall be limited from 6 am to 10 pm. 1.9 Construct afive-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of W. Everest Lane on the southern boundary of the subject property, as none currently exists. 1.10 Lots 41-45, Block 49, Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 12 shall not be subject to detailed Conditional Use Permit approval as previously required by CUP-02-012. 1.11 The previous conditions of approval for CUP-02-012 that are still applicable to the Lochsa Falls development are as follows: • Applicant shall meet all of the requirements of the preliminary plat (PP-02-009) as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit. • The proposed 171 unit multiple-family housing project within the development shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development prior to submitting for building permits. • The office lots in Block 1 °°~ -'-° °~ ~ c-lul~et~~~leel~ ~q shall be required to apply for a detailed Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for building permits. Staff recommends esHd~ef-~ese ~e-E33 this areas be submitted as an overall, detailed Planned Development, which, upon approval, would allow each individual lot/building to apply directly for a building permit if in conformance with Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 the overall PD concept. Note: CUP-06-008 eliminated the requirement foY Lots 46 & 47, Block 49 (formerly Block S4) to obtain detailed CUP approval • The office/commercial lots in Block 1 and Block 49 (formerly Block 54) shall be required to submit for a Planned Sign Program prior to construction of any signs on these lots. The number of future off~ce/commereial signs along Chinden shall be restricted to no more than two (2) signs and the number along McMillan shall be restricted to no more than one (1) sign. All signs for office or commercial use shall be limited to the L-O standards in the Sign Ordinance. • All site improvements (landscaping, irrigation, etc.) for the 6-acre park/pond area in Lot 1, Block 39 shall be complete prior to the issuance of the 250th occupancy permit for the subdivision. The applicant shall be required to maintain the pond(s) in a manner that will prevent the water from becoming stagnant or public nuisance (a mosquito breeding ground). • All development shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 This property currently has sewer and water mains installed along its frontage and the mains were sized for the uses being proposed. Public Works has no concerns with the rezone applications. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 The 5 office%ommercial lots will have an unknown transient population and will have an unknown impact on Meridian Fire Department call volumes. The Meridian Fire Department has experienced 2612 responses in the year 2004. According to a report completed by Fire & Emergency Services Consulting Group our requests for service aze projected to reach 2800 in the year 2005 and 3800 by the yeaz 2010. Exhibit B CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 C. Legal Description OESGRtPTlOld FOR REZONE LOT 41, BLOCK 49 TO ZONE C-N Lt3CNS~1 FALLS 5t1RDMS10N N0.12 beE 21, 2~6 A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED lid TliE NE 114 OF SECTICMI ~, TOWN~{iP i~RTH, RANQE 91NEST OF THE BOISE MERIDUIN. CITI' OF MERIaIAl~1.1iDA COUNTY, IDAHO, BENVt311~RE PARTICULARLY C~SCRiBED AS FOLLOWS: BEIr~ LOT 41, BLCK:IC49, of LtK`HSAfALLS suBr~msloN ~. ~a, AS RECEDED ~d BOOIG fft OF PLATS. AT PAt3E31t1~i8 TO 1tiS813; RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO. SAID PARCEL COPITAIPIS 1.TS ACMES, ARE OR LESS. WAYNE K BARBER, 8t- a~"' ~ •_ ~,wrts$ ~~ 43 -R~d~'ia-G-~.c€~?e P.L.S. No. 8448 Exhibit C CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 QE9CR~'TIOfi+i FOR REZOFIE LOtS 4~~„i, BLQCIC +f9 TQ ~#NE L-O LOCH~A FA#..LS BUBDi1flS#ON I~fE3,12 t~et~r~r 21.24E A PARCEL t)F LAN[3 LCtiCHTED IN THE NE 1!4 OF SECTtn(+t ~+ tCib+VR}SH#P ~ NQRTH, RANGE 7 WEST OF THE BOISE MER#0#Ahl, CITY OF MERMAN, ADA C4UN'IY, fC~AF~, gL'INt3 MORE PAR`iICUI-4RI.~' 13ESCRIBED A3 FOLLt31At5: BEING LOTS 42 THROUGH 45, BLOCK 49, OF LOCHSA FALLS StJBOMSION Nt). 12, AS RECO#~ED #R# Bf7+QK 92 OF Pi.ATS. AT PAGES 149 TO t(~$4, RECORDS OF ADA COUNT1t, IQi4f~b. SAJQ PARCEL C®IdTAlI+1S 7.24 ,ACRES. M©RE t?R LESS. '~YAYNE K BAR. P.L.S. rilo. 8448 vt~. ~~ e~ ~c~ 3=ltl~`E-~,-{}.dam Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN• PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN• TE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 ~~ 0 ~ a~}~ ~~~ i ~~~~ ~~ ~~ o~ ~~~ ~s`~ ~~~ g ~- *' 13 ~~~ ,; ~: trams _ ~ ~LA1C$ VwW~•. i97tdt> ~ I I- - -~ I --i ~ ~ I I ~C ~~ ~ p o~ .. ~ F' ! `~ ~~` ,, . i t ~ ~ ~a` 4,\ v``4`` t`~ Y I I ,,.,,,j t ". '< , ` ` ,° +~+' y~ ! ~ ~~„~ ~~ ~ ~ '~ sue`` ~ k 1 `` ~ s LOCFI3A FALLS StIBDi9~SIi?N I1i0. $€~~ lama ~aa. Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance 1. Rezone Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: 1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The applicant is proposing to zone the subject property to C-N. The City Council finds that the proposed zoning map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan, but not with the previous AZ and CLIP approvals on this site. A rezone to C-N for all of the subject lots would not comply with the uses shown on the conceptual site plan that was approved with the Planned Development. Rezone of the property to L-O for Lots 42-45 and C-N for Lot 41 would be consistent with the previously approved uses on these lots, as well as 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; The City Council fmds that professional and personal services (offices), financial institutions, and health care and social services are some of the principal permitted uses within both the applicant's requested zoning district of C-N and Staff's recommended L-O district. The Council finds that the site is large enough to contain the required parking and landscaping. 3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The City Council fmds that the proposed zoning amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determ;ning this ~~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, The City Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site. Please see Exhibit B for additional comments from service providers in this area. 2. Conditional Use Permit Findings: The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The future uses on the subject property shall meet all dimensional and development regulations of the designated zoning district. Parking stalls are required at the ratio of one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area in commercial districts (UDC 11-3C-6). Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely on Staff s analysis, and any oral or written public testimony provided when determining if this site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use. 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. The City Council finds that the designation on the Comprehensive Plan for this property is Mixed Use Community. The property is currently zoned R-4 with a use exception for commercial uses on these lots. The proposed elevations and future uses aze generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (see Sections 8 and 10, above for more information regazding the requirements for this use.) 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such nse will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the uses in this development should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the azea. 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The City Council finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed uses will not adversely affect other property in the azea. The Commission and Council should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. 5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. The City Council fmds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation aze currently available to the subject property. Main line services to this site were previously reviewed and approved with the Lochsa Falls Subdivision development. The City Council fords that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The City Council finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. 7. 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 the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fames, glare or odors. Exhibit D CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNIN~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARIN~ATE OF JANUARY 23, 2007 The City Council recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of future uses in this location; however, the City Council does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The City Council does not anticipate the future uses will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff finds that the proposed uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the azea. 8. 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. Staff finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this use proposal that should be brought to the Commission's or Council's attention. The City Council finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Exhibit D ~J February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 AZ 06-043 APPLICANT Spurwing Limited Partnership ITEM NO. 6-D REQUEST Findings -Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.51 acres from R-R to R-8 zones for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision -northeast corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard 8~ west of North Spurwing Way AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Findings CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: l~ 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: V Date: Y3~ ~ nj ~d ~to 0'7 Phone: Emailed: ~S ~,.,` Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clfy of Mertdlan. ~~_r CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ;~ ` h `~, y r~v~~ l'~'~~ ~ i ~~ ~~.~ ~~ ~e~ ~ ~~ -.._.~' In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R-8 (Medium Density Residential) zone; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval for 65 single family residential lots and 5 common lots on 20.51 acres; and Variance (VAR) approval to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district, by Spurwing Limited Partnership. Case No(s). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 For the City Council Hearing Dates of: December 12, 2006, January 9, 2007, and February 6, 2007 (Findings approved on February 20, 2007) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-3 82 and Maps. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 .~ 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, Landscape Plan, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007 incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Council approved the annexation request with a split zoning of R-4 for the lots with detached units and R-8 for the lots with attached units, per the Legal Description in Exhibit C and as shown on the Preliminary Plat in Exhibit A of the attached Staff Report, for the hearing date February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference; and 2. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated January 9, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; 3. The Council approved the applicant's request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 ~n w ~ within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above 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 February 6, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 ~~ By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of ~~~E~~ ~ ~A-, 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED-~~~~- COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED-~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED-~y~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED__~~~~ ..~--- MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED (TIE BREAKER) Mayq~ay~'"' 'u pW~~,yerd c Attest: _ ,.p;.. ~o ~ 'rJ 4 m ~ ~ r Tf'n, _~ ti ~~~ ~~ ~~ a '~ ~3 William G. Berg, Jr., City erk :~~~ p Y~~ ~~~ ~~` ,~ Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning Depi~rif, Public Works Department and City Attorney. c~ By: ~1 G~~ ~~~ l~+'11L~~ Dated: C~"Z'2-Z~~fl °~l City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: February 6, 2007 ~ ; {- , (Continued from December 12, 2006 and r~nF ~#'~`"-~::'~ . January 9, 2007) ~~~ ;~ TO: Mayor & City Council ~' '-`'"° FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner ~~~' Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043 Annexation and Zoning of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to -4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R-8 (Medium Density Residential). PP-06-045 Preliminary Plat of ~ ~5 single-family residential building lots con icon of 30 attached L1Litc and ~4 retached u it and 6 ~ common lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone. VAR-06-020 Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. 1. SiTMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Spurwing Limited Partnership, is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres of land to R-8 (Medium Density Residential), currently zoned RR in Ada County; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval of 73 single-family residential building lots consisting of 46 attached patio homes and 27 detached homes, and 6 common lots; and a Variance (VAR) from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. The site is located just north of Chinden Boulevard and northeast of the Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection. Currently, the site consists of vacant land some of which is improved for the golf course. The site is composed of one tax parcel and is currently platted as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. This site also includes a portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. A Property Boundary Adjustment application that matches the configuration of the property as shown on the proposed plat is currently in process at Ada County and will be required to be completed prior to annexation ordinance approval by City Council. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area, but is outside of the City's current Area of Impact. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, VAR) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance applications. Due to the annexation path of this property, the proposed plat layout, and zoning requested, Staff is recommending denial of the proposed Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision (AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, VAR-06-020) for the reasons listed in the Analysis of the Staff Report. Note: The Commission is not required to make a recommendation to City Council on the Variance application. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 1 ~ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 in order for Staff to prepare Findings and Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and revised Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2~ meeting the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006 November 2, 2006, and November 16, 2006 At the public hearing on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearings• i. In favor: Becky McKay Engineering Solutions (applicant/owner's representative); Jock Hewitt, Spurwing Limited Partnership (applicantlowner): Tina Rice• Myron Tucker• and Ed Davis (read letter written by Donna Larsen. General Manager Spurwing Country Club on behalf of Spurwing Country Club) ii. l:n opposition: Ron Ashley Ginna Engle (also speaking for other homeowners in Spurwing Subdivision Byron Brown (also sneaking for Beverly Brown). Jov Compton, Bob Trerise, Grant Peterson, and Andrea Nist. Fiheen other people signed their names on the sign-in sheet provided at the meeting in opposition to the nroiect but did not sneak during the hearing (see sign-in sheet from November 16 2006 meeting) iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters v. Other staff commenting on application• Caleb Hood b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission• i. Proposed lot sizes/transition from e~sting 1-acre lots along the north boundary; ii. Proposed density; iii. Increased traffic/access onto Chinden Boulevard• iv. Resident opposition to project c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Reoommendation• i. Commission voted to recommend denial of the project d. Outstanding Issue(s) for Citv Council: i. The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending denial of the proiect Because the Commission's recommendation is for denial no conditions are included in this report. ii. Applicant has submitted a revised plat, dated November 22 2006 (see paragraph below . Since the Commission meeting on November l6~ the applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated 1122-06, which addresses some of the concerns that the Commission and neighbors had The primary changes to the elan are as follows• I) Total lot count has been reduced by 2 building lots to 69 building lots• J The building lots along the northern boundary have increased in size providing more of a transition in lot sizes to the existing I-acre lots to the north Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 2 ~ r CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 J The oven space along the northern boundary, west of the common area between Lots 42 & 44 has been removed Visibility of the common areas located behind the building lots was noted as a concern by the Police Department J Some of the attached units originally shown along the north bounda have been relocated to the west bounda Staff has reviewed the revised plat and all lots meet the dimensional standards of the proposed R-8 zone. However, Staff has not undated the staff report below to reflect the revised plat, as the Commissionreviewed and made a decision on the previous version. The Police Department has not commented on the revised play The Commission also has not reviewed or commented on the revised play e Meridian City OLIIC~~ h strd thPCe itPme nn December 12U' 2nn6 At the nnhli~ hoar:n.. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR 06-020 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ- 06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-06- 043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/I,ocation: Parcel No.: 88081770030 Generally located northeast of the N. Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection; S.W. % of Section 23, T.4N., R.1W. b. Owner: Spurwing Limited Partnership/Pacific Links Ltd. Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203/6800 N. Spurwing Way Boise, ID 83702/Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Spurwing Limited Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP e. Present Zoning: RR (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 20.51 acres to R-8, Preliminary Plat approval of 73 single-family residential building lots and 6 common lots, and a Variance from UDC 11-6C- 3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Forty-six of the lots are proposed to be for attached patio homes and 27 are proposed to be for detached homes. All of the proposed lots meet the minimum dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 9,067 square feet. The gross density of the project is 3.56 dwelling units per acre; the net density is 4.45 dwelling units per acre. Open space consists of 3.69 acres or 18% of the site. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 6/20/06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 5/28/06 Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a Variance 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. d. Newspaper notifications published on: October 2°a and 16~', 2006 (Commission); November 20~` and December 4~' 2006 (Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 22~, 2006 (Commission); November 17~`, 2006 (Council) f. Applicant posted notice on site by: October 7`~, 2006 (Commission); December 2°a. 2006 Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is currently vacant. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property in bordered on the north by 1- acre lots in Ada County and is surrounded on the south, east, and west by Spurwing Golf Course property. Further to the west, bordering the golf course, are also one-acre lots in Ada County. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family 1-acre lots within Spurwing Subdivision, zoned RR (Ada County) 2. East: Immediately to the east, Spunwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further east, the proposed Knight Sky Subdivision, zoned R-4, R-15, and C-C. 3. South: Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); South of Chinden, the proposed Irvine Subdivision, zoned R-8; rural residential property, zone RUT (Ada County). 4. West: Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further west, single-family one-acre lots in Westwing Estates Subdivision and agricultural land, zoned RR. d. History of Previous Actions: The subject property is currently platted in Ada County as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spunwing Subdivision and also contains portions of Lots 2 and 4 of the same subdivision. NOTE: A Property Boundary Adjustment is currently in process at Ada County that will adjust the boundaries of these lots as shown on the proposed plat and described with the annexation application. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Location of sewer: This property is currently not serviceable. It is Master Planned to flow to the North Black Cat Lift Station, through planned mains in the annexed but undeveloped property to the west. Location of water: In a cooperative agreement with United Water of Idaho, Meridian as agreed to allow United Water to service this property. Issues or concerns: Sewerability of this property. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There are no major facilities coursing through this site. The applicant shall be required to the any ditch lying within this site. 3. Hazards: No hazards have been identified on this site. 4. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium Density Residential) 5. Size of Property; 20.65 acres (AZ); 20.51 acres (PP) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 73 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 73 4. Common Lots: 6 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 79 7. Gross Density: 3.56 dwelling units per acre (net density is 4.45 dwelling units/acre) 8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 square feet (proposed by applicant) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): N/A (A street buffer is 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: 18% (3.692 acres) 4. Other landscaping standards: Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (iTDC 11-3G-3E2). h. Amenities: Open space and common areas are proposed with ponds and connecting stream channels. i. Off-Street Parking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached and single-family attached dwellings with more than 1 bedroom to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x ZO' parking pad in front of each garage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standards: R-8 Dimensional Standards (in feet) Setbacks Proposed Required Front Living Area (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Side Accessed Garage (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Spurwing Paxio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 6 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Front Accessed Gazage (from back of sidewalk) 20 20 Side (5' public utility & drainage easement is required) 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (detached, with gazage facing street) 50 50 Frontage (attached) 40 40 Lot Size (detached, w/garage facing the front property line) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (attached) 4,000 4,000 Maximum Building Height 35 35 * No changes to the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-S were requested. k. Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided internally from the existing public street, W. Balata Court, which is accessed via N. Spurwing Way from Chinden Boulevazd. Balata Court is currently improved as a 36-foot wide street with curb and gutter. Sidewalk has been constructed on W. Balata Court in front of the residential lots and the clubhouse lots west of the site and on the north side of the street but none exists where the site abuts Balata or east of the proposed connection to Balata on the south side. Access to the dwellings within this development will be via internal public streets to be constructed with the subdivision. All of the internal streets will be local streets with 36- foot wide street sections (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain 5-foot wide attached sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way. The applicant is not proposing any stub streets since the surrounding property is currently a golf course and there are no existing stubs on the north boundary from Spurwing Subdivision. Staff is generally supportive of the proposed street system. NOTE: To satisfy the Fire Department requirement for secondary access, the applicant is proposing an "emergency access only" road at the southwest corner of the site from Chinden Boulevard directly north of the terminus of N. Ten Mile Road. ACHD has submitted conditions of approval for this development (see Exhibit B). The Idaho Transportation Department (TTD) has submitted a comment that the applicant has not yet applied to ITD for the proposed emergency access from Chinden Boulevazd with a note that the main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. Supposedly, the predominant movement from the subdivision would be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement (please see Exhibit B for all of ITD's comments). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On September 29, 2006, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Meridian Police Department. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 7 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 73 single-family lots on 20.Slacres for a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density lies within the anticipated density of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. 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 service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense, although it is currently not available (water service will be provided by United Water). • 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 Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. 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. The applicant is proposing to construct a solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary and a 4 foot tall wrought iron fence along the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries of this development. Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This parcel has limited frontage on Chinden Boulevard, an arterial street. The applicant is proposing an emergency access only connection to Chinden Boulevard. The new public street Spurwing Pario Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 connection to W. Balata Court has been reviewed and approved by ACIID. City Staff is also supportive of the connection to W. Balata Court; no additional access points to Chinden Boulevard, except for the emergency access, shall be allowed. The Idaho Transportation Department has yet to approve the proposed emergency access from Chinden. The Meridian Police Department is requiring that the plat be revised to include an additional stub street for increased emergency access to this site. 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 proposed development is generally compatible with the existing single family residential properties to the north in that they are both residential uses; however, Staff does believe that there should be more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the existing 1-acre lots to the north and the proposed attached units proposed on 4, S9S-6, 042 square foot lots. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 8 -Require new urban density subdivisions which abut or are proximal to existing low density residential land uses to provide landscaped screening or transitional densities with larger, more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban level densities and Waal residential densities. There are some existing low density residential land uses to the north. The applicant is proposing to construct solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of this development to provide a buffer to the existing residences. Further, a landscaped common area with a meandering creek and ponds are also proposed along this boundary between the existing homes and the proposed attached homes. Stafffinds that the proposed fencing and common area would assist in providing screening between the proposed urban development and the existing surrounding rural residences.; However, Staff believes that the applicant should provide a better transition in density and plat larger more comparable lot sizes adjacent to the existing 1-acre lots to the north, instead of the proposed landscape buffer and attached lots. Staff recommends that a minimum 10, 000 square foot lot be provided along the north side of this property, to effectively transition to the urban densities proposed. Further, although the applicant has provided a buffer in the form of landscaped common area along this boundary, it is virtually inaccessible and unusable to the residents of the subdivision because of the proposed ponds and meandering creeks and does not meet the requirements of UDC 11-3G-3. Also, the Police Department is not supportive of the design of the open space area on the north boundary as it does not offer natural surveillance opportunities for the public areas and creates a potential safety hazard. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any written or verbal testimony provided from neighbors when determining if additional screening or if a d fferent transition in density is more appropriate. 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. Spurwing Subdivision to the north obtained an RR zone (1-acre lots) in Ada County. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site; however, Staff believes that mote of a transition should be provided between the existing Mural lots and the proposed urban lots in the form of larger, more comparable lot sizes, and lower densities on the north boundary of the subdivision. To provide an even better variety of residential zoning, and to better transition between the one acre lots to the north, some R-4 zoning should be approved on the northern portion of this property. Staff generally believes that the density proposed with this project is appropriate. However, the design of the development does not fit well into this established area. 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) 11-2A-2 lists single-family attached and 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 aze distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. c. General Standazds: All lots shown on the proposed plat conform to the minimum dimensional requirement of the R-8 zone per UDC 11-2A-2. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. Therefore, the applicant must meet all dimensional standards. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: 1. Annexation & Zoning Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is generally consistent with what the Future Land Use Map calls for. However, Staff believes that zoning all 20 acres of this property to R-8 is not appropriate for this property_ Please see Exhibit D and the Comprehensive Plan Analysis above for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on October 16, 2006 by David Mazks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Although the annexation path of this property appeazs to comply with the requirements of State Code, Staff believes that annexing the subject property will have the effect of having City pazcels in the middle of a County subdivision (a City enclave). Staff believes that it is in the City's best interest to have additional properties included as part of annexing this property. It does not seem appropriate to have aCity-approved subdivision of this size that is surrounded by property still in the County, which may or may not annex into the City in the foreseeable future. Further, the applicant is actually processing Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/VAR-06-020 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 a property boundary application through the City to annex a small portion of the golf course lots, to facilitate this development, but is leaving a vast majority of the golf course lots out of the subject annexation and development request. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission did not have an issue with the proposed R-8 zone and the transition in densities provided between the existing 1-acre properties in Spurwing Subdivision and the proposed lots. 2. Preliminary Plat Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Density: As noted previously in this report, this area is designated for medium density residential uses. Medium density residential is defined as 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The submitted plat has a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units per acre. Although Staff has no problem with the proposed density, Staff believes that more of a transition from the e~sting 1-acre rural residential lots should be provided in the form of larger lots and lower densities along the north boundary. The smaller, attached lots should be relocated to the west, east, and south boundaries adjacent to the golf course, with the larger lots serving as the transition between the 1-acre lots to the north and the attached lots farther to the south. Landscaping: The landscape plan prepazed by Harvest Design, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1 is not approved. • 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. • Per UDC-11-3G-3, the applicant must provide a minimum of 5% open space that is accessible by all residents of the development including but not limited to: open grassy areas of at least 50' x 100' in azea, community gardens, ponds or water features, or plazas. While the applicant is proposing ponds and meandering creeks as water features, they aze not readily accessible by all residents of the development, and do not allow emergency service providers good visibility into these public azeas. Further, not all of the grassy azeas proposed meet the dimensional requirements stated above for qualified open space. Although the proposed open space calculations exceed the requirements of the UDC, the actual qualified open space does not meet the minimum requirements due to dimensions and location. Staff believes that the common azea should be more centrally located and provide more open azea without ponds for usability by the residents. Applicant should clarify at the public hearing what height of fence is proposed along the north boundazy. The applicant clarified at the public hearing that a 6 foot tall masonry wall is proposed along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spurwing Subdivision. A written certificate of completion should be prepazed by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Access: Access to this site is currently provided by N. Spurwing Way via W. Balata Court, both local public streets within Spurwing Subdivision. An emergency access is proposed from Chinden Boulevard at the southwest corner of the site for emergency vehicles only. Direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard shall be prohibited except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision; a note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access. Stub Streets: The Police Department is requiring that an additional stub street be added for increased emergency access to the site. Staff believes that this will be a difficult condition to meet. Staff recommends that the applicant meet with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to discuss this issue, prior to the next public hearing. As of the print date of this report, the applicant was unable to make contact with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to come to a resolution on an additional access to the site. Staff contacted the Lieutenant and the Police Department still maintains that they would like to see an additional access provided to the site. It appears that the applicant will be unable to provide one based on the existing subdivision to the north that did not stub to this property and the existing golf course that surrounds the site. Existing ResidencesBuildings: The site does not currently contain any residences or buildings. Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the existing residences. A 4-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed on the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path /multi-use fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common 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. Although the proposed plat and R-8 zoning would add to the variety of housing types Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 in the subject area, Staff believes that more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the e~sting 1-acre lots and the proposed attached units should be provided along the north boundary. Staff does not oppose the overall density proposed; however, believes that the higher density attached homes should be relocated from the north boundary to the west, east, and south boundaries of the subdivision. Further, Staff would like to see larger, more usable open space areas, located centrally within the development. The Commission should consider staffs analysis and recommendation, and the layout of the proposed lots and open space in relation to the e~sting and proposed homes when making recommendation to the City Council. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission heard testimony, considered Staff's analysis, and discussed the proposed common areas and did not have an issue with the amount of open space provided, or the location and inaccessibility of some of the common areas as noted by Staff in this report. The Commission also did not have an issue with the requested R-8 zone or the transition in density and lot sizes proposed between the existing rural lots and the proposed lots. Although some of the proposed lot sizes are small, they believed that since the proposed units would be attached and would be a minimum of 1,400 square feet per unit, the structure itself would be least 2, 800 square feet, comparable with the existing homes in Spurwing than smaller detached homes on these lots would be. Therefore, the Commission requested that Staff prepare Conditions of Approval for the subject applications (see Exhibit A). 3. Variance Application: The applicant has applied for a Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Special Considerations: There are no existing stub streets or pedestrian connections from the existing surrounding Spurwing Subdivision for this development to connect to. Since the land to the west, south, and east is part of the Spurwing Golf Course, no stub streets are proposed for future connectivity although the Police Department is requesting a stub street be provided to the property. The irregular shape and size of the property also limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Staff believes compliance with UDC 11-6C- 3F is not feasible in this case due to the site limitations stated above and that the required Findings for a Variance can be met (see Exhibit D). b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the subject applications, AZ-06-043, PP- 06-045, and VAR-06-020 per the comments stated in the staff report for the hearing date of October 19, 2006. NOTE: Staff is recommending denial of the variance because the recommendation is for denial of annexation into the City. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 to allow Staff time to prepare Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and Findings in Exhibit C Prior to the November 2"d meeting, the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 13 ~- a CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006• November 2.2006; and November 16 2006 At the public hearing on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial. he Meridian City OunC~l hes+rd these items nn llnramhar 19~' 'fM~ 7 ~ 2007 aII February 6.2007. At the February 6.2007 meetin¢_ the City f'n»nril a.,.,rnvaA +ho _ 'on request along with he Pre iminarv Pla and Variance wnnli atinnc_ m~hie~t t e COn itioIIC of Annrnval listed in FYhihit R Of he staff rennrt 11. EDITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) 3. Landscape Plan (dated: 5-28-06) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Idaho Transportation Department 9. Central District Health Department C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Spurwing Pario Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 A. Drawings Vicinity Map Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) ~a ~ ~wo.~ me ~. ~'~~' mT,.z°i'S-e°` ~ ~~'~s. is nx ~wv~nu~.ca.,s~ ~ ~i av~m-xac e® m•uas,d¢ ~,e moo xve, ~~ aye - $ ~- N~ it §:1 R'31 A~ 49?,tk] RilaB51 $j ONNbf +A~A1 '+i~ ~ ~ -0 g e r !{ i .. ~~ ~ ~n - , ..:o.ra s .. ..., a ~ ~ I ~ ~ 1 ' ~i~i~a ~~.'b 4 J _ ~ _ys,.r .~'~., ~ I ~ ~ ~ + I H .~~ _ ~Jh, f ', ~ ,~.d+s ,~'`.Lr !ice 1~1 ~ I a ( ~ { ~ ~ tl i' ~ vo 7 -~`f°"~ '{ ~ age i ln, ~ ~~ i :, ~-~ ~ x~- ' -- ., 1 ~- ^~'pp~'yy"~~ ,+ ,_ ,. s_ •'R ~r .:i~ i ~ ~~1 a ~R']t ~~ r ~~ x ~~ (`''~,,,~. '9. !' t ,'I ~~ 1~7:~' ~ ~ ~~," -E tl ~ti~! i ~~JI~~ 1 V '~. i II ~, I ~ ./ ~ ~ ' ~ r: ~ _ , -$ -w : III l i ~' ~ + '~,,~ ~ '~ ~ ~ j` "F ~ ~. .~ ~,, ~ `, ~' ~ ~ if v,-~~", ~!} w~ o ~ N ~'~ j ~. + ~'~, ~ ,r~ ai ~ ~ ~• ray ;~;~f^~ { ,~, ~ ~~ ~' 9a@EER~ § 3 ~_ ~ 1 -r ate-=` ~ ~a ~ ate"--~-~ -' a r Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. Landscape Plan (dated 5-28-06) -NOT APPROVED =. Exhibit A -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1. The overall annexation boundary legal description submitted with the application (prepared on August 16, 2006, by D. David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. owever. the original annexation legal description does not effect the Council-approved zoning for this property. The applicant has submitted lea descriptions. dated 12/19/06. and an exhibit map that reflect the zoning designations of R-4 and -8 approved by City Council. which are included in Exhibit C along with the original over exation boundary legal description and exhibit map. 1.1.2. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The Development Agreement process shall be completed within 6 months of City Council approval of the annexation Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The DA shall incorporate the following: • Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall complete a Record of Survey for a Property Boundary Adjustment in Ada County for the portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, Spurwing Subdivision, that are currently within the boundaries of the subject annexation request. Submit a copy of the recorded Record of Suryey to Planning Staff. • Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall submit recorded warranty deeds to the Planning Department that reflect the current boundary of the proposed annexation and plat. • Secondary access to the subdivision as provided on the preliminary plat at the southwest corner of the property from Chinden Blvd. shall be gated both at the Chinden access and the internal subdivision access in accordance with Police and Fire Department requirements. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIlVIINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet 1 of 1, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated December 13, 2006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 The landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Associates, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1, is not approved and shall be revised according to the conditions noted below: • Revise the landscape plan to reflect the revised configuration of the plat and install all landscaping in accordance with UDC 11-3B. • 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. Include mitigation information on the landscape plan. • Provide a detailed fencing plan for all fencing proposed on the site reflecting a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spurwing Subdivision and a 4-foot tall wrought iron fence around the west, east, and south perimeter boundaries as shown on the landscape plan submitted with the preliminary plat. Exhibit B -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The preceding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.3 All lots within the development shall conform to the dimensional standazds of either the R-4 or the R-8 zone, depending on the particulaz zone in which they are located. 1.2.4 All lots along the north boundary of the subdivision shall have a minimum lot size of 10,000 squaze feet as shown on the plat dated 12-13-16 and required by Council at the 12-12-06 City Council meeting. 1.2.5 Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon the Idaho Transportation Department's approval of the emergency access proposed from Chinden Boulevazd. If TTD should deny this access request, the development would not be able to provide the two emergency access points required by the Fire Department for this size of development. 1.2.6 Place a note on the face of the final plat that prohibits direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision. 1.2.7 Per UDC 11-3B-9C6, all open water ponds proposed on the site shall have re-circulating water and shall be maintained so that they do not become a mosquito breeding ground. 1.2.8 Provide fencing around the perimeter of the development, as proposed. Provide a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the north boundary of this site, as proposed during the October 19~' public hearing. 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 shall be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.9 Maintenance of all common azeas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. 1.2.10 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area. being subdivided 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. 1.2.11 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIltEMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.3.1. 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). 1.3.2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3. All azeas 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 Z i • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4. A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. 1.3.5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.6. 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. 1.3.7. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 The preliminary plat shows the sewer main proposed in this development ending at W. Chinden Boulevard. At this time there are no sewer mains in or planned to be installed in Chinden Boulevard. This property is master planned in the North Black Cat shed. This property is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sewer system and the City of Meridian does not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC. 2.2 This property is master planned to sewer to the North Black Cat Lift Station via mains that are planned to be development driven in the property to the west. If the applicant wishes to commence development prior to the "Master Planned mains" being available they may proceed under the following conditions: a) This is conditional on there being available capacity within the Ten-Mile Trunk. b) The applicant shall provide written permission from the owner of the Silver Leaf Lift Station, granting access to use that lift station. c) The applicant shall be responsible to prove capacity exists in the Silver Leaf Lift Station, and be responsible for any upgrades necessary. d) The applicant shall be responsible install the necessary ofF site gravity mains from this site to the Silver Leaf Lift Station. These mains shall not be eligible for reimbursement agreements. 2.3 The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this proposed 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. 2.4 The applicant shall be responsible to install an all-weather access road per City of Meridian standard specifications to all sewer mains not located within the right-of--way. 2.5 The applicant shall connect to a Municipal water system. 2.6 The applicant shall comply with all Department of Environmental Quality's Best Management Practices separation requirements between storm facilities and private wells. 2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. Exhibit B -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2.8 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.9 The applicant has indicated that the P.I. system shall be an extension of Spurwing's system. Prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting the applicant shall provide written approval from the owner of that system. 2.10 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.11 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.12 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the azea being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/dra.inage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.13 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.15 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, 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. 2.17 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that maybe required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.21 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.22 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations aze set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.23 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall Exhibit B -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. 1F~re Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story family dwellings 3600 square feet and greater will require a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' 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 %" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 The emergency access drive 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 The emergency access drive shall have a 20' wide improved surface capable of supporting an imposed load of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 3.7 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 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). Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.9 This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thru the Meridian Fire Department. A "No Parking, Fire Lane" emergency access sign shall be installed at the access gate. 4. Police Department 4.1 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. Common areas are completely blocked from public view. Seventy-three home sites with one primary access is not acceptable. Prior to the next public hearing, 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. 4.2 To increase emergency access to the site, the Police Departments recommends that the applicant provide a stub street from the property. Prior to. the next public hearing, the applicant should submit a revised plat/site plan to reflect this requirement. 4.3 Any interior fencing 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 has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.1.1 Construct West Balata Court as one half of a 36-foot street section within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.2 Locate the entry road intersecting West Balata Court as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct all the internal roadways as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.4 Locate and construct one knuckle on the south side of West Tramore Drive and one standard cul- de-sac turnaround at the intersection of North Dunloy Way and North Castle Bar Way. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7.1.5 Construct emergency access at the southwest corner of West Tramore Drive, as proposed. Utilize some restrictive device to inhibit the possibility for cut-thru or general use traffic within the emergency access. The device used to control access on the emergency vehicle roadway shall be approved by the Meridian Fire Department and submitted to ACRD in writing. 7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 STANDARD CONDTI'IONS OF APPROVAL 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call 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. Exhibit B -Page 2 • . CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7.2.1 Z 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. 7.3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7.3.1 The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are satisfied. 7.3.2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. 8. Idaho Transportation Department 8.1 The applicant shall apply to ITD for the emergency access to US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd.) shown on the proposed plat. Note: The main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. The predominant movement from the subdivision is suspected to be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement. 9. Central District Health Department 9.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map l .Overall Annexation Boundary Legal Description & Exhibit Map TE,ALEY'S L~tl!d[~ 25U1 t3agus Basin Ad. a 3oise, Idaho H37t?? SUR'9liEY1NG t2~) 3as-as3e F®x ~208j 385.0B9R ProJeot. Ne.: 29$1 ®ata: Juno 2; 20oa Revised: August 1B, 2006 ANNExAT10N DESCRIPTION FtM SPURWINfl PATIO HOMES SUBDIVISION A parcel of land being a portion of Lots 2 and 4 and all of Lot 3 of Biook 1 of Spunaing Subdivision, as filed for record in the office of the Ada County Recorder, Boise, Idaho rn Banc 69 of Plats at pages 7104 thru 7108, and a par6on of the SW tI4 of Section 23, T.4N., R1W., 9.fv1., Ada County, Idaho and more partkufa~ly described as follows: t3EGINNfNt3 at a brass cap marking the Southwest comer of the said Section 23: thence alar~ the Westerly boundary of the said SW 1A4 of Section 23; the North 00°20'40" East 324.83 feet to an iron pin; thence said Westerly- boundary South 89°39"20" East 30.00 feet to an kon pin marking a point of curve; thence corrtlnuing along an arc of a curve to the loft, saki curve having a radius of 20.OOfeet, a t~rHral angle of 104°21'16", a lengt}i of 36.43 feet and a tong chord trearir~ South 51°49'58" East 31.60 feet to an iron pin marking a point of tangent; thence continuing North 75°59'24" East 156.18 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing North 00°4$'28" East 184:80 fee# to an iron pin; thence leaving said Westerly boundary North 70°58'41"' East 673.13 feet to an iron pin marking the Northwest comer of said Lot 3; them anortg the Northerly boundary of said Lot 3 5auth 78°3$'59" Eat 106.97 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing .South 82°24'58" East 127,74 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing South 50°13'58" East 125.67 feet to an Iron pin; thence-c~ntincdrtg South 43°02"58" East 180.00 feet to an iron pin; thence crontinufng South 43°00'12° East 160.00 feet to en iron pin; thence car>tinuing South 52°28`14" fast 222.39 fast to an iron ptn; thence con5nuing 5outfr 87°44'25" East 290.87 feet to ari tray pin; thence continuing North 54°48'27° East 242,Oi feet to an iron pin; thence contnuing North 28°48'32" East 166.21 feet to an iron pin;. therx:e c~rrfinuing North 19°22'35" East 11$.86 feet to an kon pin; thence oontlnuing North 43°12'34° West 28525 feet to an Iran pin rrtark)ng a ~ of curve; thence conninuing along an arc of a curve to the left, sand curve having a r~ius of-20.00 feat, a ~rtral angle of 102°27'35°, a length of 35,77 feet and a long t~rord 13earfng Sou9r 85°33'38" Walt 31.19 to an iron pin marking a point of ern3ing of stove on the South right-al-~ay line of W+~t Balata Court; thenc® leaving said South right-of-vway Ana North 55°40'10" West 25.00 teat t4 a pOiM cn the rentariina of said West Balata Court marlekrg ®Point of cxarve; thence along said centerffne slang the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 35D.00 fit, a central artgie # 20°47'29", a length of 127.01 feet anal a ~ chord bearing c.~m°ammna m,°aatl~y°on1Fj ~rmvEe":dm•y~ Exhibit C -Page I CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7EA-LEY'S L,~-ND SURVEYING ~o-ta>~usaRa~ra,sc~GS~.Enx~roa3-ra~rt2oe3~ea Project Na.; 2881 Date: June 2, 2006 Revised: August 16, 2006 Page ~ North 44°43'35" East 126.31 feet to a point marking a post of ending of curare: thence leavir~ said centerlum South 34°52"40" East 25.00 test to an iron pin an said South right-of way line of West t3alate Court; thence leaving said South right-of-taay line South 05°57`22" West 30.26 fee# to an iron pin; thence South 43°12'34° East 268.19 feet to en iron pin marking a point of curve; thence along the arc of a curve to the right, said curare having w radius of 75.00 feet, a central angle of 24°20'33". a length of 31.86 feet and a long chord taring South 31°02'18" East 31.63 feet to an iron pin markir~ a point of tangent; thence South 78°52'01° East '79.34 feet to an iron pin on the East baurtdary of-said Lafi 3; thence along said East imundary South 00°48`ZS" West 788.24 feet to an iron pin marking the Southeast comer of said Lot 9; thence slang the Southerly boundary of said Lot 3 North 78°39'48a West 691.47 feet to an trop pin; them canUnukrg South 82°'16'37" West 505.59 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing North 85°06`24" West 300.83 feet to an Iran pin; thence contira.~ing South 75°59'24° West 994.94 feet to an iron pin marking a point of curve; thence c~ntirxtirrg along the arc of a caws to the left, said curve having a radius ~ 20,00 feat, g central angle of 75°38'44", a length of 26.41 feet and a tang cord Ming -South 38°10`02" West 24.;33 feet to an Iran pih marking a point +af tanger~ thence cordinu~g South 00°20'40" West 177.61 feet to an Iron pin marking a point of carve; thence continukg atang the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having. a radius of 20.00 feet, a ceraral angle of 88°32'12", a length of 31.25 feet and a tong chard bearing Soutlt 44°25'28" East 28.17 fast to an iron pin marking a point of ending of love ~ said North rE~t-of~avey fine of Stets i-8ghvuay 20: thence reeving said Nark right-of- way line South 00°48'28" West 40.00 feet to a paint an the South boundary of said Section 23; thence along said South boundary North 89°11'32° West 65.52 feet to the pO1N7 OF BEL3tNNINt~3. Said parcel of land contains 20.65 acxes, more ar less. ~`~.~AL LAN ~ / e 5 ~ d~ ~~4,~y N.1lAf' ~~;~: . ~~~ ~ Exhibit C -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 - ._..z,.~. ~ .~,_ r SFUR'dFNG StJ9~75i4N ~/ d ~, c ~:: z o_ '.] ~. +-", .~ ~fl~ ~! AUWi IDR faJS Sd4W dgOEj 6819 ~ it 7GID IBR7itl' .SLA gq H~ BgfA'~e as mm mra'ar' ~ x» s+u s asst~r z c mm ermr ism evB my a srs~ e u sac sm ~m aat s ssa'u' e m ~ ~ i cr 8 ~w tt m s u i t Exhibit C -Page 3 t*~ ~,,,,,~,~ SPLTBWIl~IG PATtO H0 S~JBDI'PISI#?N 'LtIA/EEi~j~lG ~,. ~, s„~, PRV~o~o r~~~QE~ pnrra~-ncx~ ~`Ul~ttMS~ ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Legal Descriptions & Exhibit Map Depicting Boundary of R-4 & R-8 Zones TEJ#L~Y'S LAND ~s7 ~ n si.s • ~a-~n ~&~. E~ ~~~r ~ ~: ~'..~~ fix {2Q8) 3~5-mss Prt~~oct IVY,: 2981 ber t 4, 2~b D ON IrQR k-4 ~OtVE SPLIRVYENC PATIO HOINF~ 513BOlVLSIOI+! ~ p~+ee1 cif lam beia$ a psrti~n of i 2.3 arnd 4 Block I ~f Sp~rwsag 5u6dieisi~n as 61ed fvr record ~ t~ office of the Ada C~~nty Recorder. ~a~, fd~a in . b4 a~ stets at P ?Ifl4 thru 9108 toamted in t~ SW 1P4 of iot- 23, Y'>4N., R.I VV'„ B.M., Ada C~t~r, [t~to, tie d~'bed as fettowa: 29$I•R Exhibit C -Page 4 • CTTY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 T~-#_Elf'S L„AN©SUFi~Y~Y#I~tG ~~r ~ e~> ra~.a3.t~ Pr~ct Na.~ 1 O~tec t9, 2006 P~e2~2 P~1 Gam 13.80 . mcrre or ins. v~ ~~,s~s ~t ,m •PiJ. Exhibit C -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 T~ALEY'S LAW® Raj ~ ter, ~s. _~~~ cam. rd ~:~~~~ SUR1lEYfNG tom) ~es- Fan tit 385.6696 t+ta. 2981 Ctbe~ i 9.20(!6 DLSG7tIP!'i(~~ i~(1R R~8 ZONE SPtdRlirtMG PATIO fltl!!~3 SUBDif VtS10At A poacet of rant! bein,~ a portion of Lots 2 3 Ble~ck t of Spuiwring Subdivision ~ Gte3d feu° terord is (ire affice of tt~ AtiB County Rt+et Boise, Ida in Book 69 of Pik ~ Poges Ti04 ttuu 7108 lt- is the: SW if4 caf Saetion 23, T.4At., lL t W.. B.AI., Ada Cawtity, tt, more y t~sarit~tl ~ fi~tiows; t Exhibit C -Page 6 ~ a CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEAl.IEY'S L.~-ND SURVEYtQ+tG ~a~ ~ . rte, ~, .e~saea Pro~dt Imo.; 2$ff1 ~r3e 19.2I~ Page 2 of 2 ~d Parcel Cent 6.7T , enoae of tens. aEV at av iz:p .. rqa~-aE-dcs~~oe Exhibit C -Page 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 w~ ~' ~ ~ I ~~ ~'z~=, to .,. g ~ _ ~ G7 ~ J [3G 2 sr ~ ~'~ r,,~?~ '~e~ Q7 E,a ,g a. ~ - a: C ~ I dl. ~ 4 .L R ~ H ~,, ~1~ `~ ~ _~ -~ I +~ fif t t ~ ~''~.. ~ ~ dd ~ ~~~ j( .~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~!t. ,... 4 aq ',~' \ ~ 2 ~ ~ y~~i ~~ ,~.; ~~ a.t ~~~yyy"' ~ g ~~~~ -. J fJ~ t._ i /r d ! 1 e 4=~ ff ~ ~'' fi -.,,i`l1~ - ,s d' ~ ~ ~~ ~ '~ - °C- /A i~:i ~ ~ ,~~ e+- ``~ ! ~°.. N i l ~ °--.. ,: ,,~+ f +', ~+ e, ~ t `' n ~g r_ ~ ~~t i bj ~ ,(. ~ z S~ ~ 's~ ~ ~ .~ ~ W _ A ft a _ J ~.e ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~° h _ ~ -~ ~~ '~ ~~ ~ ,;~ --- ~~ _ _ PL G ~; ~~~ }~~ O ~ S Exhibit C -Page 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. 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. The Council finds that a more appropriate map amendment would reflect a split zoning of R-4 for the lots proposed for detached units and R-8 for the lots proposed for attached units in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; As proposed on the revised plat dated 12/13/06, the Council finds that the development of this property will comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the residential districts. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment, as amended with both R-4 and R-8 zones, 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). The Council finds that all essential services can be made available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The Council finds that annexing the subject property to R-4 and R-8 is in the best interest of the City at this time 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Exhibit D -Page 1 ~. s ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Council fmds that the proposed revised preliminary plat (dated 12/13/06) conforms to the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Council fmds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends that the Commission & Council rely 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, and Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD and TI'D consider road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission & Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff and the Commission is unaware. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Council is unawaze of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, the Council fmds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which Staff is unawaze. 3. Variance Findings: The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-SB-4E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The UDC requires that no block face be more than 750-feet in length without an intersecting street or alley or that no block face shall have a length greater than 1,300-feet Exhibit D -Page Z 4 e ~ . . t- CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 without a connecting pedestrian open space and pathway. Therefore, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. However, since the property is irregularly shaped and the existing surrounding development does not stub or have pedestrian connections to this property, Council believes the variance requested should be granted. This site is such that full compliance with the UDC standards would be relatively impossible and cause an undue hardship to the applicant. B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Council finds that this is an irregularly shaped lot, which limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Further, the existing surrounding development does not provide any stub streets or pedestrian connections to this property which would allow the applicant to comply with the UDC. For these reasons, Council believes that a variance would relieve an undue hardship to the applicant because of the characteristics of the site. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare Council fmds that granting the subject variance should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Further, Council recognizes that this is an unusually shaped property and existing site conditions restrict compliance with the ordinance. However, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. Council believes that in this case site conditions are such that would cause an undue hardship to the applicant and that a variance should be rg anted Council further requires that development of this property be required to comply with all other dimensional standards of the UDC. Exhibit D -Page 3 • . February 16, 2007 PP 06-045 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Spurwing Limited Partnership ITEM NO. 6-E REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for PP approval of 73 residential bldg lots consisting of 46 attached single-family units 8~ 27 detached single-family units & 6 common lots on 20.51 acres in proposed R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Sub AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: See Attached Findings //~l' ~ Date: Phone: _ 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 • .~ ,~~= ~. ~~ ~~~ «.~e, 1ti ~ '~~~. ~~'~ In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R S (Medium Density Residential) zone; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval for 65 single family residential lots and 5 common lots on 20.51 acres; and Variance (VAR) approval to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district, by 5purwing Limited Partnership. Case No(s). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 For the City Council Hearing Dates of: December 12, 2006, January 9, 2007, and February 6, 2007 (Findings approved on February 20, 2007) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 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, Landscape Plan, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007 incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Council approved the annexation request with a split zoning of R-4 for the lots with detached units and R-8 for the lots with attached units, per the Legal Description in Exhibit C and as shown on the Preliminary Plat in Exhibit A of the attached Staff Report, for the hearing date February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference; and 2. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated January 9, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; 3. The Council approved the applicant's request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 • s within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council 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 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 • By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~~ day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED_~~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED ~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIRD VOTED_~~~~ MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED ~_ (TIE BREAKER) ~vi'~~i~~~~~~'6 Mayo~~~ ~ ~~~Weerd Attest: ~'~~® ~ "~ ' ~` ~®„°° ~~® ~/~ ~ = ~ L William G. Berg, Jr., City lerk = ~ ~~' d sue!'// ~ , ~~~ `~a ~m Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning fop ;'public Works Department and City Attorney. By: ~Y1 G~,1 e~c ~ Vu.`1'~ -> Dated: (`~ ~- ZZ ~^~ City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: February 6, 2007 -s ~:~•.~~ (Continued from December 12, 2006 and '~;~ -G~'~~ ,~ January 9, 2007) ~a~+,~~ TO: Mayor & City Council ~ t°`~"' ~! ~~ FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner ~~~ *~ ~~~~-` Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043 Annexation and Zoning of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to -4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R-8 (Medium Density Residential). PP-06-045 Preliminary Plat of ~ 45 single-family residential building lots ~_-°_~' 30 attached units and 35 detached units and 6 ~ common lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone. VAR-06-020 Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. 1. SUNIMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Spurwing Limited Partnership, is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres of land to R-8 (Medium Density Residential), currently zoned RR in Ada County; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval of 73 single-family residential building lots consisting of 46 attached patio homes and 27 detached homes, and 6 common lots; and a Variance (VAR) from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. The site is located just north of Chinden Boulevazd and northeast of the Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection. Currently, the site consists of vacant land some of which is improved for the golf course. The site is composed of one tax parcel and is currently platted as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. This site also includes a portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. A Property Boundary Adjustment application that matches the configuration of the property as shown on the proposed plat is currently in process at Ada County and will be required to be completed prior to annexation ordinance approval by City Council. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area, but is outside of the City's current Area of Impact. 2. SIJNIlVIARY RECOIVIlVIENDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, VAR) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance applications. Due to the annexation path of this property, the proposed plat layout, and zoning requested, Staff is recommending denial of the proposed Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision (AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, VAR-06-020) for the reasons listed in the Analysis of the StaffReport. Note: The Coryt~nission is not requited to snake a recornnzendation to City Council on the Variance application. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/VAR-06-020 PAGE 1 i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 in order for Staff to prepare Findings and Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and revised Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2~ meeting the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006 November 2, 2006, and November 16 2006 At the public hearing on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearings: i. In favor: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions (applicant/owner's representative); Jock Hewitt, Spurwing Limited Partnership (applicant/owner); Tina Rice; Myron Tncker• and Ed Davis (read letter written by Donna Larsen. General Manager Spurwing Country Club on behalf of Spurwing Country Club) ii. In opposition: Ron Ashley, Ginna Engle (also speaking for other homeowners in Spurwing Subdivision) Byron Brown (also speaking for Beverly Brown), Joy Compton, Bob Trerise Grant Peterson, and Andrea Nist. Fifteen other people signed their names on the sign-in sheet provided at the meeting in opposition to the proiect but did not speak during the hearing fsee sign-in sheet from November l6 2006 meeting) iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters v. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission• i. Proposed lot sizes/transition from e~sting 1-acre lots along the north boundary ii. Proposed density; iii. Increasedtraffic/access onto Chinden Boulevard• iv. Resident opposition to proiect c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation• i. Commission voted to recommend denial of the proiect d. Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: i. The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending denial of the proiect Because the Commission's recommendation is for denial no conditions are included in this report. ii. Applicant has submitted a revised plat. dated November 22 2006 (see paragraph below . Since the Commission meeting on November 16s' the applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated 1l 22-06 which addresses some of the concerns that the Commission and neighbors had The primary changes to the plan are as follows• J Total lot count has been reduced by 2 building lots to 69 building lots; J The building lots along the northern bounda have increased in size providing more of a transition in lot sizes to the existing 1-acre lots to the north: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/VAR-06-020 PAGE 2 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3) The oven space along the northern boundary, west of the common area between Lots 42 & 44, has been removed Visibility of the common areas located behind the bualdang lots was noted as a concern by the Police Department J Some of the attached units originally shown along the north boundary have been relocated to the west boundary. Staff has reviewed the revised plat and all lots meet the dimensional standards of the proposed R-8 zone. However. Sta f has not updated the staff report below to reflect the revised plat. as the Commisswn reviewed and made a decision on the revious version. The Police Department has not commented on the revised play The Commission also has not reviewed or commented on the revised play he Meridian City ouncil h Al'rl *hPQp ~*nme nn 7loramhnr 1'f~ 2006 A the T71h~1P haarinrr aL ___ ___~____ ~ a~ • . . ~ -. .. _._ __ aye a inimum to 'tee of 10 000 aaare feet and ~rther rea ~ stpd tha aff Lndate g ..a_.ce_-----'' ---' ---_ ... .. - -- - - Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ- 06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-06- 043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: Parcel No.: 88081770030 Generally located northeast of the N. Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection; S.W. '/a of Section 23, T.4N., R.1 W. b. Owner: Spurwing Limited Partnership/Pacific Links Ltd. Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203/6800 N. Spurwing Way Boise, ID 83702/Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Spurwing Limited Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP e. Present Zoning: RR (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 20.51 acres to R-8, Preliminary Plat approval of 73 single-family residential building lots and 6 common lots, and a Variance from UDC 11-6C- 3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Forty-six of the lots are proposed to be for attached patio homes and 27 are proposed to be for detached homes. All of the proposed lots meet the minimum dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 9,067 square feet. The gross density of the project is 3.56 dwelling units per acre; the net density is 4.45 dwelling units per acre. Open space consists of 3.69 acres or 18% of the site. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 6/20/06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 5/28/06 Spurwing Pario Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a Variance 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. d. Newspaper notifications published on: October 2~ and 16~`, 2006 (Commission); November 20~` and December 4~. 2006 (Council) e. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 22~, 2006 (Commission); November 17~`. 2006 (Council) f. Applicant posted notice on site by: October 7`", 2006 (Commission); December 2~, 2006 Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is currently vacant. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property in bordered on the north by 1- acre lots in Ada County and is surrounded on the south, east, and west by Spurwing Golf Course property. Further to the west, bordering the golf course, are also one-acre lots in Ada County. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family 1-acre lots within Spurwing Subdivision, zoned RR (Ada County) 2. East: Immediately to the east, Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further east, the proposed Knight Sky Subdivision, zoned R-4, R-15, and C-C. 3. South: Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); South of Chinden, the proposed Irvine Subdivision, zoned R-8; rural residential property, zone RUT (Ada County). 4. West: Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further west, single-family one-acre lots in Westwing Estates Subdivision and agricultural land, zoned RR. d. History of Previous Actions: The subject property is currently platted in Ada County as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spurvving Subdivision and also contains portions of Lots 2 and 4 of the same subdivision. NOTE: A Property Boundary Adjustment is currently in process at Ada County that will adjust the boundaries of these lots as shown on the proposed plat and described with the annexation application. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 5 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Location of sewer: This property is currently not serviceable. It is Master Planned to flow to the North Black Cat Lift Station, through planned mains in the annexed but undeveloped property to the west. Location of water: In a cooperative agreement with United Water of Idaho, Meridian as agreed to allow United Water to service this property. Issues or concerns: Sewerability of this property. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There aze no major facilities coursing through this site. The applicant shall be required to the any ditch lying within this site. 3. Hazards: No hazards have been identified on this site. 4. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium Density Residential) 5. Size of Property: 20.65 acres (AZ); 20.51 acres (PP) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 73 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 73 4. Common Lots: 6 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 79 7. Gross Density: 3.56 dwelling units per acre (net density is 4.45 dwelling units/acre) 8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 square feet (proposed by applicant) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): N/A (A street buffer is 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: 18% (3.692 acres) 4. Other landscaping standazds: Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (iJDC 11-3G-3E2). h. Amenities: Open space and common azeas aze proposed with ponds and connecting stream channels. i. Off-Street Pazking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached and single-family attached dwellings with more than 1 bedroom to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' pazking pad in front of each garage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standazds: R-8 Dimensional Standazds (in feet) Setbacks Proposed Required Front Living Area (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Side Accessed Gazage (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 6 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Front Accessed Garage (from back of sidewalk) 20 20 Side (5' public utility & drainage easement is required) 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (detached, with garage facing street) 50 50 Frontage (attached) 40 40 Lot Size (detached, w/garage facing the front property line) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (attached) 4,000 4,000 Maximum Building Height 35 35 * No changes to the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-S were requested. k Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided internally from the existing public street, W. Balata Court, which is accessed via N. Spurwing Way from Chinden Boulevard. Balata Court is currently improved as a 36-foot wide street with curb and gutter. Sidewalk has been constructed on W. Balata Court in front of the residential lots and the clubhouse lots west of the site and on the north side of the street but none exists where the site abuts Balata or east of the proposed connection to Balata on the south side. Access to the dwellings within this development will be via internal public streets to be constructed with the subdivision. All of the internal streets will be local streets with 36- foot wide street sections (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain 5-foot wide attached sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way. The applicant is not proposing any stub streets since the surrounding property is currently a golf course and there are no existing stubs on the north boundary from Spurwing Subdivision. Staff is generally supportive of the proposed street system. NOTE: To satisfy the Fire Department requirement for secondary access, the applicant is proposing an "emergency access only" road at the southwest comer of the site from Chinden Boulevard directly north of the terminus of N. Ten Mile Road. ACHD has submitted conditions of approval for this development (see Exhibit B). The Idaho Transportation Department (TTD) has submitted a comment that the applicant has not yet applied to ITD for the proposed emergency access from Chinden Boulevard with a note that the main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. Supposedly, the predominant movement from the subdivision would be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement (please see Exhibit B for all of TTD's comments). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On September 29, 2006, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Meridian Police Department. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 73 single-family lots on 20.Slacres for a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density lies within the anticipated density of the Comprehensive Plan for this area. 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 service will be extended to the project at the developer's expense, although it is currently not available (water service will be provided by United Water). • 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 Sherifjys 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 Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. 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. The applicant is proposing to construct a solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary and a 4 foot tall wrought iron fence along the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries of this development. Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis below and Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This parcel has limited frontage on Chinden Boulevard, an arterial street. The applicant is proposing an emergency access only connection to Chinden Boulevard. The new public street Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 8 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 connection to W. Balata Count has been reviewed and approved by ACI•ID. City Staff is also supportive of the connection to W. Balata Count; no additional access points to Chinden Boulevard, except for the emergency access, shall be allowed. The Idaho Transportation Department has yet to approve the proposed emergency access from Chinden. The Meridian Police Department is regaining that the plat be revised to include an additional stub street for increased emergency access to this site. 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 proposed development is generally compatible with the existing single family residential properties to the north in that they ane both nesidential uses; however, Staff does believe that there should be more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the existing 1-acne lots to the north and the proposed attached units proposed on 4, 595-6, 042 squane foot lots. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 8 -Require new urban density subdivisions which abut or aze proximal to existing low density residential land uses to provide landscaped screening or transitional densities with lazger, more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban level densities and rural residential densities. There are some existing low density residential land uses to the north. The applicant is proposing to construct solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeters boundary of this development to provide a buffer to the existing residences. Further, a landscaped common anea with a meandering creek and ponds are also proposed along this boundary between the existing homes and the pnoposed attached homes. Stafffinds that the proposed fencing and common area would assist in providing screening between the proposed urban development and the existing surrounding rural residences.; However, Staff believes that the applicant should provide a better transition in density and plat larger more comparable lot sizes adjacent to the existing 1-acre lots to the north, instead of the proposed landscape buffer and attached lots. Staff recommends that a minimum 10, 000 square foot lot be provided along the north side of this property, to effectively transition to the unbars densities pnoposed. Further, although the applicant has provided a buffer in the form of landscaped common area along this boundary, it is virtually inaccessible and unusable to the residents of the subdivision because of the proposed ponds and meandering cheeks and does not meet the requirements of UDC 11-3G-3. Also, the Police Department is not supportive of the design of the open space area on the north boundary as it does not offer natural surveillance opportunities for the public areas and creates a potential safety hazard. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any written or verbal testimony provided from neighbors when determining if additional screening or if a d fferent transition in density is more appropriate. 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. Spunwing Subdivision to the nonth obtained an RR zone (1-acre lots) in Ada County. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site; however, Staff believes that mote of a transition should be provided between the existing rural lots and the proposed urban lots in the form of larger, more comparable lot sizes, and lower densities on the north boundary of the subdivision. To provide an even better variety of residential zoning, and to better transition between the one acre lots to the north, some R-4 zoning should be approved on the northern portion of this property. Staff generally believes that the density proposed with this project is appropriate. However, the design of the development does not fit well into this established area. 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) 11-2A-2 lists single-family attached and 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. a General Standards: All lots shown on the proposed plat conform to the minimum dimensional requirement of the R-8 zone per UDC 11-2A-2. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. Therefore, the applicant must meet all dimensional standards. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Annexation & Zoning Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is generally consistent with what the Future Land Use Map calls for. However, Staff believes that zoning all 20 acres of this property to R-8 is not appropriate for this property- Please see Exhibit D and the Comprehensive Plan Analysis above for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on October 16, 2006 by David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Although the annexation path of this property appears to comply with the requirements of State Code, Staff believes that annexing the subject property will have the effect of having City parcels in the middle of a County subdivision (a City enclave). Staff believes that it is in the City's best interest to have additional properties included as part of annexing this property. It does not seem appropriate to have aCity-approved subdivision of this size that is surrounded by property still in the County, which may or may not annex into the City in the foreseeable future. Further, the applicant is actually processing Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 a property boundary application through the City to annex a small portion of the golf course lots, to facilitate this development, but is leaving a vast majority of the golf course lots out of the subject annexation and development request. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on OctobeY 19, 2006, the Commission did not have an issue with the pNOposed R-8 zone and the transition in densities pYOVided between the existing 1-acre properties in Spur-wing Subdivision and the proposed lots. 2. Preliminary Plat Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Density: As noted previously in this report, this area is designated for medium density residential uses. Medium density residential is defined as 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The submitted plat has a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units per acre. Although Staff has no problem with the proposed density, Staff believes that more of a transition from the e~sting 1-acre rural residential lots should be provided in the form of larger lots and lower densities along the north boundary. The smaller, attached lots should be relocated to the west, east, and south boundaries adjacent to the golf course, with the larger lots serving as the transition between the 1-acre lots to the north and the attached lots further to the south. Landscaping: The landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1 is not approved. • Per UDC 11-3B-10, the applicant should work with the City Arborist, Ekoy Huff, on designing, adopting, and implementing a protection and mitigation plan for the existing trees on site. • Per UDC-11-3G-3, the applicant must provide a minimum of 5% open space that is accessible by all residents of the development including but not limited to: open grassy azeas of at least 50' x 100' in azea, community gardens, ponds or water features, or plazas. While the applicant is proposing ponds and meandering creeks as water features, they aze not readily accessible by all residents of the development, and do not allow emergency service providers good visibility into these public azeas. Further, not all of the grassy azeas proposed meet the dimensional requirements stated above for qualified open space. Although the proposed open space calculations exceed the requirements of the UDC, the actual qualified open space does not meet the minimum requirements due to dimensions and location. Staff believes that the common azea should be more centrally located and provide more open azea without ponds for usability by the residents. Applicant should clarify at the public hearing what height of fence is proposed along the north boundary. The applicant clarified at the public hearing that a 6 foot tall masonry wall is proposed along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spunving Subdivision. A written certificate of completion should be prepazed by the landscape azchitect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 11 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Access: Access to this site is currently provided by N. Spurwing Way via W. Balata Court, both local public streets within Spurwing Subdivision. An emergency access is proposed from Chinden Boulevard at the southwest corner of the site for emergency vehicles only. Direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard shall be prohibited except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision; a note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access. Stub Streets: The Police Department is requiring that an additional stub street be added for increased emergency access to the site. Staff believes that this will be a difficult condition to meet. Staff recommends that the applicant meet with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to discuss this issue, prior to the next public hearing. As of the print date of this report, the applicant was unable to make contact with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to come to a resolution on an additional access to the site. Staff contacted the Lieutenant and the Police Department still maintains that they would like to see an additional access provided to the site. It appears that the applicant will be unable to provide one based on the existing subdivision to the north that did not stub to this property and the existing golf course that surrounds the site. Existing Residences/Buildings: The site does not currently contain any residences or buildings. Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the existing residences. A 4-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed on the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries. A detailed fencing plan should be submitted upon application of the final plat. If permanent fencing is not provided before issuance of a building permit, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path /multi-use fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, asingle-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common 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. Although the proposed plat and R-8 zoning would add to the variety of housing types Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-O6-020 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 in the subject area, Staff believes that more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the e~sting 1-acre lots and the proposed attached units should be provided along the north boundary. Staff does not oppose the overall density proposed; however, believes that the higher density attached homes should be relocated from the north boundary to the west, east, and south boundaries of the subdivision. Further, Staff would like to see larger, more usable open space areas, located centrally within the development. The Commission should consider staff s analysis and recommendation, and the layout of the proposed lots and open space in relation to the e~sting and proposed homes when making recommendation to the City Council. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission heard testimony, considered Staff "s analysis, and discussed the proposed common areas and did not have an issue with the amount of open space provided, or the location and inaccessibility of some of the common areas as noted by Staff in this report. The Commission also did not have an issue with the requested R-8 zone or the transition in density and lot sizes proposed between the existing rural lots and the proposed lots. Although some of the proposed lot sizes are small, they believed that since the proposed units would be attached and would be a minimum of 1,400 square feet per unit, the structure itself would be least 2,800 square feet, comparable with the existing homes in Spurwing than smaller detached homes on these lots would be. Therefore, the Commission requested that Staff prepare Conditions of Approval for the subject applications (see Exhibit A). 3. Variance Application: The applicant has applied for a Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Special Considerations: There are no existing stub streets or pedestrian connections from the existing surrounding Spurwing Subdivision for this development to connect to. Since the land to the west, south, and east is part of the Spurwing Golf Course, no stub streets are proposed for future connectivity although the Police Department is requesting a stub street be provided to the property. The irregular shape and size of the property also limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Staff believes compliance with UDC 11-6C- 3F is not feasible in this case due to the site limitations stated above and that the required Findings for a Variance can be met (see Exhibit D). b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the subject applications, AZ-06-043, PP- 06-045, and VAR-06-020 per the comments stated in the staff report for the hearing date of October 19, 2006. NOTE: Staff is recommending denial of the variance because the recommendation is for denial of annexation into the City. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 to allow Staff time to prepare Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2"d meeting, the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 13 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006 November 2.2006; and November 16, 2006. At the public hearine on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial eridian City O 7n it hParri thc+ca itame nn T•nnnml, 19~ 2006 iAnnarv th February 6.2007 A he February 6 2007 mppt~no tH_p r;r~, ~.,,,,,_ •~ _ a ~L ~nexation request along with the Preliminary Plat and Varian~p annhratinnc ~.,H;o,.t to e on ~ on o nnroval lis din hibi B of b aff r no 11. EI~~ITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) 3. Landscape Plan (dated: 5-28-06) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Sanitary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Idaho Transportation Department 9. Central District Health Department C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 A. Drawings Vicinity Map Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) a~ na 7as aw. ~ mn ao-o ~ "~" - :a~ ac, as ~u, w a ma c.ri my:.sea.+ - [yj ~_ Rl T16 EYta~-~ 7i'gW itCt ~ Y'D W~Lt 0 4tl 4a0. ,: ~----_.u"~ 1~ ~. ~. ~. l '~ mpur p'r#~.4i?~ l61341t Li#oU!) O%Aap ar rriutlf ma~'+am -"~iVll~Y~lfMf(~•~YAI L, r 9' I, R a~~l ~ b ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ P - •~ 9- ~ ~ (~i '1 = ~~~- l +iTJ~p^ ~ 6 i ry y.__. Il .,d. a ,~ 1- ~ : tt4q g8: 1pF k f ~'°~ bf ` Y~ ~ ~j~,n',~„~LJ ~ ~ I. ~ ~i r III 1 { r r{~ I) ~ `~r' - r f f~. I°a~ -3~'1 8~ ~j i~ 1 EHc ~~ ,~,~:~...~ ~ ~ , ~ .,.. =~ ; ~ ~ , . ~ 114: ' , 'Z' ~ t r~ 6 ~~ ~ ~ r F ~~~ ~.~ ,, e ~~` i ._ -~ ~1 1 r r { i ~ , ,v~ ~,._ yip ~ p ~ ~ . ~ ' ~r 5g~ g~ 1 ~. ~ ~ a ,~ k F t Y~ .~ M t 1 ~- i Dyyyya`aA i I ./ f#. • ~.~. I ~. ,. ~ ,eooaae - L Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. Landscape Plan (dated 5-28-06) -NOT APPROVED ..:-;:~. Exhibit A -Page 3 ~ # CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1. The overall annexation boundary legal description submitted with the application (prepared on August 16, 2006, by D. David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. owever. the orieinal nnexat;nn lei 1 description does no efl ct the Council-approved zoning for this property The applicant has submitted legal e captions. dated 12/1 /06. and an exhibit map that reflect the .opine des; _ Lions of R~ and R-8 approved by City Council which arP inrlnrlPra ;,, Rol,;t,'~ n 1 •.i...L „ ~~vu ~. cuvu~ Irv 1611 6116 UilL'lIIdl OVer I exahon bounder legal descnption and exhibit m p 1.1.2. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The Development Agreement process shall be completed within 6 months of City Council approval of the annexation Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The DA shall incorporate the following: • Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall complete a Record of Survey for a Property Boundary Adjustment in Ada County for the portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, Spurwing Subdivision, that are currently within the boundaries of the subject annexation request. Submit a copy of the recorded Record of Survey to Planning Staff. Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall submit recorded warranty deeds to the Planning Department that reflect the current boundary of the proposed annexation and plat. Secondary access to the subdivision as provided on the preliminary plat at the southwest corner of the property from Chinden Blvd. shall be gated both at the Chinden access and the internal subdivision access in accordance with Police and Fire Department requirements. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet 1 of 1, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated December 13, 2006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 The landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Associates, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1, is not approved and shall be revised according to the conditions noted below: • Revise the landscape plan to reflect the revised configuration of the plat and install all landscaping in accordance with UDC 11-3B. • 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. Include mitigation information on the landscape plan. • Provide a detailed fencing plan for all fencing proposed on the site reflecting a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spurwing Subdivision and a 4-foot tall wrought iron fence around the west, east, and south perimeter boundaries as shown on the landscape plan submitted with the preliminary plat. Exhibit B -Page 2 ~ i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The preceding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.3 All lots within the development shall conform to the dimensional standards of either the R-4 or the R-8 zone, depending on the particulaz zone in which they aze located. 1.2.4 All lots along the north boundary of the subdivision shall have a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet as shown on the plat dated 12-13-16 and required by Council at the 12-12-06 City Council meeting. 1.2.5 Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon the Idaho Transportation Department's approval of the emergency access proposed from Chinden Boulevard. If ITD should deny this access request, the development would not be able to provide the two emergency access points required by the Fire Department for this size of development. 1.2.6 Place a note on the face of the final plat that prohibits direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision. 1.2.7 Per UDC 11-3B-9C6, all open water ponds proposed on the site shall have re-circulating water and shall be maintained so that they do not become a mosquito breeding ground. 1.2.8 Provide fencing around the perimeter of the development, as proposed. Provide a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the north boundary of this site, as proposed during the October 19~` public hearing. 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 shall be installed azound the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.9 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. 1.2.10 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided 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. 1.2.11 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.3.1. 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). 1.3.2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3. 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 aze 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 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable azea. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4. A written certificate of completion should be prepazed by the landscape azchitect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the landscape installation. All standazds of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. 1.3.5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.6. 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. 1.3.7. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 The preliminary plat shows the sewer main proposed in this development ending at W. Chinden Boulevazd. At this time there aze no sewer mains in or planned to be installed in Chinden Boulevazd. This property is master planned in the North Black Cat shed. This property is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sewer system and the City of Meridian does not guazantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC. 2.2 This property is master planned to sewer to the North Black Cat Lift Station via mains that aze planned to be development driven in the property to the west. If the applicant wishes to commence development prior to the "Master Planned mains" being available they may proceed under the following conditions: a) This is conditional on there being available capacity within the Ten-Mile Trunk. b) The applicant shall provide written permission from the owner of the Silver Leaf Lift Station, granting access to use that lift station. c) The applicant shall be responsible to prove capacity exists in the Silver Leaf Lift Station, and be responsible for any upgrades necessary. d) The applicant shall be responsible install the necessary off-site gravity mains from this site to the Silver Leaf Lift Station. These mains shall not be eligible for reimbursement agreements. 2.3 The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this proposed development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any mains that aze 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 Standazd Specifications. 2.4 The applicant shall be responsible to install an all-weather access road per City of Meridian standazd specifications to all sewer mains not located within the right-of--way. 2.5 The applicant shall connect to a Municipal water system. 2.6 The applicant shall comply with all Department of Environmental Quality's Best Management Practices separation requirements between storm facilities and private wells. 2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized. prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2.8 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.9 The applicant has indicated that the P.I. system shall be an extension of Spurwing's system. Prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting the applicant shall provide written approval from the owner of that system. 2.10 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.11 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. 2.1 Z Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.13 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.15 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, 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. 2.17 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.21 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.22 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.23 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall Exhibit B -Page 2 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story family dwellings 3600 square feet and greater will require a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' apart. International Fire Code Appendix C 3.2 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing. 3.3 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 %z" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications. d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 The emergency access drive 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 The emergency access drive shall have a 20' wide improved surface capable of supporting an imposed load of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 3.7 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 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). Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the. distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.9 This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thru the Meridian Fire Department. A "No Pazking, Fire Lane" emergency access sign shall be installed at the access gate. 4. Police Department 4.1 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. Common areas are completely blocked from public view. Seventy-three home sites with one primary access is not acceptable. Prior to the next public hearing, 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 azeas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 4.2 To increase emergency access to the site, the Police Departments recommends that the applicant provide a stub street from the property. Prior to. the next public hearing, the applicant should submit a revised platlsite plan to reflect this requirement. 4.3 Any interior fencing 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 has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.1.1 Construct West Balata Court as one half of a 36-foot street section within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.2 Locate the entry road intersecting West Balata Court as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct all the internal roadways as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.4 Locate and construct one knuckle on the south side of West Tramore Drive and one standard cul- de-sac turnaround at the intersection of North Dunloy Way and North Castle Baz Way. Exhibit B -Page 2 i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7.1.5 Construct emergency access at the southwest corner of West Tramore Drive, as proposed. Utilize some restrictive device to inhibit the possibility for cut-thru or general use traffic within the emergency access. The device used to control access on the emergency vehicle roadway shall be approved by the Meridian Fire Department and submitted to ACRD in writing. 7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACHD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACRD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLIlVE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACRD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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. 7.3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7.3.1 The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are satisfied. 7.3.2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. 8. Idaho Transportation Department 8.1 The applicant shall apply to ITD for the emergency access to US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd.) shown on the proposed plat. Note: The main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. The predominant movement from the subdivision is suspected to be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement. 9. Central District Health Department 9.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map l .Overall Annexation Boundary Legal Description & Exhibit Map T~Q~~Y`$ ~j~d 25tH Bogus Basin Ad. + 8aise, Idaho E33702 .S~R~E~~~~.i' (2o8j 385-a636 Fax (208} 385-0$98 Proje~, No_: 2981 Date: 3une Z, a0D6 Reuised: August 18, 2005 ANNIrXA110N DESCRIP710M FOR SRURWINt3 PATIO HOMES SUBDIVISION A parcel of land being g portion of Lod 2 and 4 and ail of Lot 3 of Stock 1 of t3purwutg Subdhrision, as filed far record in the office of the Ada County Reorder, Boise, Idaho ~ Book 89 of Plate at pages 7104 Yhru 7108, and a portion of the SW if4 of Section 23, T.4N., R1W„ B.M., Ada County, Idaho and more parUauiarly described as foltaws: t3EGINNtNt3 at a loess cap marking the Soutitwsst corner of the said Section 23; thence slang the Westeriy t~undary of the' said SW 114 of Sec~hxt 23; thence North QO°24'4d" East 324.83 feet to an iron pin; thence said Westerly t>o~dery 8ottth 89°39'24Y' East 30.00 feet tc an rcon pin marking a point of curve; thence cvnttnuirug atang an arc of a curve tc the left. said runre having a radius of 20.00 feet, a central angle of 104°21''k6", a length of 38.43 fesi and a long chard tx3armg South 51 °69'58" ~ 31.60 feat to an Iron pin marktrlg a ~lnt of tangent; thence contirwir~ North 75°59'24" East 156.18 fit to an iron pin; thanes continuing North ti0°48'28" East 184.80 fit to an iron pin; theme leav4~ said. Westerly boundary North 90°58'41" East 873.13 #eet to err iron pin marking the Northwest garner of saki Lot 3; thenr~ atom. the !Northerly Boundary of said Lot 3 South 78°38'59" East idt3.A7 feet to an iron pirr thence continuing South 82°24'58" East 1.27.74 fit to an iron pin; thence continuing South 50°13'58" East 125:87 feet to an iron pin; thence t~tinutng t3outh 43°42"58" East 184.00 feet to an irrx- pin; thane continuing South 43°t)0'92" East 160.04 festto an trap pin; thence t•.ontinuing South 52°28'14° East 222.39 fit to an ifon pkr; thence continuing South 87°4+}'25" East 290.87 feet in an iron pin; thence continuing North 'S4°48'27° Eft 242,01 feet to an iron pin; thence conthtuing North Z6°48'2Z" East 1 x.21 feet to an Iran pin;. thence truing North 19°22'35" East 196.86 #eet to an iron pin; ~~oa t~tinuing North 43°12'34° West 285.25 fi'eet to an iron pin markng a point of curare; them carttinuing slang an arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a r~us of 24.00 feet, a c~tfral angle of 102°27'35°, a length of 35;77 feet and a fang c~tord bearfng South 85°33'38" West 31.18 to art Iron pin maritlrtg a point of ending of cave on ttte South right-of~nray Una of Wit Baba Coutt; thence issuing said South right-flf-army Una North 55°40'10"' West 25.40 fit #a a paint on the centerUr~ of said West Baia Cam markkrg a poMU of wive; thence aiorxg satd centerrne aior~ the. arc of a eaarve to. the right, said curve having a radius of 350.40 feet, a central artgie ~ 20°47'29", a length of 127.41 feet and a ~ chord bearing c.e. -smm~aee:am•lio Exhibit C -Page 1 i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEALEY'S LAMDSURVEYING z~tusaaaar~,~s~.~n~+aaaxae,s Prayed No.: 2981 Date: June 2, 2008 Revised: August 18, 20>~i Page 2 North 44°43'35° East 12+6,31 feet to a point marking a point of ending of carve; fhencv9le~ring saidr~nterlvre South 34°52"4tf" E~asi Z5.U0 feet to an ion pin on said South right-of-way line of West Galata Court; thence leavtng sold Soutl~ right-oi vsay Ifne South 05°57'22" West 38.28 feel to an iron pin; thence South 43°12`34" East 26619 feet to an iron pin marking a potrt of curve; thence along the arc of a cxave to the rkht, said curve fiavfng a radius of 75.00 feet, a cetttrai angle of 24°20'33", a length of 31.86 feet and a long otwrd beefing South 31°82'18" Fast 31.83 feet to an iron pin markir~ a poktt of tanger4; thence South 18°52`01" East 77.34 feet ko an iron pin on the fist tiourtiiary of said Lot 3; thence along said East lmundary South 40°48'28° West 789.24 fast to an irar- pin marking the Southeast comer of said Lot 3•"~nCe along the Southerly boundary of said LoE 3 North 76°39'48° Wes# 881.47 feet to an kon pin; thenca3 continuing South 82°16'37° West 605.59 fast to an iron pin; thence contfiuing North 85°06'24" West 300.82 feet to an iron pin; thence corrhrwing South 75°59'24" West 194.94 feet b an iron pin marling a paint of cwve; them cantirantng -along tFre arc of a curve to ttre left, sold curve having a radius ~ 20.80 fit, a cerdral angle of 75°38'-04", a length of 28.41 feet and a karcg chord tsearing Saufit 38°10`02" West24.53 feet to an Iron pin marking a point of tanger~ theme continu~g South 00°28'40" West 177.61 feet to an Iran pin marking a point of curve; tlt8nce continuing along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 20:00 feet, a c;ergrai'angle of 89°32'12", a length of 31.25 feet and a tong chard bearkcg Soutl~ 44°25'28" East 28.17 feet to an iron pin marking a point of ending of cwve ~ said tdorth r~td-of~-ray f#ne of State F~jhway 20; theme teavtng said North rigt~-of- way line South 00°48'28° West 40.80 feet to a past an the South boundary of said Sectlon 23; thence ahmg saki. South bo-mdary North $9"11`32" Weak 88:52 feet to the 1NJINT OF BEt3iNNIN{3. Said parcel of land contains 20,65 acmes, more or less. ~~~ 5 ~ l ~ 1, av~" ' 1yr, '~ RAY - ~~ ~~ Exhibit C -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 .- - SFURdtPdG SU8ci1}~flN ,ey ,~-.~~., _ s o~ o .... ..~.... . ~~ ~ ~ C~i e~ i M~ ~$.~ ~7 `~ ~ ~~ _ ,~ , 9 ! ::. d ~` ~_ a S?URIMNG SUSOMSIUN c. f 1 S. A~ dUNltrC. "'~~-~ cure oasn m4R 21 Mpn L 07E6 ~ RbRW A69 OSm aa1 ~ a1 e ~ Bf gyt+ ~ ~• sn ~ ~ nu 8 [ s~• p aG09 ffiYT$ 7SID f171 IS71 p ~' [ SA !!LO ~ 6t' SfA7 6~'pi 1C C 7 SPA 641 Lbs B.!'70'dS'y Sd Z89~ RPR'AS' flH 8p IIA a ~' [ d v ~ $Hg ~-Rjgp' __ 7 ~, ~,,, ~, SI`ffBWING PATIO H0 SIIBI)IPISI~IIT ~~~I~EEIi l~l'6 ~,.,~ s~ti~ RRCjPQ~ED MER~DIl~I AN(dE?(ATELNd ~'flL~ltl~S~ r ~ t wr~€o ~t ~~~ ~»., au ,se ,acpffi ~ s 5 $ OC Exhibit C -Page 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Legal Descriptions & Exhibit Map Depicting Boundary of R-4 & R-8 Zones TEAL.EY`S LARJLl 1 ~7 E 5~+ STree~ . ~ crr~, ~aar~ ~:~e, ~ A pal of land ~ p~~n of ~ a, 3 amd 4 Block ! of Sptuwi~ Subditriei~ as lll~ ~ > m the olOce of tt~ Ada. Comer Rccordt~r, Bcsase, Idalx+ ~ B~ 8~ of Plats at ?104 Wiu ?108, in Che SW Ito of Bastion 23p T 4N., R.1 ~., B.M., Ada Ca~tar- lttal'ro, tine as foltov~: SURVEYING t fax { Prujecx Na: 2981 19, 2~6 ~ ON AIL tt d ~PiB BPURWIIVts YATI®~'014i SiP8lplVl~Ip~l i-tt Exhibit C -Page 4 l___J CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 'i`EALEIf"S ~.IA{Ilt} SURVEYING ~~ ~ ~" c~,. tsa,+~ad Pt~jed NB.: ~ tom: i8, 2+iJQ6 Page Z aB 2 Chid 1'~el Cvn ! 3.8fl a ar less. ~ v~~ ~~+~' ~~ -. T. ~,~ r~t~~ ~ ~~ c as Exhibit C -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEALEY'S I~W~ a~ ~. ~~r; r , ~~a~ cam, ~~,~ ~:~~~ ~ SURVEYING tom) yes Fax (mil 3~AS~ Pm,~aR Alt! 2981 19~ DIEI~'JP't'!ON ~R R-8 ZUNI Sl~itR9Y`tNC 1pA3Ifl I~OtWES SITBD1iYtS1~f11i A Pte) of ~ bc~g a partion of Lots 2 X13 Btcaek t of Spt~eving Subdivis~an as filed f~ r+~crrd in t~ office e-f ~ Ada Cceunty ReB'ouse,ldals~ in 13aok 69 of at 1 ?lt)4 tlsru 71tl8 lammed in tl~ ~W ld~ of motion 23~, T.4N., 2I W.~ B.M., Ada Cawrty, td~-, ~' descn`b~ ~ Follows: Exhibit C -Page 6 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEAi.E1('S t.~IN~? Si.lRVEYt~tG ~av ~ saw as~aaa Cr~r. .e~t~ Fr~ect No.: Z~1 tie: t9, 2I)D6 Pie Z of 2 Psr~et ~+~ 6.77 , more at I~ss. a 1~~' ~ F<<"IZr~ T Exhibit C -Page 7 • , CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Q ° - r :.: w m ~, ~~ ~~ ~$~dd pZ ~ ~ ~ ~ D `c5~ a ~°~ ? ¢ t~* txi ~ a ~ - ~v~ ~~ ~ ~,~~~ ~ .. a, ~Gr~~.i C;d'N A ~ ' a ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ gy ~ "~ ~ Ct ~~~a. E'~tn I ~ ~ `~~ !~ 1 jr •,~~~ f p A jj _ ~ {v 1 f _ ~ ~ W~ ~`~ g 1. ~~ a~ t_ tl ~~ ~~ F_~ ~ '^ --`~~ ~ !dam _~ _ _ ~0, m r V .'.`~° ~ I ~rs~ ~~ 1 ~~~~~° ~i ~:.~~ O 7 f~r ~ yea a w b ,~ f ~ ,~ _ .~ _ [ v £t T ~ ~ i /' f _ m `e ~ ~ S ` ~ • m ~ ~'~~ N _. s0 °~, { '~z Ydr r_ .£d L3R ,9Lt1i 4 ,~~ ~ , "i? 3~` Exhibit C -Page S CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. 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. The Council finds that a more appropriate map amendment would reflect a split zoning of R-4 for the lots proposed for detached units and R-8 for the lots proposed for attached units in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; As proposed on the revised plat dated 12/13/06, the Council finds that the development of this property will comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the residential districts. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment, as amended with both R-4 and R-8 zones, 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 (iTDC 11-5B-3.E). The Council finds that all essential services can be made available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The Council finds that annexing the subject ro erty to R-4 and R-8 is in the best interest of the City at this time 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Council finds that the proposed revised preliminary plat (dated 12/13/06) conforms to the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement fiends. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends that the Commission & Council rely 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, and Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not awaze of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD and ITD consider road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission & Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff and the Commission is unaware. F. The development preserves significant nataral, scenic or historic features. The Council is unawaze of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, the Council finds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which Staff is unawaze. 3. Variance Findings: The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-5B-4E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The UDC requires that no block face be more than 750-feet in length without an intersecting street or alley or that no block face shall have a length greater than 1,300-feet Exhibit D -Page 2 • , CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 without a connecting pedestrian open space and pathway. Therefore, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. However, since the property is irregularly shaped and the existing surrounding development does not stub or have pedestrian connections to this property, Council believes the variance requested should be granted. This site is such that full compliance with the UDC standards would be relatively impossible and cause an undue hardship to the applicant. B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Council finds that this is an irregularly shaped lot, which limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Further, the existing surrounding development does not provide any stub streets or pedestrian connections to this property which would allow the applicant to comply with the UDC. For these reasons, Council believes that a variance would relieve an undue hardship to the applicant because of the characteristics of the site. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare Council finds that granting the subject variance should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Further, Council recognizes that this is an unusually shaped property and existing site conditions restrict compliance with the ordinance. However, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. Council believes that in this case site conditions are such that would cause an undue hardship to the applicant and that a variance should be granted Council further requires that development of this property be required to comply with all other dimensional standards of the UDC. Exhibit D -Page 3 • • February 16, 2007 VAR 06-020 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Spurwing Limited Partnership ITEM NO. 6-F REQUEST Findings for Approval -Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block length allowed under UDC 11-2D-3C for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision -northeast corner of North Ten Mile Road 8~ West Chinden Blvd AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Findings CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: V " MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER r e-r-ev~~ ~iii~t`~~" ~. ; a~ i~.~e $~ ~~ ~. _~;~~. In the Matter of Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R 8 (Medium Density Residential) zone; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval for 65 single family residential lots and 5 common lots on 20.51 acres; and Variance (VAR) approval to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district, by Spurwing Limited Partnership. Case No(s). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 For the City Council Hearing Dates of: December 12, 2006, January 9, 2007, and February 6, 2007 (Findings approved on February 20, 2007) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-3 82 and Maps. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 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 aze 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, Landscape Plan, and the Conditions of Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007 incorporated by reference. The conditions aze 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 aze herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The Council approved the annexation request with a split zoning of R-4 for the lots with detached units and R-8 for the lots with attached units, per the Legal Description in Exhibit C and as shown on the Preliminary Plat in Exhibit A of the attached Staff Report, for the hearing date February 6, 2007, incorporated by reference; and 2. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat, dated January 9, 2007, is hereby conditionally approved; 3. The Council approved the applicant's request for a Variance to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, 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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 within two (2) years of the approval of the preliminary plat or one (1) year of the combined preliminary and final plat or short plat. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen (18) months, maybe considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-6B- 7.A, the Director may authorize a single extension of time to record the final plat not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Additional time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the City Council may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or City Council may require the preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat or short plat to comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. If the above timetable is not met and the applicant does not receive a time extension, the property shall be required to go through the platting procedure again. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review maybe filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ '"- day of 2007. COUNCIL MEMBER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED_z~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER JOE BORTON VOTED~~~~i COUNCIL MEMBER CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED-~~~ COUNCIL MEMBER KEITH BIlZD VOTED_~~~- MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD VOTED ~ (TIE BREAKER) MayQ~~'~ „•• ~'~ee~d ~~ Attest: `~ C~ A~ `~_`~ ~,~ - $~.~~~ William G. Berg, Jr., City erk = .~ ~ 1 O ~ \\`y\ Copy served upon Applicant, The Planning ~D~etS~itim~`~,`~'ublic Works Department and City Attorney. _rr~ By: `7Gi,~1 ~'~ ~,~~ -~~ Dated: C72- Zz -L 1 City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, & VAR-06-020 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 E STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: February 6, 2007 ~;? ;' (Continued from December 12, 2006 and <-~' ~~ ~'' ~' '' R '.~~ _,~~ "w- January 9, 2007) ~Yll ~,~ TO: Mayor & City Council ~ 1°`"~"' FROM: Sonya Wafters, Associate City Planner ~~ ~~~ i Mike Cole, Development Services Coordinator 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043 Annexation and Zoning of 20.65 acres from RR (Ada County) to -4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and R-8 (Medium Density Residential). PP-06-045 Preliminary Plat of ~ ~ single-family residential building lots sonsistin~ of 30 attached L1Lits and 5 de ached Lnity and g ,~ common lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone. VAR-06-020 Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. 1. SUNIlVIARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Spurwing Limited Partnership, is requesting concurrent approval for Annexation and Zoning (AZ) of 20.65 acres of land to R-8 (Medium Density Residential}, currently zoned RR in Ada County; Preliminary Plat (PP) approval of 73 single-family residential building lots consisting of 46 attached patio homes and 27 detached homes, and 6 common lots; and a Variance (VAR) from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. The site is located just north of Chinden Boulevazd and northeast of the Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevazd intersection. Currently, the site consists of vacant land some of which is improved for the golf course. The site is composed of one tax parcel and is currently platted as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. This site also includes a portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, of Spurwing Subdivision. A Property Boundary Adjustment application that matches the configuration of the property as shown on the proposed plat is currently in process at Ada County and will be required to be completed prior to annexation ordinance approval by City Council. The subject property is within the Urban Service Planning Area, but is outside of the City's current Area of Impact. 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION The subject applications (AZ, PP, VAR) were submitted to the Planning Department for concurrent review. Below, staff has provided a detailed analysis for the requested Annexation and Zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Variance applications. Due to the annexation path of this property, the proposed plat layout, and zoning requested, Staff is recommending denial of the proposed Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision (AZ-06-043, PP-06-045, VAR-06-020) for the reasons listed in the Analysis of the Staff Report. Note: The Commission is not YequiYed to make a Yecommendation to City Council on the YaYiance application. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE I CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 in order for Staff to prepare Findings and Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was recommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and revised Findings in Exhibit C. Prior to the November 2~ meeting the applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat, dated November 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006 November 2, 2006, and November 16 2006 At the public hearing on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearings: i. In favor: Becky McKay, Engineering 5olntions (applicantlowner's representative ;Jock Hewitt. Spurwing Limited Partnership (applicant/owner); Tina Rice; Myron Tucker and Ed Davis (read letter written by Donna Larsen. General Manager Spurwing Country Club on behalf of Spurwing Country Club) ii. In opposition: Ron Ashley, Ginna Engle (also speaking for other homeowners in Spurwing Subdivision) Byron Brown (also speaking for Beverly Brown). Joy Compton. Bob Trerise Grant Peterson and Andrea Nist. Fikeen other people signed their names on the sign-in sheet provided at the meeting in opposition to the proiect but did not speak during the hearing (see sign-in sheet from November 16.2006 meeting) iii. Commenting: None iv. Staff presenting application: Sonya Wafters v. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Kev Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Proposed lot sizes/transition from e~sting 1-acre lots along the north boundary ii. Proposed density; iii. Increasedtraffic/access onto Chinden Boulevard• iv. Resident opposition to proiect c. Kev Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation• i. Commission voted to recommend denial of the proiect d. Outstanding Issue(s) for Citv Council: i. The Planning & Zoning Commission is recommending denial of the proiect Because the Commission's recommendation is for denial no conditions are included in this report. ii. Applicant has submitted a revised plat. dated November 22 2006 (see paragraph below). Since the Commission meeting on November I6'h, the applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat. dated 1122-06. which addresses some of the concerns that the Commission and neighbors had The primary changes to the plan are as follows• J Total lot count has been reduced b 2 building lots to 69 building lots; J The building lots along the northern boundary have increased in size providing more of a transition in lot sizes to the existing 1-acre lots to the north Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045/VAR-06-020 PAGE 2 L~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 J The oven space along the northern boundary west of the common area between Lots 42 & 44. has been removed Visibility of the common areas located behind the building lots was noted as a concern by the Police Department 4) Some of the attached units originally shown along the north boundary have been relocated to the west boundary. Staff has reviewed the revised plat and all lots meet the dimensional standards of the proposed R-8 zone. However Staff has not undated the staff report below to reflect the revised plat, as the Commission reviewed and made a decision on the previous version. The Police Department has not commented on the revised play The Commission also has not reviewed or commented on the revised plat he Meridian City Counc'1 heard thpc 11'Pme nn 11n~.Pmhar 17~' 2006 At the ntlhlic haarina Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 3 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 3. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Numbers AZ- 06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Numbers AZ-06- 043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 6, 2007, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial of the annexation and you must state specific reason(s) for the denial of the plat.) Continuance I move to continue File Numbers AZ-06-043, PP-06-045 and VAR-06-020, to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (State specific reason(s) for a continuance.) 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS a. Site Address/Location: Parcel No.: 88081770030 Generally located northeast of the N. Ten Mile Road/Chinden Boulevard intersection; S.W. % of Section 23, T.4N., R.1 W. b. Owner: Spurwing Limited Partnership/Pacific Links Ltd. Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203/6800 N. Spurwing Way Boise, ID 83702/Meridian, ID 83642 c. Applicant: Spurwing Limited Partnership 200 N. Fourth Street, Suite 203 Boise, ID 83702 d. Representative: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP e. Present Zoning: RR (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 20.51 acres to R-8, Preliminary Plat approval of 73 single-family residential building lots and 6 common lots, and a Variance from UDC 11-6C- 3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Forty-six of the lots are proposed to be for attached patio homes and 27 are proposed to be for detached homes. All of the proposed lots meet the minimum dimensional standazds of the R-8 zone. The average lot size in the proposed development is 9,067 square feet. The gross density of the project is 3.56 dwelling units per acre; the net density is 4.45 dwelling units per acre. Open space consists of 3.69 acres or 18% of the site. 1. Date of preliminary plat (attached in Exhibit A): 6/20/06 2. Date of landscape plan (attached in Exhibit A): 5/28/06 Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and 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 Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on this matter. c. The subject application will in fact constitute a Variance 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. d. Newspaper notifications published on: October 2nd and 16d', 2006 (Commission); November 20d' and December 4d' 2006 (Council) e: Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: September 22nd, 2006 (Commission); November 17`s, 2006 (Council f. Applicant posted notice on site by: October 7d', 2006 (Commission); December 2nd. 2006 Council 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): The site is currently vacant. b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This property in bordered on the north by 1- acre lots in Ada County and is surrounded on the south, east, and west by Spurwing Golf Course property. Further to the west, bordering the golf course, are also one-acre lots in Ada County. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: 1. North: Single-family 1-acre lots within Spurwing Subdivision, zoned RR (Ada County) 2. East: Immediately to the east, Spunwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further east, the proposed Knight Sky Subdivision, zoned R-4, R-15, and C-C. 3. South: Spurwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); South of Chinden, the proposed Irvine Subdivision, zoned R-8; rural residential property, zone RUT (Ada County). 4. West: Spunwing Golf Course, zoned RR (Ada County); further west, single-family one-acre lots in Westwing Estates Subdivision and agricultural land, zoned RR. d. History of Previous Actions: The subject property is currently platted in Ada County as Lot 3, Block 1, of Spunwing Subdivision and also contains portions of Lots 2 and 4 of the same subdivision. NOTE: A Property Boundary Adjustment is currently in process at Ada County that will adjust the boundaries of these lots as shown on the proposed plat and described with the annexation application. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities: 1. Public Works: Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 5 i ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Location of sewer: This property is currently not serviceable. It is Master Planned to flow to the North Black Cat Lift Station, through planned mains in the annexed but undeveloped property to the west. Location of water: In a cooperative agreement with United Water of Idaho, Meridian as agreed to allow United Water to service this property. Issues or concerns: Sewerability of this property. 2. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: There aze no major facilities coursing through this site. The applicant shall be required to the any ditch lying within this site. 3. Hazards: No hazards have been identified on this site. 4. Proposed Zoning: R-8 (Medium Density Residential) 5. Size of Property: 20.65 acres (AZ); 20.51 acres (PP) f. Subdivision Plat Information: 1. Residential Lots: 73 2. Non-residential Lots: 0 3. Total Building Lots: 73 4. Common Lots: 6 5. Other Lots: 0 6. Total Lots: 79 7. Gross Density: 3.56 dwelling units per acre (net density is 4.45 dwelling units/acre) 8. Minimum House Size: 1,400 squaze feet (proposed by applicant) g. Landscaping 1. Width of street buffer(s): N/A (A street buffer is 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: 18% (3.692 acres) 4. Other landscaping standards: Common open space lots should include at least one deciduous shade tree per 8,000 square feet (UDC 11-3G-3E2). h. Amenities: Open space and common areas aze proposed with ponds and connecting stream channels. i. Off-Street Pazking: UDC 11-3C-6 requires single-family detached and single-family attached dwellings with more than 1 bedroom to have 2 enclosed parking spaces (a garage) and a 20' x 20' parking pad in front of each gazage. j. Proposed and Required Residential Standazds: R-8 Dimensional Standazds (in feet) Setbacks Proposed Required Front Living Area (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Side Accessed Gazage (from back of sidewalk) 15 15 Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 6 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Front Accessed Garage (from back of sidewalk) 20 20 Side (5' public utility & drainage easement is required) 4 4 Rear 12 12 Frontage (detached, with garage facing street) 50 50 Frontage (attached) 40 40 Lot Size (detached, w/garage facing the front property line) 5,000 5,000 Lot Size (attached) ~ 4,000 4,000 Maximum Building Height 35 35 * No changes to the dimensional standards in UDC Table 11-2A-S were requested. k. Proposed and Required Non-Residential: N/A 1. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access: Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided internally from the existing public street, W. Balata Court, which is accessed via N. Spurwing Way from Chinden Boulevazd. Balata Court is currently improved as a 36-foot wide street with curb and gutter. Sidewalk has been constructed on W. Balata Court in front of the residential lots and the clubhouse lots west of the site and on the north side of the street but none exists where the site abuts Balata or east of the proposed connection to Balata on the south side. Access to the dwellings within this development will be via internal public streets to be constructed with the subdivision. All of the internal streets will be local streets with 36- foot wide street sections (measured back of curb to back of curb) and contain 5-foot wide attached sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of--way. The applicant is not proposing any stub streets since the surrounding property is currently a golf course and there are no existing stubs on the north boundary from Spurwing Subdivision. Staff is generally supportive of the proposed street system. NOTE: To satisfy the Fire Department requirement for secondary access, the applicant is proposing an "emergency access only" road at the southwest comer of the site from Chinden Boulevard directly north of the terminus of N. Ten Mile Road. ACHD has submitted conditions of approval for this development (see Exhibit B). The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has submitted a comment that the applicant has not yet applied to ITD for the proposed emergency access from Chinden Boulevazd with a note that the main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. Supposedly, the predominant movement from the subdivision would be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement (please see Exhibit B for all of ITD's comments). 7. COMMENTS MEETING On September 29, 2006, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with service providers in this azea. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Pazks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Meridian Police Department. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in Exhibit B below. 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 This property is designated "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight dwelling units per acre (see Page 99 of the Comprehensive Plan). The proposed Preliminary Plat includes 73 single-family lots on 20.51 acres for a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units/acre. The proposed density lies within the anticipated density of the Comprehensive Plan for this azea. 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 service will be extended to the project at the developers expense, although it is currently not available (water service will be provided by United Water). • 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 (NIPD). • The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained by the Ada County Highway 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 Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company. 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. The applicant is proposing to construct a solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary and a 4 foot tall wrought iron fence along the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries of this development. Prior to house construction, fencing should be constructed around the perimeter of this site. See Analysis Below and Exhibit B for more information. Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 2 -Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets. This parcel has limited frontage on Chinden Boulevard, an arterial street. The applicant is proposing an emergency access only connection to Chinden Boulevard. The new public street Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 connection to W. Balata Court has been reviewed and approved by ACI•ID. City Staff is also supportive of the connection to W. Balata Court; no additional access points to Chinden Boulevard, except for the emergency access, shall be allowed. The Idaho Transportation Department has yet to approve the proposed emergency access from Chinden. The Meridian Police Department is requiring that the plat be revised to include an additional stub street for increased emergency access to this site. 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 proposed development is generally compatible with the existing single family residential properties to the north in that they are both residential uses; however, Staff does believe that there should be more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the existing 1-acre lots to the north and the proposed attached units proposed on 4, 595-6, 042 square foot lots. Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective D, Action 8 -Require new urban density subdivisions which abut or are proximal to existing low density residential land uses to provide landscaped screening or transitional densities with larger, more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface between urban level densities and rural residential densities. There are some existing low density residential land uses to the north. The applicant is proposing to construct solid manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of this development to provide a buffer to the existing residences. Further, a landscaped common area with a meandering creek and ponds are also proposed along this boundary between the existing homes and the proposed attached homes. Stafffinds that the proposed fencing and common area would assist in providing screening between the proposed urban development and the existing surrounding rural residences.; However; StajJ'believes that the applicant should provide a better transition in density and plat larger more comparable lot sizes adjacent to the existing 1-acre lots to the north, instead of the proposed landscape buffer and attached lots. Staff recommends that a minimum 10, 000 square foot lot be provided along the north side of this property, to effectively transition to the urban densities proposed Further, although the applicant has provided a buffer in the form of landscaped common area along this boundary, it is virtually inaccessible and unusable to the residents of the subdivision because of the proposed ponds and meandering creeks and does not meet the requirements of UDC 11-3G-3. Also, the Police Department is not supportive of the design of the open space area on the north boundary as it does not offer natural surveillance opportunities for the public areas and creates a potential safety hazard. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any written or verbal testimony provided from neighbors when determining if additional screening or if a d~erent transition in density is more appropriate. 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. Spurwing Subdivision to the north obtained an RR zone (1-acre lots) in Ada County. Staff finds that the requested zoning designation contributes to the variety of residential zoning categories in this area and is Spurwing Pario Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 9 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this site; however, Staff believes that more of a transition should be provided between the existing rural lots and the proposed urban lots in the form of larger, more comparable lot sizes, and lower densities on the north boundary of the subdivision. To provide an even better variety of residential zoning, and to better transition between the one acre lots to the north, some R-4 zoning should be approved on the northern portion of this property. Staff generally believes that the density proposed with this project is appropriate. However, the design of the development does not fit well into this established area. 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 (iTDC) 11-2A-21ists single-family attached and 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 lots shown on the proposed plat conform to the minimum dimensional requirement of the R-8 zone per UDC 11-2A-2. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. Therefore, the applicant must meet all dimensional standards. 10. ANALYSIS a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Annexation & Zoning Application: Based on the policies and goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan, Staff believes that the requested R-8 zone is generally consistent with what the Future Land Use Map calls for. However, Staff believes that zoning all 20 acres of this property to R-8 is not appropriate for this property_ Please see Exhibit D and the Comprehensive Plan Analysis above for detailed analysis of the required facts and findings for annexation. The annexation legal description submitted with the application (stamped on October 16, 2006 by David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. Although the annexation path of this property appears to comply with the requirements of State Code, Staff believes that annexing the subject property will have the effect of having City parcels in the middle of a County subdivision (a City enclave). Staff believes that it is in the City's best interest to have additional properties included as part of annexing this property. It does not seem appropriate to have aCity-approved subdivision of this size that is surrounded by property still in the County, which may or may not annex into the City in the foreseeable future. Further, the applicant is actually processing Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 10 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 a property boundary application through the City to annex a small portion of the golf course lots, to facilitate this development, but is leaving a vast majority of the golf course lots out of the subject annexation and development request. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission did not have an issue with the proposed R-8 zone and the transition in densities provided between the existing 1-acre properties in Spurwing Subdivision and the proposed lots. 2. Preliminary Plat Application: The proposed preliminary plat substantially complies with the Unified Development Code. Special Considerations: Density: As noted previously in this report, this area is designated for medium density residential uses. Medium density residential is defined as 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The submitted plat has a gross density of 3.56 dwelling units per acre. Although Staff has no problem with the proposed density, Staff believes that more of a transition from the e~sting 1-acre raral residential lots should be provided in the form of larger lots and lower densities along the north boundary. The smaller, attached lots should be relocated to the west, east, and south boundaries adjacent to the golf course, with the larger lots serving as the transition between the 1-acre lots to the north and the attached lots further to the south. Landscaping: The landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1 is not approved. • 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. • Per UDC-11-3G-3, the applicant must provide a minimum of 5% open space that is accessible by all residents of the development including but not limited to: open grassy areas of at least 50' x 100' in area, community gardens, ponds or water features, or plazas. While the applicant is proposing ponds and meandering creeks as water features, they are not readily accessible by all residents of the development, and do not allow emergency service providers good visibility into these public areas. Further, not all of the grassy areas proposed meet the dimensional requirements stated above for qualified open space. Although the proposed open space calculations exceed the requirements of the UDC, the actual qualified open space does not meet the minimum requirements due to dimensions and location. Staff believes that the common area should be more centrally located and provide more open area without ponds for usability by the residents. Applicant should clarify at the public hearing what height of fence is proposed along the north boundary. The applicant clarified at the public hearing that a 6 foot tall masonry wall is proposed along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spurwing Subdivision. A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 11 • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Access: Access to this site is currently provided by N. Spurwing Way via W. Balata Court, both local public streets within Spurwing Subdivision. An emergency access is proposed from Chinden Boulevazd at the southwest corner of the site for emergency vehicles only. Direct lot access to Chinden Boulevazd shall be prohibited except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision; a note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access. Stub Streets: The Police Department is requiring that an additional stub street be added for increased emergency access to the site. Staff believes that this will be a difficult condition to meet. Staff recommends that the applicant meet with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to discuss this issue, prior to the next public hearing. As of the print date of this report, the applicant was unable to make contact with Lieutenant Bob Stowe to come to a resolution on an additional access to the site. Staff contacted the Lieutenant and the Police Department still maintains that they would like to see an additional access provided to the site. It appears that the applicant will be unable to provide one based on the existing subdivision to the north that did not stub to this property and the existing golf course that surrounds the site. Existing Residences/Buildings: The site does not currently contain any residences or buildings. Fencing: The applicant is proposing to construct a manufactured stone wall fence along the northern perimeter boundary of the subdivision adjacent to the existing residences. A 4-foot tall wrought iron fence is proposed on the west, south, and east perimeter boundaries. 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 azound the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path /multi-use fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. Common Areas: Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. Ditches, Laterals, and Canals: Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Pressure Irrigation: The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is used, the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common azeas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. An underground, pressurized irrigation system should be installed to all landscape azeas per the approved specifications and in accordance with UDC 11-3A- 15 and MCC 9-1-28. Although the proposed plat and R-8 zoning would add to the variety of housing types Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 12 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 in the subject area, Staff believes that more of a transition in density and lot sizes between the e~sting 1-acre lots and the proposed attached units should be provided along the north boundary. Staff does not oppose the overall density proposed; however, believes that the higher density attached homes should be relocated from the north boundary to the west, east, and south boundaries of the subdivision. Further, Staff world like to see larger, more usable open space areas, located centrally within the development. The Commission should consider staffs analysis and recommendation, and the layout of the proposed lots and open space in relation to the e~sting and proposed homes when making recommendation to the City Council. At the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on October 19, 2006, the Commission heard testimony, considered Stafj"s analysis, and discussed the proposed common areas and did not have an issue with the amount of open space provided, or the location and inaccessibility of some of the common aYeas as noted by Staff in this report. The Commission also did not have an issue with the Yequested R-8 zone oY the transition in density and lot sizes proposed between the existing ruYal lots and the proposed lots. Although some of the proposed lot sizes are small, they believed that since the proposed units would be attached and would be a minimum of 1,400 square feet per unit, the structure itself would be least 2, 800 square feet, comparable with the existing homes in Spurwing than smalleY detached homes on these lots would be. Therefore, the Commission Yequested that Staff prepare Conditions of Approval for the subject applications (see Exhibit A). 3. Variance Application: The applicant has applied for a Variance from UDC 11-6C-3F to exceed the maximum block face length allowed in a residential district. Special Considerations: There aze no existing stub streets or pedestrian connections from the existing surrounding Spurwing Subdivision for this development to connect to. Since the land to the west, south, and east is part of the Spurwing Golf Course, no stub streets are proposed for future connectivity although the Police Department is requesting a stub street be provided to the property. The irregular shape and size of the property also limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Staff believes compliance with UDC 11-6C- 3F is not feasible in this case due to the site limitations stated above and that the required Findings for a Variance can be met (see Exhibit D). b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the subject applications, AZ-06-043, PP- 06-045, and VAR-06-020 per the comments stated in the staff report for the hearing date of October 19, 2006. NOTE: Staff is recommending denial of the variance because the recommendation is for denial of annexation into the City. At the Planning c~ Zoning Commission meeting on OctobeY 19, 2006, the Commission recommended that this project be continued until November 2, 2006 to allow Staff time to prepare Conditions of Approval. The original staff report did not contain Conditions of Approval since Staff was Yecommending denial of the project. Staff has now included Conditions of approval in Exhibit A and Findings in Exhibit C. PrioY to the NovembeY 2"d meeting, the applicant submitted a Yevised preliminaYy plat, dated NovembeY 9, 2006, and requested that the hearing be continued until November 16, 2006. Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 13 • i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on October 19 2006 November 2.2006; and November 16, 2006. At the public hearing on November 16 2006 they moved to recommend denial. rldldII C1tV Olin it heard thp~.• itamc nn ilo..o..,l.e.- 11~ ~nnc T_____~_ nth ....~.... _ ebruarv 6.2007. A he F bruarv 6.2007 m 'n .the .itv oun~;l annrnvpd +Hp _ request lop with he Pre iminarv Pla and Varlancp annh~atinna m~hinr _ e Con ltlon of Approval ictpd in hibit B of he staff repo 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) 3. Landscape Plan (dated: 5-28-06) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Parks Department 6. Salutary Service Company 7. Ada County Highway District 8. Idaho Transportation Department 9. Central District Health Department C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Spunving Pario Homes Subdivision AZ-06-043/PP-06-045NAR-06-020 PAGE 14 a r CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map Exhibit A -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Preliminary Plat (dated: 12-13-06) ~~ ~~ ar~o a a~ R ~~~~~t~g~~~~ ~ ~~; ~~ (~ -I;E~ ,~~. ,~ ac .1 ;~ q ' ~~ ~~ E$ j~~~ D~~tE~s ~Nea.an .oa~a~a a~~ ie~~~~ s~voII~ t ~ ~~ Exhibit A -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Landscape Plan (dated 5-28-06) - NOT APPROVED t,=< -.:~a~ Exhibit A -Page 3 ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 1.1 ANNEXATION COMMENTS 1.1.1. The overall annexation boundary legal description submitted with the application (prepared on August 16, 2006, by D. David Marks, PLS) shows the property as contiguous to the corporate boundary of the City of Meridian. owever. the original annexation legal description does no reflect the Counc'1-approved zoning for this property The applicant has sub fitted le 1 escxYptions. dated 12/19/06. and an exhibit map h t reflect the .ovine designations of R-4 and -8 approved by City Council which are included in Exhibit C along with the on 'nil over 1 annexation boundary legal description and exhibit m_ p 1.1.2. Prior to the annexation ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian, property owner(s) (at the time of annexation ordinance adoption), and the developer. The applicant shall contact the City Attorney, Bill Nary, at 888-4433 to initiate this process. The Development Agreement process shall be completed within 6 months of City Council approval of the annexation Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The DA shall incorporate the following: • Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall complete a Record of Survey for a Property Boundary Adjustment in Ada County for the portion of Lots 2 & 4, Block 1, Spurwing Subdivision, that are currently within the boundaries of the subject annexation request. Submit a copy of the recorded Record of Survey to Planning Staff. • Prior to annexation ordinance approval by the City Council, the applicant shall submit recorded warranty deeds to the Planning Department that reflect the current boundary of the proposed annexation and plat. • Secondary access to the subdivision as provided on the preliminary plat at the southwest corner of the property from Chinden Blvd. shall be gated both at the Chinden access and the internal subdivision access in accordance with Police and Fire Department requirements. 1.2 SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.2.1 The preliminary plat labeled as Sheet 1 of 1, prepared by Engineering Solutions, LLP, dated December 13, 2006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. 1.2.2 The landscape plan prepared by Harvest Design, Associates, on 5-28-06, labeled Sheet #LS-1, is not approved and shall be revised according to the conditions noted below: • Revise the landscape plan to reflect the revised configuration of the plat and install all landscaping in accordance with UDC 11-3B. • 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. Include mitigation information on the landscape plan. • Provide a detailed fencing plan for all fencing proposed on the site reflecting a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the northern perimeter boundary adjacent to the existing Spurwing Subdivision and a 4-foot tall wrought iron fence around the west, east, and south perimeter boundaries as shown on the landscape plan submitted with the preliminary plat. Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Where the applicant has submitted a preliminary landscape plan and where staff has reviewed such plan, the landscaping shall be consistent with the preliminary plan with modifications as proposed by staff. The preceding modifications and notes should be shown on a revised landscape plan submitted with the final plat application(s). 1.2.3 All lots within the development shall conform to the dimensional standards of either the R-4 or the R-8 zone, depending on the particulaz zone in which they aze located. 1.2.4 All lots along the north boundary of the subdivision shall have a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet as shown on the plat dated 12-13-16 and required by Council at the 12-12-06 City Council meeting. 1.2.5 Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon the Idaho Transportation Department's approval of the emergency access proposed from Chinden Boulevazd. If ITD should deny this access request, the development would not be able to provide the two emergency access points required by the Fire Department for this size of development. 1.2.6 Place a note on the face of the final plat that prohibits direct lot access to Chinden Boulevard except for the emergency access point approved with this subdivision. 1.2.7 Per UDC 11-3B-9C6, all open water ponds proposed on the site shall have re-circulating water and shall be maintained so that they do not become a mosquito breeding ground. 1.2.8 Provide fencing around the perimeter of the development, as proposed. Provide a 6-foot tall masonry wall along the north boundary of this site, as proposed during the October 19~' public hearing. 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 shall be installed around the perimeter. Perimeter, common open space, and micro-path fencing shall be designed according to UDC 11-3A-7. 1.2.9 Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision Home Owners' Association. 1.2.10 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of any natural waterway, that intersect, cross or lie within the azea 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. 1.2.11 Underground, pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. 1.3 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS-PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP-06-045) 1.3.1. 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). 1.3.2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to UDC 11-3A-17. 1.3.3. 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 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 facility. This may require losing a developable lot or developable area. It is the responsibility of the developer to comply with ACRD, City of Meridian and all other regulatory requirements at the time of final construction. 1.3.4. A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan upon completion of the landscape installation. All standards of installation should apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. 1.3.5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 1.3.6. 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. 1.3.7. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in UDC 11-6B-7. 2. Public Works Department 2.1 The preliminary plat shows the sewer main proposed in this development ending at W. Chinden Boulevazd. At this time there aze no sewer mains in or planned to be installed in Chinden Boulevard. This property is master planned in the North Black Cat shed. This property is currently not serviceable by the City of Meridian's sewer system and the City of Meridian does not guarantee sewer service in the timelines outlined in the UDC. 2.2 This property is master planned to sewer to the North Black Cat Lift Station via mains that aze planned to be development driven in the property to the west. If the applicant wishes to commence development prior to the "Master Planned mains" being available they may proceed under the following conditions: a) This is conditional on there being available capacity within the Ten-Mile Trunk. b) The applicant shall provide written permission from the owner of the Silver Leaf Lift Station, granting access to use that lift station. c) The applicant shall be responsible to prove capacity exists in the Silver Leaf Lift Station, and be responsible for any upgrades necessary. d) The applicant shall be responsible install the necessary off-site gravity mains from this site to the Silver Leaf Lift Station. These mains shall not be eligible for reimbursement agreements. 2.3 The applicant shall install sewer mains to and through this proposed development; applicant shall coordinate main size and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standazd 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. 2.4 The applicant shall be responsible to install anall-weather access road per City of Meridian standard specifications to all sewer mains not located within the right-of--way. 2.5 The applicant shall connect to a Municipal water system. 2.6 The applicant shall comply with all Department of Environmental Quality's Best Management Practices separation requirements between storm facilities and private wells. 2.7 Any potential reimbursement agreements must comply with all requirements of City Code 9-1-13 and 9-4-19, which includes the preliminary agreement (which includes footage, size, and depth of reimbursable pipe) being finalized prior to construction plan approval. The detailed agreement with the reimbursable amount shall be approved by Council prior to plat signature. Exhibit B -Page 2 • ~"a~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2.8 The applicant shall provide a 20-foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public right of way (include all water services and hydrants). 2.9 The applicant has indicated that the P.I. system shall be an extension of Spurwing's system. Prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting the applicant shall provide written approval from the owner of that system. 2.10 All existing structures not meeting setbacks or meeting the dimensional standards of the UDC shall be removed prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 2.11 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.12 Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being developed shall be tiled. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2.13 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, fencing installed, drainage lots constructed, road base approved by the Ada County Highway District and the Final Plat for this subdivision shall be recorded, prior to applying for building permits. 2.14 A letter of credit or cash surety in the amount of 110% will be required for all uncompleted fencing, landscaping, amenities, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 2.15 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, 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. 2.17 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. 2.18 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.19 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.20 Developer shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. Where mailboxes are located on or near sidewalk the applicant shall comply with all American with Disabilities Act requirements for unobstructed sidewalk access. 2.21 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 2.22 The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established peak groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least 1-foot above. 2.23 One hundred watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights, on 25' pole shall be required on all public residential streets. Two-hundred and fifty watt high pressure sodium streetlights, on 30' pole shall be required on subdivision entrances and collector roadways. Design of the streetlights shall Exhibit B -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 be approved by the Public Works Department. Decorative lights require a streetlight agreement on file with Public Works prior to activation. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants, and no further than 400' distance in between locations. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain approval from the Public Works Department, and permit from Building Department prior to commencing installations. 3. Fire Department 3.1 One and two family dwellings not exceeding 3600 square feet will require afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute available for duration of 2 hours to service the entire project. One and two story family dwellings 3600 square feet and greater will require a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 500' 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 comers when spacing permits. e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10' . f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade. g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5. h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project. 3.4 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.5 The emergency access drive 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 The emergency access drive shall have a 20' wide improved surface capable of supporting an imposed load of 75,000 lbs. All roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 3.7 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 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). Exhibit B -Page 2 ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 b. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). 3.9 This project will be required to provide a 20' wide swing or rolling emergency access gate. The gate shall be equipped with a Knoxbox Padlock which has to be ordered thru the Meridian Fire Department. A "No Parking, Fire Lane" emergency access sign shall be installed at the access gate. 4. Police Department 4.1 The proposed development and/or plat do not offer natural surveillance opportunities of the public areas. Common azeas are completely blocked from public view. Seventy-three home sites with one primary access is not acceptable. Prior to the next public hearing, 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 azeas, front porches, and adequate nighttime lighting. The site plan and/or landscaping plan shall be revised in accord with those discussions. 4.2 To increase emergency access to the site, the Police Departments recommends that the applicant provide a stub street from the property. Prior to. the next public hearing, the applicant should submit a revised platJsite plan to reflect this requirement. 4.3 Any interior fencing shall allow visibility from the street or shall not exceed four feet in height if solid fencing is used. 5. Parks Department 5.1 Standazd 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 standazd established in the City of Meridian Landscape Ordinance will be followed. 6. Sanitary Service Company 6.1 SSC has no comments related to this application. 7. Ada County Highway District 7.1 SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.1.1 Construct West Balata Court as one half of a 36-foot street section within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.2 Locate the entry road intersecting West Balata Court as proposed. 7.1.3 Construct all the internal roadways as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet ofright-of--way complete with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk. 7.1.4 Locate and construct one knuckle on the south side of West Tramore Drive and one standazd cul- de-sac turnaround at the intersection of North Dunloy Way and North Castle Bar Way. Exhibit B -Page 2 • ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7.1.5 Construct emergency access at the southwest corner of West Tramore Drive, as proposed. Utilize some restrictive device to inhibit the possibility for cut-thru or general use traffic within the emergency access. The device used to control access on the emergency vehicle roadway shall be approved by the Meridian Fire Department and submitted to ACRD in writing. 7.1.6 Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. 7.2 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 7.2.1 Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of--way. 7.2.2 Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within any ACRD roadway or right-of--way. 7.2.3 All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7.2.4 Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that maybe damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 7.2.5 Comply with the District's Tree Planter Width Interim Policy. 7.2.6 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 7.2.7 All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 7.2.8 The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7.2.9 Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7.2.10 Payment of applicable road impact fees is required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #200, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 7.2.11 It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of--way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLIlVE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of--way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACRD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. Exhibit B -Page 2 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 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. 7.3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7.3.1 The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval aze satisfied. 7.3.2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. 8. Idaho Transportation Department 8.1 The applicant shall apply to lTD for the emergency access to US 20/26 (Chinden Blvd.) shown on the proposed plat. Note: The main access at Spurwing will not be signalized in the future, so it is prudent to consider how many households would be added to the intersection. The predominant movement from the subdivision is suspected to be left turns onto the highway. Over time, congestion on the highway will make this a more difficult movement. 9. Central District Health Department 9.1 After written approval from appropriate entities is submitted, we can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. 9.2 The following plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & welfaze, Division of Environmental Quality: central sewage and central water. 9.3 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Exhibit B -Page 2 • s CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 C. Annexation Legal Description & Exhibit Map l .Overall Annexation Boundary Legal Description & Exhibit Map ~;A1~E~'.Si (.~j~® ~5Q1 tlrsguS Basin Ad. • Boise, Idaho E337p2 SURVEY![dG tom? 3as-ors Fex (208) 385.0698 Proje~. No_: 28$1 oat®: ~~,ne z, aoi Re~i~ed: August 16, zoos ,tWNEXATI;7N DESCRIPTION FOR SPURIlVIINtfi PATIO Fi0I1rfES 3UBI~VISION A parcel of land tn}ing a portion of Lois 2 and 4 and aA of Lot 3 of BEtsc[t 1 of Spunain9 Subdivisitm, as filed for nerd 3n the once, at the Ada Courriy Recorder, Boise, Idaho ~ Book 85 of Play at pages 7104 thru 71x8, and a port~n of the SiN 1/4 of SecBon 23, T.4N., R.1W., B.RA., Ada County, Idaho and mare parUc~ariy described as follows: BE6INNINt3 at a brass cap marking the Southwest corner of the said Section 23; (hence along the Westerly boundary of the said SW 7!4 of Section 23; thelt~ North 00°2Q'46" East 324.83 feet to an iron pin; thence said Westery boundary South 89°39'20° East 30.00 #eet too an iron pin marking a point of curve; !hence continuing along an arc of a curve to the tail, said canoe having a radhrs of 20.00 feet, a central angle of 104°21'46", a length of 38.43 feet and a long chard bearlrtg South 51°49'58" East 31.50 feet to en iron pin marking a point of tangent; thence continuing North 75°§9'24" East 158.18 feet to an iron pin; thence carrtintring North 00°48'28" East 164.90 feet to an iron pin; thence leaves said. Westerly boundary North 10°58'41" East 573.13 feet to err iron pin marking the Northwest comer of said Lot 3; thenta3 alvttg f,+te Northerly boundary of said Lot 3 South 78°36'55" East 106.87 feel to an iron pin; thence carttirtt~rrg .South 82°24'5t3" East 127,74 feet to an iren pin; thence: corrxinuing South 50°13'58" East 125.67 feet to an iron pin; thence cdntlntdrrg South 43°02"58" East 180.00 feet to err iron pin; thent~ continuing South 43°00'12" East 160.00 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing South 52°28'14" >=ast 212.39 feet to an korr pin; thence continuing South 87°4+1'25" East 290.87 Peet to an iron pin; thent~ continuing North 54°48'27° East 242,01 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing North 26°48'22" East 1 x.21 feet to an iron pin;. thence ruing North 1 g°22'35" East 116.98 feast to an iron pin; tlren+~ continuing North 43°12'34° bleat 285.25 feet ~ an-iron pin marking a point of curare; them oontinuing along an arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 20.00 feet, a csrrtral ~ngle.~ 1t2°27'35°, a length of 35.77 feet and a long ctrord bearing South 85°33'38" West 31.19 to an trop pin meriting a pokrt of e-rding of ctmre on the South right-of~aray lino of West Balada Cotut; thenc® teavtr-g said South right-of-v-Pap Ana North 55°40'10° West 25.00 feet #a a point on the (~rrterlirm of said West Batata e iourt markhrg a pow of earrvs; them aidr~ said c~ntr~rfine atoms the arc cf a curve !o. the n9hk said curve having a radius of 350.00 feet, a central angle of 20°47'29", a length of 127.t?1 feet and a ~~ chord bearing Exhibit C -Page 1 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEALEY'S LAMD SURVEYIPIG ~,>~usar:o».~~.s~~ Project No.: 2981 Date: June 2, 2006 Revised: August 18, 2006 Page 2 North 44°43'35" East 926.39 feet to a point marking a pOfnt of ending of curve; thence leaving said centeriiraa South 34°5Z„4q" L~at 25_*JO feat to an ion pin on said South right-of~vay fine of West Bekata Court; thence leaving said South right-of-vuay line South 05'57`22" Weat 3tf.28 feat to an iron pin; thence South 43°12'34" East 286.18 feat to an iron pin rrtarktng a point of curve; thence along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve hang a radius of 75.00 feet, a central angle of 24°20'33", a length of 31.86 fast and a long chord lxearing Soutlt 31°02'18" Fast 31.63 feet to Ari iron pin markir~ a pokrt of tartgertt; thence South 18°52'01" Fist 77.34 feet to an iron pin on the -East boundary of said Lot 3; thence along said East boundary South 00°48'28" West 789.24 feet to an iron pin marking the Southeast comer of said Lot 3; tt~nce along the Southerly boundary of said Lot 3 North 76°39'48e West 681.47 feet to an iron pin; thence continuing . South 82°18'37" West 505.59 feet to an irat pin; thence contirnrfng North 85°06'24" West 3~.$2 feet to an Iran pin; thence contiraafng South 75°69'24" West 184.94 feet fo an iron pin marking a potr~ of curve: thence c~rr#irwing along the arc of a caws to fire left, said curve having a nsdiws of 20.00 feat, a cerdrai angle of 75°38'x94", a length of 26.41 feet and a long cord bearing South 38°t0'02" West24.53 fe®t to an Iran pin marking a point of tangent; thence condnu~g South 00°20'40" West 177.81 feet to an iron pin marking a point of curve; thence oontinuir~ along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having. a radius of 28.00 feet, a cerHrai atigfe of 88°32'12". a length of 81.25 fit and a tong diord beer5lg Soutl~ 44°25'28" East 28.97 feet to an iron pin marking a point of ending ai cxtrve on said tdorth r~gtrt-of~aay 1#ne of 3tete l~ghmray 20; thence leaving said North rlgis-af- wayline South QO°48'28° West 40.00 feet to a poirrt on the Sou;}r boundary of said Sectlon 23; thenr~ along said South fmundary North 86°11'32" West 89.52 fit to the PO1N'C t7P BE~[NNINO. Said parcel of land Mains 20.65 armies, more or less. e ~3 ~ ~ i O~~D ~ ~1:1-~~y ~ «,,cc A~~'' ~~ ~~ Exhibit C -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 _..__ SF'UI~NG SU3~r7i~flN ,.~ ~~... ~ ~ S Le~28'W 7E3Z0' e 4 _ ~. ~ r `~' y 1, ~~ a~ Y 1 f ~~~. te8 --J' Rne't7:C~f:1'l ~' "'1 1 b CU~tE BATA ~ ~ IB~0tl9Y $ih ~ ~ g~ ~ E m mng mrn~ sfn a~a~ nw s~s`r 4 i0ea9 81'1'Ytl1 YSm [I]t fSY p (tq~' [ a 171n synb` 9781 m 4 sia~. s~taYr [ ~ Atl0 7S~E'if EflA ~ E4S1 8~18'O!`Y -~-~_ m mm ~s'sr rs Asa m:, e+u~e t a~1' /~ ri~tt 11~~ n /n~ aectsa~ es/sal~ bAh 17' r.[![~,i0 ~~ Sl~ ~. ~ a~i~ PROPQSED A+9ERiDlAPd Af+ltdEXATION ~m t ~ t tOLt1~D 9t THE 99 tl+ ~ 23, ~4a. RiR., B;K ~, ~ouh, ~ czrr. muw Si't1RWtt3G SU9DNCStON ..: i ~.. N? ~_ a I t ! _ 1~ ,R,4 ZLi:1'1PcG s ~ ~ 8 ~~~, ~ ~ ~.A, PAP ~ ~ h Exhibit C -Page 3 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 2. Legal Descriptions & Exhibit Map Depicting Boundary of R-4 & R-8 Zones TE.aL.EY'S !AN® ~ a7 a stria • ~arrn cagy, ~das~ ~,~r 1 a SURVEYING t~e# fax project No.: 29$i ~, ~~CY pA~O ~~~~ ®~~~ A p~+cet of !ffiad ~ pottior, of Its 2.3 and 413tock I of Spurwis~ Subdivissioa as bled fair nn the office oI'tl~ Ads Coarnty Rr, Bois, Idailtci in . b9 otpl~ at 9I~4 tluu 7108 Igcatesi ~ ~ SW !t4 of Sectioc ~3, T.4N., R.I V~'., B.M.. Ada qty tt~e arty d~arfbed ~ Ioltovws: ~s~-a Exhibit C -Page 4 • .~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7'EALEY'3 LA~tD SURYEYiAtG Bar ~ ter. ra~rt'~ Ab:~ 2gB9A 1a, I.VNo P~e2ofZ ~~ p~~ti C~ e4 f ~.~~ 8L'd+G4. IpOfC qi 1~5. ~ Y~~ R~~~ ~3~` _..- Exhibit C -Page 5 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 7LALEi~t'`S LAN© c~7 ~. mart r . x ~~, ems, ~ ~.~~r ~ SUkVE1fiNG t~~) ~ F~sx tai 3B.4-a8~ ~S~ irt~ 2981 19~ 2006 fIIV FOR R-8 ZONE S~URVY[NG PA~IQ >~UMES SU81N'V1S101~' A peel of tad ~ a pardon of Lacs 2 a~13 Blae4c i of Spu~wing ~bdierision as &led for rocvrd is the a~ df t~ Ads Co,~tY R Boisca Ida4so ~ Baal 69 of its at 7104 tau ?108 la~cat®d imm Ehts SV4- i!4 of Bectian 23, T.4Ai„ R. i W y B.A~., Ada Oaunty, ids, o desc~t'bed ~ faltaws: Exhibit C -Page 6 • • CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 TEALEY'S 6.AND SURVEYING PrCa~dt ISta.: ~1 Date: 99, 2{~6 U87 E. . Cid+dert ESL B~7f#"~Sj Page 2 of 2 Said Parcel Gastea~ 6.77 , mEne or !. ~ ~ ~~',:i ~ ~o Asa-dam Exhibit C -Page 7 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 y J ..` ~ ~.n cL ~ q `~` u~wt ~~~ ~ ~ __ ~ ~i ~ r '~ ~g ct~ 'rs~n,~~s z +~ .~ ~ ^ ~ ~ _ -~- ~ - k~ arias 'ti - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ H ~_'(7' ~' ? ~ t'ywc~ ur". e ~ Fr Fir .~i k ~ ~ H `Yl~~ ~~ ,~ R. 1 ~ ~ ~ ~,a ' - . m, s °~ --_ ~~ ~`~ 4~~ ~ r -t -~ 1 I ._ ```~..`" ~ n Ls ~K `~ a `~ vyr j ° r ~ ,t r_rr~ a ~ ~ ^ ~ ~~~`~ ~ I ~~ !~ ar ~ ~ rs ~ ,, f ~~ w Y' , ' ~ °$'~ ~ ~ H S 3 ~ a ~x,~ - S ~' c Ca ~. ~ ~ E. , ~, ~, ~~ . "" .~ y ~ r , ~ , ~~~ ~ ~ .~' ~ i ~_, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..~. i;~ ~, ~ ~ ~-~ *~ 1°v ~ ~ ~ ~~j~~ ~~ * a .. . _ .~ s U1114Yl103 ~. € ... -• . _ . DEL E44 ,,£B'YLE ~e . ~ o ~ udrm r Exhibit C -Page 8 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 D. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Annexation Findings: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant an annexation and/or rezone, the Council shall make the following findings: A. 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. The Council finds that a more appropriate map amendment would reflect a split zoning of R-4 for the lots proposed for detached units and R-8 for the lots proposed for attached units in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically the purpose statement; As proposed on the revised plat dated 12/13/06, the Council finds that the development of this property will comply with the established regulations and purpose statement of the residential districts. C. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any oral or written testimony that may be provided when determining this finding. D. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts; and, The Council finds that the proposed zoning amendment, as amended with both R-4 and R-8 zones, 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 (LTDC 11-5B-3.E). The Council finds that all essential services can be made available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The Council finds that annexing the subect property to R-4 and R-8 is in the best interest of the City at this time. 2. Preliminary Plat Findings: In consideration of a preliminary plat, combined preliminary and final plat, or short plat, the decision-making body shall make the following findings: A. The plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; Exhibit D -Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 The Council finds that the proposed revised preliminary plat (dated 12/13/06) conforms to the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Public services are available or can be made available and are adequate to accommodate the proposed development; The Council finds that public services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. (See Exhibit B of the Staff Report for more details from public service providers.) C. The plat is in conformance with scheduled public improvements in accord with the City's capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, the Council finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. There is public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends that the Commission & Council rely 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, and Exhibit B for more detail.) E. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare; and The Council is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision. ACRD and ITD consider road safety issues in their analysis. Staff recommends that the Commission & Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff and the Commission is unaware. F. The development preserves significant natural, scenic or historic features. The Council is unaware of any natural, scenic or historic features on this site. Therefore, the Council fmds that the proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature(s) of major importance. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed development may destroy or damage a natural or scenic feature(s) of major importance of which Staff is unaware. 3. Variance Findings: The City Council shall apply the standards listed in Idaho Code 67-6516 and all the findings listed in Section 11-SB-4E of the UDC to review the variance request. In order to grant a variance, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district: The UDC requires that no block face be more than 750-feet in length without an intersecting street or alley or that no block face shall have a length greater than 1,300-feet Exhibit D -Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 without a connecting pedestrian open space and pathway. Therefore, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. However, since the property is irregularly shaped and the existing surrounding development does not stub or have pedestrian connections to this property, Council believes the variance requested should be granted. This site is such that full compliance with the UDC standards would be relatively impossible and cause an undue hardship to the applicant. B. The variance relieves an undue hardship because of characteristics of the site; Council finds that this is an irregularly shaped lot, which limits design alternatives that would allow for shorter block lengths. Further, the existing surrounding development does not provide any stub streets or pedestrian connections to this property which would allow the applicant to comply with the UDC. For these reasons, Council believes that a variance would relieve an undue hardship to the applicant because of the characteristics of the site. C. The variance shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare Council finds that granting the subject variance should not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. Further, Council recognizes that this is an unusually shaped property and existing site conditions restrict compliance with the ordinance. However, if the City grants the variance it would allow a right or privilege not usually allowed in a residential district. Council believes that in this case site conditions are such that would cause an undue hardship to the applicant and that a variance should be granted Council further requires that development of this property be required to comply with all other dimensional standards of the UDC. Exhibit D -Page 3 i February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Dave Edmark ITEM NO. 6-G REQUEST Approve Transfer of Owner Applications for Dave Edmark dba Andrades at 2031 E. Fairview Ave., to Daved Edmark dba Super Polio Mexican Grill at 2031 E. Fairview Ave. AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS Contacted: Date: Emailed: Phone: ~ratr initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-H REQUEST Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian irrigation District for Waltman Court /Ten Mile Drain: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Email /Letter OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Mat®dals pres®nted at pubUc me®#inga shall become property of the City of Meridian. - ~ ` - ~ ~ - ADA COUNTY RECQRQER J. DAUIQ NAUARRQ AN~UNT 38.E 12 - 801SE iQAH0 02I17/pB x:22 ACR QEPUTY Bonnie OberbilBg RECORDED-REQUEST OP iii 111111111111i~1111111illllll III IN - Nampa & lOerltllan Irrlpallon 106025294 - ... - f LsICENSE 4A,C"rREEMENT ,~// LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~ day of .,~1~~11ld.4.,c~;, 2006, by and - amongNAMPA & MERIDIAN TRRTGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party oC the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "District", and CITY OF MERIDIAN, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho 83G42 party or parties of the second part, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Licensee", - ~b~NESSET~: WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of real property/right-of--way for a sewer lint (burdened with the - easement of the District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in the "Legal Description" atlached hcrcto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the District owns the irrigation ditch or canal known as TEN MILE DRAIN .. ~~ (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal "), an integral part ofi the District's irrigation works and system, together with the easement therefor to convey irrigation and drainage water, operate, clean, maintain, and repair the ditch or canal, and access the ditch or canal for those purposes; and, WHEREAS, said ditch ar canal and easement crosses and intersects Licensee's real property as shown on Exhibit li attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and, ` ~' WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to engage in wnsttvction or activity affecting said ditch - orcanal or the District's casement in its course across the lands of the Licen.ee in the manner and under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary that the District protect ditches and its right of way along its ditches; - NOW, THEREFORE, far and i n consideration of the premises and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: i. The Licensee shall fiave the right to modify the said ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's casement along said ditch or canal in the manner generally descrihed in the "Purpose of License" attached hcrcto as Exhibit C. and by this reference made a part hereof. Any modification of said ditch or canal by the Licensee or encroachment upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal shall be performed and maintained in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit D, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. This agreement pertains only to the Licensee's modification of said ditch or canal or encroachment to the District's easement for the purposes and in the manner described herein. The Licensee ~i } shall not change the location of the ditch or canal, bury the ditch or canal in pipe, or otherwise alter the ditch of canal in any manner not described in this agreement without first obtaining the written permission of the District. 3. Each iacility (" facility" as used in this agreement means any object or thing of any nature installed in or on the District's easement by Ehe Licensee or the Licensee's predecessor in interest) shall be constructed, installed, operated, maintained, and repaired at all times by the Licensee at the cost and expense - ofthc Licensee. 4. Licensee agrees to construct, install, operate, maintain and repair each facility and conduct ' its activities within or affecting the District's easement so as not to constitute or cause: a. a hazard to any person or property; - b. an interruption or interference with the flow of irrigation water in the ditch or canal or the delivery of irrigation water by the District; c. an increase in seepage or any other increase in the loss of water from the ditch or ..~; canal; d. the subsidence of soil within or adjacent to the easement; e. any other damage to the District's easement and irrigation works. 5. The Licensee agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the District from all claims ' for damages arising out oC any of the Licensee's construction or activity which constitutes or causes any of the circumstances enumerated in the preceding paragraph, 4.a. through 4.e., or any other damage to the . casement and irrigation works which may he caused by the construction, installation, operation, mai ntenance, repair, and any use; or condition of any facility. 6. Licensee agrees that the work performed and the materials used in such construction shall at all times he subject to inspection by the District and the District's engineers, and that final ac:c:eptance oC . such work shall not be made until all such work and materials shall have been expressly approved by the District. Such approval by the District shall not be unreasonably withheld. ' 7. The llistricl reserves the right, at the District's option, to remove any facility installed by the Licensee and to repair any alteration by the Licensee of said ditch or canal and the easement therefor which does not comply with the terms of this agreement, and to remove any impediment to the flow of water in said ditch or canal and any unsafe condition or hazard caused by the Licensee, at any time, and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the costs which shall he reasonably expended by the District for such purposes. If the Licensee shall fail in any respect to properly maintain and repair such facility, then the District, at its option, and without impairing or in anywise affecting its other rights and remedies hereunder, shall have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and repairs and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the cost or expense which shall be reasonably expended or incurred by the District for such purposes. The District shall give reasonable notice to the Licensee prior to the District's performing such maintenance, repair or other work except that in cases of emergency the District shall attempt to give such notice as reasonable under the circumstances. Nothing in this paragraph shall create or support any claim oi' any kind by Licensee or any third party against the District for failure to exercise the options stated in this parabn~dph, and Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any claims made against the District arising out oi' or relating to the terms oC this paragraph except for claims arising solely nut of the negligence of the District. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 S. Neither the terms of this agreement, the permission granted by the District to the Licensee, the Licensee's activity which is the subject of this agreement, nor the parties exercise of any rights or ' `. perfot7nance of any obligations of this agreement, shall be construed or asserted to extend the application of any statute, rule, regulation, directive or other requirement, or the jurisdiction of any federal, state, or other agency or official to the District's ownership, operation, and maintenance of its ditches, canals, drains, irrigation works and facilities which did not apply to the District's operations and activities prior to and without execution cif this agreement. In the event the District is required to comply with any such requirements or is subject to the jurisdiction of any such agency as a resuh of execution of this agreement or the Licensee's activity authorized hereunder, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from all costs and liabilities associated with the application of such laws or the assertion of such jurisdiction or, at the option ut' the District, this agreement shall be of no force and effect and the Licensee shall cease all activity and remove any facility authorized by this agreement. 9. In addition to all other indemnification provisions herein, Licensee further agrees to indemnify, hold hornless and defend the District from any injury, damages, claim, lien, cost andlor expense (including reasonable attorney's fees) incurred by, or asserted against, the District by reason of the negligent acts or omissions of Licensee or its agents, contractors or subcontractors in performing the construction and activities authorized by this agreement. 10. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable far any damages which shall occur to any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement arcs of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance or repair of said ditch or canal. The Licensee further agrees to suspend its use of the said easement area when the uce of the easement area is required by the District far maintenance or repair under this or any other paragraph of this agreement. 11. Licensee shall place no structures, pathways or landscaping of any kind above or within the District's easement area except as refereed to in this agreement or exhibits hereto without the prior written consent of the District. Nor shall Licensee permit, authorize or grant any other person or entity to excavate, discharge, construct or place any structures, pathways or landscaping within the District easement without the prior written consent of the District. 12. Should either party incur costs or attorney fees in connection with efforts to enforce the provisions of this agreement, whether by institution of suit or not, the party rightfully enforcing or rightfully resisting enforcement of the provisions of this agreement, or the prevailing party in ease suit is instituted, shall he entitled to reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorney fees from the other party. 13. The parties hereto understand and agree that the District has no right in any respect to impair the uses and purposes of the irrigation works and system of the District by this agreement, nor to grant any rights in its irrigation works and system incompatible with the uses to which such irrigation works and system arc devoted and dedicated and that this contract shall be at all times construed according to such principles. l4. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair the right of way of the District in the said ditch or canal and all uses of said ditch or canal by the Licensee and the license herein provided therefor shall remain inferior and subservient to the rights of the District to the use of said ditch or canal far the LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 transmission and delivery of irrigation and drainage water. 15. ]n the event of the failure, refusal or neglect of the Licensee to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this agreement, the license of the Licensee under the terms hereof may be terminated by the District, and any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement in or over said ditch or canal, and ', the right of way therefor, which may impede or restrict the maintenance and operation of such ditch or canal by the District with its equipment for the maintenance of its said ditch or canal may be removed by the ;i District. 1 b. The Licensee agrees to pay attorney fees or engineering fees charged by the attorney for the District or by the engineers fir the District in connection with the preparation of this Liccnsc Agreement or in connection with negotiations covering the terms and conditians of this License Agreement. Licensee also agrees to pay any fees incurred in connection with the recording of this Agreement. 17. Nothing in this agreement shall create or support a claim of estoppel, waiver, prescription or adverse possession by the Licensee or any third party against District. 18. This agreement is not intended for the benefit of any third party and is not enforceable by any third party. 19. If any provision of this agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to he invalid or otherwise unenforceable, all remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 20. The word "Licensee", if used in the neuter in this agreement, includes the masculine and feminine genders, the singular number includes the plural, and the plural number includes the singular. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained shall constitute covenants to run with, and running with, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each ' of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the benefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. NAMPA MERIDIAN iRR1G TION DISTRICT By Its resident A • EST: Its Secretary ~ ~ ~.~~~~~ ~_ ~x~ LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 ';1 ATTEST: CITY OF MERIDIAN ``~~~~~ti~ s + n ~+ r t t ~ ~, ~ ~ ~~~ .~f"r~i~ 4~L. YyCit/ ~~ 1 _ ~ ~ „ . STATE OF IDAHO ) '~i''~~~'~,,tt~``,,~~```~~~ ) SS: =111{4{9 County of Canyon ~ ) . On this ~ day of ~ -, 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared r,C~r.~ . .and Darcn R. Conn, known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. 1N WITNESS WI~iEREOF, I have hereunto set my harid and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certiticate fast above written. -~,r-~~Y~ °,r'~~s;..•••+.:;©p °°., Notary Public for Idaho •° 4 •' ~'~tez~ Residingat ,.1_';:%GG~~-~ Idaho ~pTA~~, ~i My Commission Expires: ~ u . ~`OD+t; STATE OF IDAHO ) AV ~ LtG '~ • County of Ada )ss. ,~°°0f~.~ ~F„~ ~~ . v y ~,~ T~_ 2006, before me, the undersigned, a notary On this i ~da of r °L ~ 1 ~` ~ w ~' , public in and for said state, personally appeared 't ~. aPt4w~ , ~i; iti~~• ~tl and ~.v, ta..i...~~? ~; known to me to he the ; ~ ;~4 _:.: t and ~ . ~ .~ t` t., , i:. T, respectively, of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, the political subdivision and municipality that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that such entity 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 LICENSE AGREEMENT - Pa~_ _ h r. ;~ ~~ ~-ri.~ °~~ Notary Public for ~~a_~.. b ~ .~ Residing at 1 r~,. b r._-, .,~~ t c'. F . '~ My Commission Expires. ~ (: - IS -!I ':d ;~ Exhibit "A,",~g~~ scription of Sewer Easement An easement for sanitary sewer located in the NW '/a of the SE '/a of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a 5/8 inch diameter marking the northeast comer of said NW '/a of the SE '1a {CE 1/16' Comer}, from which a 5/8 inch diameter Iran pin marking the northwest earner of said NW '/a of the SE'/a bears N 89°52'22" W a distance of 1321.56 feet; Thence S 0°19'56" W along the easterly boundary of said NW '/a of the SE'/4 a distance of 20.99 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of Waltman Lane; Thence N 89°41'56" W along said southerly right-of-way a distance of 60.88 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence leaving said southerly right-of-way S 63°46'05" W a distance of 83.31 feet to a point; Thence N 23 °39'48" W a distance of 40.72 feel to a point on the southerly right-of-way of Waltman lane; Thence S 89°41'56" E slang Said southerly right-af-way a distance of 91.07 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This parcel contains 1,695 square feet and is subject to any other easements existing or in use. Clinton W. Hansen, PLS Land Solutions, PC Revised January 4, 2006 ~an,,`~olutiions ~,a s,.vy.q.,acamerq `p~pt t OS ~~G, ~ ~m 11118 ~ ~.~ alJoY~u~ ~° z !~~ l~ a F ~O ~g~ lpM ~ HP Exhibit A, page 'lw altman lane -Ten Mile Sewer Extension Job No. 05-19 f~ 4 i A r ~j N N 1 2 ~~la! ~ I n~ p ~ to o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ OO O N' C O ~ ;-I N ~ ~ a r. OOD~~ o ~1 ?`~ ~ ~ ~`z~o z~ ~z~ ~ ~, _ a ao 'SQm ~ ;., .a, ~ -~ Z ~_ ~ I I Z 2 -P ~ ~' Dump b ~ D "' "~ ~' p ~ m ~ ~ ~ r-~~ ~ Z ~ A "' ~ ~ lam: L_J 1 ~ ~ O Qp I ~ ~' ~ O N . ~~~ ~ ®®• ~ y m m 1--~ 1 I ~ 20.99' ~ _ ~ '`i L_J 1 ~ ~ ~ a o I S 079'56" dY ~ ~, ~ Z ~ ~ ~n m~ 0 ~ ~ o ti zW O ~•i ~ C C Gl '`: -~ "~ n z Z Z ~ m O C~ ~ O ~ _ w '", c ~ Z o ~ °_• Cam- - - m m m "' .-~ ~+ a ~` ~ S. MER/DIAN RD z ~ -zo 0 z o z o z m ~ ~ • Z ~ -1 --i cn ~JJ ~l C °~ O m m t./1 "., Exhibit A, page 2 s ~~a~ux~ ,• + '~S .j ,,~aX ~~.341w v >,, ~~ Y~, : p~ `~~'~.~~~+* •~ r~'. t' ~ ~„ eTi F +' , ' r ~' ~. ~ J ff~4 ~ ~~~•' `its i ~ .1 p 1 ~ ~ .~ „~., . ~. ~ 'Y . .~,;~, .: £' E y ~ d~y~ j '~~~ a >+ .: $#.~ ~'r ~ '+'i non c~ ~~ .~ ~;. ~, r -~ ~ , ~. •~ ~~;~ ~t.~ ~ t:,~: ~ , 1 ~~ ~R~ X1'8 tV14 ~ N€1 ~'r ~~.~ ~~..~;~~~` a1! ~s:'~~ '~~• ~ ..~~L1. ~;+.,.. £~ ~ b~G~S u~ uie~~ ~~i~y u~l . ~. . '' `~~ ~ ~ ~.~ z ~ Z ~« ^ i ^ ^ ,~,11~a.:lr~_ .....;-.~..:.. _.... ~ fir,... f.~ .: ~..:-~ -.., EXHIBIT C Purse of License The purpose of this License Agreement is to permit Licensee to: 1. construct, install, maintain and repair a sewer line across and under the Ten Mile Drain and within the District's easement; 2. construct, install, maintain and repair manholes for said sewer line within the District's casement for the Ten Milc .Drain, all within Licensee's right-of-way, located south of the intersection of the Ten Miic Drain and Waltman Lane in Meridian, Ada Cnunty, Idaho. EXHIBIT D Spc~~a~ Conditions a. Construction shall be in accordance with Exhibit D-l, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. b. Licensee shall notify the water superintendent of the District prior to and immediately after construction so that he or the District's engineer's may inspect and approve the construction. c. The Licensee recognizes and acknowledges that the license granted in this agreement by the District pertains only to the rights of the District as owner of an easement. The District has no right ar power to create righl,5 in the Licensee affecting the holder of title to the property subject to the District's easement. Any such rights affecting fee title must be acquired by the Licensee from the holder of title to the property. Should Licensee fail to obtain such rights from the holder of title to the property or should the rights obtained prove legally ineffectual, Licensee shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the District from any claim by any party arising out cif or related to such failure of rights and at the option of the District this agreement shall he of no force and effect. d. Licensee represents that Licensee has complied with all federal, state or other laws, rules, regulations, directives or other requirements in any form regarding environmental matters, and specifically those relating to pollution wntrol and water quality, as may he applicable under the subject matter, terms or performance of this agreement broadly construed. Licensee recogni2a5 i is continuing duty to comply with all such requirements that now exist or that may be implemented or imposed in the future. By cxes:uting this agreement the District assumes no responsibility or liability far any impact upon ar degradation of water quality or the environment resulting frnm the discharge or other activity by Licensee which is the subject of this agreement. e. Licensee hereby indemnifies, holds harmless and shall defend the District ftom any and all penalties, sanctions, directives, claims or any action taken or requirement imposed by any party or entity, public ur private, with respect to environmental matters relating to the subject matter, terms or performance oC this agreement unless the District shall be solely responsible Car the condition or activity which gives rise LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 6 to any such penalty, sanction, directive, claim ,action or requirement. f. In the event the District is required by any governmental authority to acquire or comply with = ~: any permit or other operational requirements associated with Licensee's discharge and other activity which ~ . is the subject of this agreement, Licensee shall indemni['y, hold harmless and defend the District form all costs and liabilities associated with such permit and other requirements, including but not limited to all costs associated with all permit acquisition, construction, monitoring, treatment, administrative, filing and other requirements. g. The parties to this agreement recognize this license agreement is an accommodation to Licensee. The District by this agreement does not assume, create, or exercise legal or other authority, either express or impl ied, to regulate control, or prohibit the discharge or contribution of pollutants or contaminants to the District's facilities or to any groundwater, waters of the State of Idaho or the United States, or any .. other destination. Such authority, to the extent that it exists, is passessed and exercised by governmental environmental agencies. h. Licensee shall not excavate, discharge, place any structures, nor plant any trees, shrubs or landscaping within the District's easement, nor perform any construction or activity within the District's easement for the Ten Mile Drain except as referred to in this agreement or exhibi s thereto without the prior written consent of the District. The District's easement for the Ten Mile Drain is ]O!) Feet, 50 feet to either side of the centerline. i. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this Agreement. Time is of the essence. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 7 a r r r r p p s p~ y r r- ~ w r r F P F 'r 8 • ~ r a v. r a r i 8 $ fi x x at a ar fl E Sfl a e tE $ ~ g rp7 r a g a flg j ga a ~; ~ D t t ,~ ~ t~~p f $ $ ~ ~ !f~ 1P1?p ~ a3 @rj ~ ! ~ ~t ~~ t ~i Eflx~ ~ ~t ~# a ~~ ~t ~~ ', ~~ r tot i~ ~~@s t. x ~ t r ~pr~ ~~ ~~ ~ f ~}6 i }B ~~ a r a~~ i ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ `a~ ~ ~ f~ ~~ i~ ~ ~~ ~ ~x f ~~t~ asp ~~ ~ j~ a ~j~ ~$ a ~ ~ ~f ~ ~ 9 ~~ ~ ~ ~~fa ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ a a{ i , ~ ~f {~ j~ ~~ t# ~j~~ :6~~ ~($7 8 n t~ ~ ~ ~~ f,Y. aE i t 67e ~ ~Ft s ~ ~¢r~ ~ a ~~$~~ ~1 ~t ^9a ! a4 ~ }f}. d~ ~' ~: ~t t ~E[ }i~~ ~9~ ajg ~ ~~ ~a ~r ~ ~~ ~~~ A ' gx! a 8g t ~ L9 ~ ~f ti ]{1 ~ f~ ~ t Q ~}~ ~Qg( [•`g$a 6H ta6' pSr9g~~p ~ }a ~ rr ~~'~# ~ ~t~ ~ fat a ~ ~ ~ ~ j~(!~ ¢,~$ ~ ~~ [Ba 9~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~4@ ~~~ ~.~~ ~`=~}r ®ga~~ 9 ~ jt ~( R"d ~ ~~ ~ a~ ~ ~ r a ~~ t~ 4dg ~ ~~ ~ ~,~ t~ ~ B~~ re4a Pr ~ ~a~e ~} t~ •Q8 r e ~t $r `1} i ~`R ~ i:~ ~ 1 ( p ~ ~~~ 1 0 ~ f ~~ &~~ is ~8~ r~ ~} t#6 =}flY ~~~ f ~ b &s Prt i ~~j i •a t ~ ~ ~ ~~~ r " a3 ~ ~~(g~~ Ra a~ :$°r, ~ 9 ~ ¢ atf jii t $ ~E i~~ ~ $ f r $ ~ Ir j t earl q~ a~~p ~$'' ~ ~ ~P 89~~g~` ~af Est ~jj't~@6igif~a lfli p E'g ~ggPe~$~ ?jjj~~ e~~~f~ ~~° `@ra ~yg: ~B~~ef~ ~~ ~ ~~s6 ~~r~ p ~(3~ n~ °$~ B~rf~~tj~~ $$j~ ~~ ~ r id8 ~i ~nflrfla} f#$ °~j~ 'd~ t !~f it ql ~~9 ~ j~~ }ryflt r $~~ ~rr>i ~~_~ ~ ¢6 It @~ ~. 44A!~~~~Q }~ ~~ •it~j7 ~ ~ ~ ~ e i ~ ~~r~ } ~t ai = afl ~ { I ~ I _ i f + : . ~ `i ~' 9 tea fg8i ~ ~~~ ~~i~f }~~~f ~ i I i}xr8g~~t8a @~~e m ~~ ? ~~~a~ ~Q~xt ~~Yagr ~E ]~i~ fj ?1i®q ~ i ' 1 2 t ~ a ~~ r~~ ~s~a Fflt n a~~ egx$~~ Pe fl~~ ~, i~f~d~ re~` d ~ ~ $~ aj~r~ A°~{ Y~}~t ~t@ a Qa ~tEpi p~s ~ ~}`r t g ~' ~ ~tt i~6'~l@ g~ _ ~t i E ~$ f $f jR~ gg ~} if j8 ~~ ~ r af. s t ai j 8f R~ } a} ~1 I• ~I j~i $ ~ ff~ =~at ~ Pr .t i ~~f i ~ 3 , ~$ tgf } t, ~,} 1 ~ ~ d ! } 6 } } I 1 °t md'~`~x~t g~1 ~ ~ f ~s~~~ir`~'~ = aj ra ofg tB~f @ } $ ~ r a!K@ ~~~ ~riRf ~r$ ' r' t A t ~ t t R r j ~ ~g r$t~#$n iE~ ~ ~ }'g fjla d R$ ~R ~ ~~ 4 t ~@ [ a = 6 Et } ~ a % ~q t f ja a i' ~ t of~ r ]y g~f iA~* ~°~ ~ ~~ $ ~tg~ a 1 f ~ ~ .aE~i €~ } ~ j 6 M~ jfl x ~6~ Sf ~~i Ij flit afl7 sr @P '~ i i gg~ gg~ f = ~ i ~ ~ ~ j= a ~~~ r ~ rta a ~=.'~f E ~ .e f i r~ t d ~ ~° R~r r air ~Gr f ~ ~,x ~ ~~ ~ ~a $ f r f ~,, ~p ~ ~r~ga~j~' ~~e ~ ~~ ~~ €a t ~~ ~: R~Qa~ag 1~~gt t'~ ~ `$ ~~~ {{~~~g~ a4 ~r~ ~x a j ~ ~ ~ a f' r i i .~ -~ ; ~ ~~ ~ P. ~ 8R 8 ~ N ~ `t'i i~lY: 1 ~t g ~ ~~ I t 1 '; h _ !Lt: ~ 1 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ lily...-• . y~ ~'• ,t t '`'1 t ~1 _ .. .... e ~- ~ I ~ ~ a +~'! r a ~ I ~ n •f' __ 8 ~~ ~ ~i4 ~atj'IQtLa T, .8 ~ }6~p ~~ )~ / ; ~ H,~ ~ /, _ _ gg A~ e1 R 1i ; ; (~ ~ A i '~r .sa. 6 fl el N~ j I ~ Gg i y ` .~ ~ ~ 18~ ~ Lga~~~~ eaoaaec~w ~8 18 ~ f '~ e ~ ~~ ' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ City of Meridian Public Works ~ o • - • '- fi:. ~ Waltman Lane Sewer Factension s~Ew~er~eb.~ m _ -• I Meridian, Idaho w~.~e~ Exhibit U-1 ;--page--9- =$;~1~ QQQ RR~~ g~ •. R i J I a 8 a® tl __ 1 i a nu, i t _ ~ J.---- p $ - .- i ~ • O• ~ 1 a d~ J/ d~` ~ ~ . i ~ '_ ~ ~ ~ ~ City of Meridian Pubflc Works ~~ o ~' Waltman Lane Sewer 6ctension ~E~-~ m Meridian, Idaho ~"°""~e°'~' ir~~ Exhibit D-1, page 2 February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. tS-~ REQUEST Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 3 / Ridenbaugh Canal AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Emall j Letter Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meerings shall become property of the Ctfy of Mertdtan. ~, .° - , . i ADA COUNTY REGORQER J. QAV1Q NAVARRO AMOUHITT x.00 12 BOISE IDAHO 03/1210% 06:12 AM 11''I t l I l1{1 `I 1 '. • ~ R~GORDED~nREQUESTOF UIItN~IIIIlIII1lIf11111111111I11i~1 NamAa Meridian ~riga6on Disi 1a71~3~59G j . I LICENSE AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this •~ day of 2007, by and between NAMYA 8i MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organized and existing undo and )?y virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party of the first party, hereinafter referred to as the "District," and .. ~• • ~ THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, a political subdivision and municipality of the State of Idaho (hereinafter "City"). party or parties of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee," WLT~[ESSETI,~•: ~ ; WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Master Pathway Agreement Fir Developing and Maintaining Pathways fir public: use along and across some of the District's ditches and within some of the District's easements and fee title lands dated December 1.9, 2Q00, recorded as Instrument No. 100102999, ~. records of Ada County, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "Master Pathway Agreement;" and, WHEREAS, the District and the City intended by entering the Master Pathway Agreement to accomplish the following in a manner that is consistent with their respective legal and fiduciary ~ ':: reslmnsibilities; w enhanccthe City's pathway planning though early consultation between the City and the District; to establish a process for the City's submission of pathway requests and the District's consideration • of such requests; and to provide the general conditions for the District's approval and authorization of ;: pathway requests at~ccling the District's ditches, property, operations and mainlena~ice; and, WHEREAS, the District grants to Licensee the right develop pathways to encroach within the District's easements along and auoss the District's ditches, canals and easements therefor upon the terms . and conditions of said Master Pathway Agreement and after the execution of a license agreement for each • propo:;ed crossing and encroachment; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee is the owner of the real propertycasement / right of way (burdened with the easement ofthe District hereinaftermentioned)particularly described in the "Legal Description" atiaehed hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, _ ` ~~ WHEREAS, the District controls the irrigation ditch or canal known as RIDENBAUGH CANAL • (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal") together with the real property and/car easements to convey irrigation water, to operate and maintain the ditch or canal, and which crosses and intersects said described real property of the Licensee as shown on Exhibit Ii attached hereto and by this reference made apart hereof; and, • LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 1 , a 12 ~, . , t .. WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to perform construction to pave a pathway within the • District's easement fur the Ridcribaugh Canal under the terms and conditions of said Mastcr Pathway Agreerncnt and those hcrcinaftcr set forth, r ~ NC)W, THEREFORE, far and in consideratiUn of the premises and of the covenant`s, agreements and conditions hcrcinaftcr set Earth and those set forth in said Mastcr Pathway Agreement, the parties hereto ~ `'~ agree as follows: 1. Licensee may perform construction involving the paving of the pathway on the east side of " the Ridenbaugh Canal, within the District's easement for said drain, located within the Southerland Farm Subdivision Nas. 3 iic. 4, northeast of the intersection of Victory Road and Eagle Road, Meridian, Ada . County, idaha. 2. Any construction, widening or crossing of said ditch or canal shall be performed in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit C, attached hereto and by this reference made part thereof. 3. The permitted hours of use of the pathway shall be from one half hour before sunrise and ~ • one half hour ai'ter sunset. 4. The parties hereto incorporate in and make part of this License Agreement all the covenants, conditions, and agreements of said Mastet Pathway Agreement unchanged except as the result of the provisions of this iiccnsc Agreement. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained and incorporated by reference shall ~ `~" constitute covenants to run with, and runningwith, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the bcnefil of each of the parties hereto and their respective suc;c;essors and assigns. _ - . - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District has hereunto caused its corporate name to be subscribed by ~ - its officers first hereunto duly authorized by resolution of its Board of Directors and the Licensee has hereunto subscribed its corporate name to he subscribed and its seal to be affixed thcrcta, all as of the day and year herein first above written. ~% 't ~r.:' .: NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT . Ty ~,~ ~rr`l~~ b '~ B f .. " ~~~t4ci~.~'~ ~ ~w `:~' Y lts President . ATTEST: t'~r ~ ~' ~' , - `~--~ tsy~_ - ,~~,,,,~ Its Secretary ~ " LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 " ; • .. „ . THE CITY CjF` MERIDIAN • ~ ----u-ururr ~ ""',. .~ ~ G'ytij ~~.e Z-Za 47 ATTEST: ' - ~~.~~ _ y STATE OF IDAHO ) ss: County of Canyon ) On this ~ day of ,2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said Statr, personally appeared eery Weick and Doren R. Coon, known to me to be the President and Scc7etary, respectively, of NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. 1N WITNESS WHER1rOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. P~a~~ A N M •.,,~ , '~d•0'C~~o•••••••.~p~'•~I(~tary Public Or i h0 0 ~~• ~y~TA1~ly ~~E'I3~siding at Idaho t lVfs~ Commission Expires: 111D~Z ~ ~ ~.® r STATE OF IDAHO Z*~ pU 8 L1G ~.~ ~ . Count Of,~k{a } '••4;~ oP 1~~ ;:••• • y ~•..~.~,..... • On this •~.7 ~'~"I day of • ~ ~; ~~„ ~L,,,. - , 2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared • t[__~, r r~~, tr cam, :. , ~~ and .:. ,•~~i~ . r~,- r 4• ~,,, known to me to be the • ~ Y t w.• ~;. and t' _•F.: ~(.(,: •i ,~•. ,respectively, of The ITY OF MERIDIAN, the entity that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such entity executed the same. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first shave writien. ~~ ~~~` ~~~~ Notary Puhlic for 1~.i i:• ~~•~-' ~QOT~~p'~'°~ Residing at ~ f t i,. ! r_~~:. cl~ - ~ My Commission Expires:~C, •- / S~~ • ~ i r i ! .. ~- LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 i • ,i i ~ ~ .~'~ . Cagincers Surveyors Ftanners ~ . ~ Frojest: 11965 ' Date: April 8, 2004 ~ - PARCEL DESCRIPTION FOR ' SUTHERLAND FARM SUBt]IY4510N. NO. 3 A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Southwest 114 of Section 21, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commenting at the Southwest corner of Section 21 marked by a brass cap; thence along the Westerly boundary of Section Z1, North 00°00'1T' West, 1,350.08 feet to theSauth 1/16 of said section marked by a 1" drill steel, the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said boundary, North 00° 00'01" West, 309.85 feet; thence South 89°OT46° East, 525.00 feet; thence South 00°52'15" East, 2.00 feet; ~ . thence South 89°OT4b" "cast, 449.89 feet; dtence North 45 ° 5Z`14" East, 31.11 feet; - thence South 85'39'41" East, 66.12 feet; thence South 44°OT46° East, 28.28 feet; - thence South 89°OT4b" East, 55,47 feet; thence along a curve to the right 148.35 feet, having a radius of 425.00 feet, a tangent of 74.94 feet, a delta of 20°00'00", and a long chord which bears South 79°0T46" East, 147.60 feet; thence South 69°OT46" East, 20.96 feet; thence North 20° 52'14" East, 125.23 feet; thence North 47°46'12" East, 34.50 feet; ~ ~ ~ . thence North 29°2b'S2" East, 120.11 feet; thence North 00°52'14" East, 472.47 feet to a point on the center line of the Ridenbaugh Canal; thence along said center line the following courses and distances; South 88'30'25" East, 134.11 feet; South 81'12'02" East, 256.90 feet; along anon-tangent curve to the right 111.22 feet, having a radius of 220.00 feet, tangents of 56.83 feet, a delta of 28° 5T57", and a long chord which bears South 66°43'02" East, 110.04 feet; South 52 ° 14'02° East, 7$.46 feet; thence leaving said center line, South 37'45'58° West, 55.00 feet; thence South 00° 5Y1~1- West, 614.25 feet; Exhibit A, page 1 ~- .. ,{ :, ~ b • ~r 1 ~~.~.. Engineers Surveyors Planners ,•~- fF l l Parcel Description far Sutherland i:arrn Subdivision No. 3 . April $, za~4 Page z thence South Ob°23'59" East. 70.02 feet to a paint on the Northerly boundary of Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. Z, recorded under the official retards of Ada County, Idaho, at Book ,and page ; thence along said.boundary the fallowing courses and• distances: along a non•tangent curve to the right 33.79 feet, having a radius of 353.86 feet, tangents of 15.91 feet, a delta of OS'28'14 , and a tang chord which bears South 8b°11'50" West, 33.71 feet; North 89°OT46" West, 369.92 feet; along a curve to the right 155.33 feet, having a radius of 445.00 feet, a tangent of 78.47 feet, a delta of 20'0000°, and a long chord which bears North 79°OT46" West, 154.55 feet; North 69°OT45" West, 151.32 feet; along anon-tangent curve to the left 723.92 feet, having a radius of 355.00 feet, tangents of 62.60 feet, a delta of 20°00'00", and a long chord which bears North 79°OT46" West, 123.29 feet; • North 89°OT46" West, 83.47 feet; South 00°52'14" West, 94.35 feet; North 89°OT46" West, 50.00 feet; • thence leaving said boundary, North 00°52'14" East, 90.35 feet; thence North 44°OT46" West, 31.11 feet; thence North 89°OT4b" West, 406.95 feet; thence South 48°21'36" West, 32.56 feet; thence North 89°OT4b" West, 54.00 feet; . thence North 46 ° 51'21" West, 29.73 feet; thence North 89°OT4b" West, 263.33 feet; thence South 87°26''!3" West, 100.18 feet; thence North 89° OT4b" West, 45.57 feet; thence South 45 ° ZT04" West, 25.42 feet; . thence South 00°00'01" East, 227.54 feet; thence North 89'21'54" West, 48.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 12.88 acres, more or less. END Oi= [7ESCRIPTION .. Prepared by: / . J-U a ENGINEERS, Inc. Ronald M. Hodge, P.L.S. ~~ ~f RMH ITIJ(; the F;\ProjectManagers\GAL\1 1 96 511 1 9b5-SurlDestriptions\PN~'3•BNDRY.doc Exhibit A, page 2 . . ~; ~4 a ~. .~"-- ~ ' ~~' .~ ' "~ _ ~ ~ +~ •~; ~'~ ~~ineers Surveyors Pltuuiers ~ . Project: 11967 Date; 3une 16, 2004 ~ - . PARCH DESCRIPTION FOR • SUTHkRLAND FARM SllBD{YISiON NO.4 A parcel of land situated in a portion of the Southwest 1 /4 of Section 21, Township 3 North, Range 1 £ast, (5oise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest comer of Section 21; thence along the Westerly boundary of Section 21, • ~. North 00°00'17" West, 1,350.06 feet to the South 1 /16 career of said section, from which the West ~/•comer of . • said section bears North 00°00'01" West, 1,350.03 feet; thence continuing slang Said boundary, North 00°00'01` West, 309.85 feet to a•point marking the Northwest tamer of Sutherland Farrn,Subdivision No. 3, recorded under the official records of Ada County, Idaho, in f3aok of Picts at pages thru ;thence along `~= the Northerly boundary of said subdivision, South 89°07'46" East, 525.00 feek to the POINT 01: BEGINNING; thence North 00°00'01" West, 253.90 feet; ~ . thence North 00° 52'14 Fast, 374.51 feet; thence North 89°OT46" West, 58.60 reet; thence North 35 ° 5731" West, 55.00 feet to a point on the center Ifne of the Ridenbaugh Canal; thence along said center tine the following courses and distances: - North 54° 02'29" East, 119.05 feet; ~ . along a curve to the rfght 505.3b feet, having a radius of 500.00 feet, a tangent of 276.64 feet, ~' a delta of 57° 54'35", and a long chord which bears North 82° 59'4b" East, 484.12 feet; South 68° 02'56" East, 352.10 feet; South 88° 30'26" East, 95.99 feet to a paint marking a Northwest corner of said Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 3; ' thence slang the Westerly and Northerly boundary of said subdivision the fol[owing courses and distances: . South 00° 52'14" West, 472.47 feet; South 29 ° 2b'S2" West, 120.11 feet; ~ ' South 47°46'12" West, 34.50 feet; South ZO ° SZ 14 West, 125.23 feet; North b9°OT46" West, 20.96 feet; along a curve to the left 148.35 feet, having a radius of 425.00 feet, a tangent of 74.94 feet, a de[ta of 20°00'00", and a tong chord which bears North 79°OT4b° West, 147.60 feet; North 89 ° 07'~4i6" West, 55.47 feet; North 44°0T46" West, 28.28 feet; North 87°23'38" West, bb.03 feet; South 45°52'14" West, 28.28 feet; - North 89°OT46" West, 451.92 feet; North 00°00'01" West, 2.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 16.12 acres, more or less. - ~ • END OF [}ESCRiPTiON ~~~t A +i' i Prepared by: 2 0 ~ J-ll-B ENGINEERS, Inc. a. u, '}~. p>~ Q ~ . Ronald M. Hodge, R.L.S. ~ pR 14,i~ QpAY A. ~~ RMN/TL.K:Ihc F:\ProjectMariagers\GAU11967 - Sutherland Farm lt4111967•SurveylDescriptiarnlPH~'4-BNaRY.doc TJvI~ •t }~i ~ ~ na rtc ~ s ~,~~~ ~oPY , ' ~'`~' ~ ~.• a 'd . } ~ ~ - ti • a., ' 9 x;;,~;' ' . , • ~-Ridenbeugh Canal ~"~'~'!~!* ~ ` ', ,,. ~ r.~ t ,mow.. • s ~. , ~;~ .* •°' t • ~• ~. ~ ;, ;.~::.~ . ~ ~ ~ Ridet~augh ~~r~l in 5~1, =`' ~- *e,e~,, :_.,r~ .erg..: - : _ . _ :,,.:. :. ~ ~ ' ~~,~•r ~. ~" i.-' ~ CQ~t Idaho ~ ust X994 ~~ E7fHIBIT C Special Conditions a. Construction of the pathway shall be in accordance with Exhibit C-t, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. b. The District's casement for this section of the Ridenbaugh Canal is 7 [~1 feet, 50 feet to either side of the centerline. ~ c. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this agreement. Time if of the . essence. LICENSE AC'rREEMENT - Pagc 4 02,•'25;2005 49:58 ~A;t 2083^^<38336 ~o ~ ~ ~W ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ f~ oa5io~ ...~ . a. ~a ~ ~, ~, , ..'„-` J - ~-,,. f 1 .~ I ~~ s~ ~ ~~ ~. 1 ~c' n a ~' ~ ~, . j !z m. c r ;. ~ ~' ~-- R -~ -- t~ ~ ~ '' Exhibit C-1, page 1 ~ti i .; i :: ~ ~~; +2;'25/2095 19:9t~ Frt1( 2063239336 ~y • ~~ :~ m V' fm ~~ i~ (~ ~t}6i OF1Fj 42,''262045 09:55 FAQ 2083239336 . ~ _ ~ ~ yti 0 QG„ rya,,, ._. A d ~ ~ a ~ • ~ • • •.~ N t*t r...~ ~.L.~ {A V_ 1 ~. . . . r ~" 'C'1 rt ~ .~. ro ~~ ~,~: ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ -, a `~ 1 ^~ n ^,,,,' F ~1 C ~~. ~Xriibit C-7, page .i 42128r2u05 49;59 FAU 2083239336 ~ u4:3,'446 .} i ~!, .1 '~ ~ .C. ~ ~ ~. ! ~ ~ ~ i :~ • ~ ~~ ~!' __.. Exhibit C- 7 , page 4 February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-~ REQUEST Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sutherland Farm No. 5 and No. 6 / Ridenbaugh Canal: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: COMMENTS See Attached Agreement / Emafl J Lefler Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. r ~ A 'ADA O08NTY RECORDI~ d. DAVID NAVARRO AIdOUNT ''15.1l00 II 5 . ~ BOISE IDAHO 0311~E'Si 0 12 AM I~~ I~n~'~~I~~~~'`Iltyi~7f ~1~~~i~~ dl~ ` pEPUTY Bonnie ObetbllBg fl 1 ff RECORDED-REO 1 Et7E134~ Nampa Meridian Itrigatlon Disi ~__ __-- LICENSE. AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~ day of 2007, by and between NAMPA & MERIDIAN iRRTGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws aF the State of Idaho, party of the first party, hereinafter referred to as the "District," and ~ . . ~ THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, a political subdivisian and municipality of the State of Idaho (hereinafter "City"). party ar parties of tl~e second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee," WIT_~T~SSE~H: WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Master Pathway Agreement Far Developing and Maintaining Pathways far public use along and acrass same of the District's ditches and within same of the District's easements and fee title lands dated December 19, 2(}00, recorded as instrument No. 100102999, reu)rds of Ada County, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "Master Pathway Agreement;" and, WHEREAS, the District and the City intended by entering the Master Pathway Agreement to accomplish the ti~llowing in a manner shat is consistent with their respective legal and fiduciary responsibilities; to enhance the City's pathway planning though early consultation between the City and the District; to establish a prcx:e!;s Par the City's submission of pathway requests and the District's cansidcration of such requests; and to pravide the general umditions for the Distxict's approval and authorization of pathway requests aftocting the District's ditches, property, operations and maintenance; and, WHEREAS, the District grants to Licensee the right develap pathways to encroach within the District's easements along and ac~rass the District's ditches, canals and easements thcrcfar upon the terms and conditions of said Master Pathway Agreement and after the execution of a license agreement far each proposed Grassing and encroachment; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee is the owner of the real property casement /right of way (burdened with the easement ofthe District hereinafter mentioned)particularly described in the "Legal Description" attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, . WHEREAS, the District cantrols the irrigation ditch or canal known as RIDENBAUGH CANAL (hereinafter collectivciy refer-ed to as "ditch ar canal") together with the real prapcrtyand/or easements to convey irrigation water, to operate and maintain the ditch or canal, and which crosses and intersects said described real praperty of the Licensee ati shown on Exhibit B attached herein and by this refcrcnc:e made a part hercal; and, LICENSE AGREEMENT - Pagc 1 .°'} { . , ., WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to perform construction to pave a pathway within the District's easement for the Ridenbaugh Canal under the terms and conditions of said Master Pathway Agreement and those hereinafter set forth, i NQW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the covenants, agreements and ~ conditions hereinafter set forth and those set forth in said Master Pathway Agreement, the parties hereto agree as Follows: 1. Licensee may perform construction involving the paving of the pathway on the east side of the Ridenbaugh Canal, within the District's easement for said drain, located within the Sutherland Farm • Subdivision No. 5, northeast of the intersection of VicWry Road and Eagle Road, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 2. Any construction, widening or crossing of said ditch or canal shall be performed in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit C, attached hereto and by this reference made part thereof. `. 3. The permitted hours of use of the pathway shall be from one half hour before sunrise and one half hour after sunset. 4. The parties hereto incorporate in and make part of this License Agreement all the covenants, • conditions, and agreements of said Master Pathway Agreement unchanged except as the result of the provisions of this License Agreement. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained and incorporated by reference shall constitute covenants to run with, and runningwith, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them •: .. or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the benefit of each of the parties hereto and their r~pectivc successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District has hereunto caused its corporate name to be subscribed by its officers first hereunto duly authorized by resolution of its Board of Directors and the Licensee has hereunto subscribed its corporate name to be subscribed and its seal to be affuced thereto, all as of the day and year herein first alcove written. ~.g:" ~: ; . ~. ~ NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT ,~~~~~~ ~; . ~, • ~, ~ J' is Presidcne~ ATTEST: ~~`~~;.. .. ~~~~~~• c~'~'~`"~---~ Its Sccxctary LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 TIIE CITY OF N[ERIDiAN . ``~~.iuun~y~ / e .. ATTEST: o r /~ r ~ - ,~ '~~, O T ts'c . ~~` ~ ~ •+ i ,.~ i .~~ ~G~:~~~ . C~..we Z-~--o7 STATE OF IDAHO ) ,•~/'///t/,tp-~~~~~r~`~~~~``` Ss: County pf Canyon ) On this ~ day of / l'~ , 2tH17, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Henry Weick and Doren R. Coon, known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of NAMPA ~ MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. iN WITIVZrSS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my off vial seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. +.• ~ A N. ~ •., ~.oa~ ~~..o...,,00 •.,~ Notary Public for Idaho 'g~E+ ~tesiding at Idaho ;~, pa..~OTAR~, ~y Commission Expires: d ZD/Z t STATE OF IDAHO ) L ~'UBLtG .: ~ ~ . County of,~c{~:, ) •'••,~'~ OF i~P.++~ - . . '•~e.u~ n+~+• On this 2~'``'i day of ~~,~;,~,, 21107, before mc, the undersilned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ° i-c; . ~...:" `/-t: t..~ : ~ F ~:i and ~..', ~;, • .. F. i~3~ ~~,~: ,known to me to he the a t ! ~~...~ . ~ and i ::.1.~ f ! - . 3.. ~ , respectively, of The CITY OF MERIDIAN, the entity that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such entity executed the sami:. IN W ITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto sat my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. 1/ :~ OTA,~~ - '~ Notary Public for ..~,'--i ~.. J; t o~ 'P + Residing at ' • t. i::. tiles( • e ; ~ My Commission Expires: /t' • ~ S / r ,. i ,: LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 - - --- -~ .~,_ i . ~ .~ ~. I Lc,gal Dcscri tiQn Aright-oC way in the South East 1/4, Section 21, Township 3 Narth, Range 7 East, B.M., Meridian, ' Ada County, Idaho. Y ~ EXHIBIT C ; :;,: SQecial Conditions a. Gonstructian of the pathway shall be in accordance with certain Plans consisting of two sheets; sheet Ll.l entitled "Landscape Plan, Sutherland Farm Phase 5 & 6,"dated January 26, 2(X.15 and sheet LI.2 entitled "Landscape Plan, Sutherland Farm Phase 5 8c 6;' dated January 5, 2005. These plans have been delivered to the [)istrict's water superintendent, are in his possession in his offices, and is hereby incnrparatcd by this rc!'crcncc. b. The nistrict's easement for this section of the Ridenbaugh Canal is 1 UO feet, 50 feet to either side al'the centerline. c. Construction shall be camplcted one yeax [ram the date of this agreement. Time if of the ~ : ~ ~ essence. . ,.. f •~ -_ l ' LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 . I ~V ,M. . ? ! . T - ~ ~~1 ~'~'.,.~- 4 ~ . ~, ~ ~-Ridenbaugh Canal ~~ ~ fit., ~ ~ .. ~ - y,~$,~q` ~ f ~ ~_ .ate. M :* .~~ ~ ~ .• ~f +r.`• .J ~, 1 ~ .~•..'~ .rte. w~A1..' ~ ~...p . ~ M • ~ '.~~.'.~ , ; ~ ~ • 6 .. ... ~p +~.~~ r q:.. r .. .{ ~ d ` ~' 3r.~ +}'•.';~4v~ /'~ ~ ~'..~ :..1`•4 1 it ri ~.~~' !rA . ... ~ ~ ~ (/'-~, ^l{ . _ ... ~ Rf~er~a h ~a~l in SE 4~ -. . ... ~~ _ `:. _ ._ .. ~ .21, T.3N, R.1E, B.~., Aida ~`• i ~~•~ aA ` .. 1: :.... t • . *.r..~ t ter... ,~ f ~ .~,~.~ ,. ...~.~ I ~V, f~ah~ {A~ 1~94~ ffi..~ ..ate . _ .'~.I.r.- .... t ~r._v ..r.. ~.. .. ~ «.-sK....a_: ..._ ~,~~ ayt~.. ~ ~tl' ~ ,..aK ~ b i4 ~ ~ T+IM t 4 ~ ~(r t Exhibit B ~ ~ February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-~( REQUEST Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for Sagecrest Subdivision /Hunter Lateral: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: See Attached Agreement / Email / Lefler Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the Clay of Meridian. •+ ~ 1 • > ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO AMOUNT 21.00 7 - BOISE IDAHO i~I'i2f07 08:12 AM 11II II11 11 tr 11 - • DEPUTY Bonnie Oberbil8g ~ll ~~~f1~~1~4~~1~'~~"I~'~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~I~ • ~ RECORDED-REQUEST OF 107IS~~5~~ . Nampa Meridian IrdgaBan Oast - ~~ LICENSE AGREEMENT ... LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entercd into this ~ day of ~ , 2007, by and ~~ between NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idahn, party of the first party, hereinafter referred to as the "District," and . • THE CITY OF MERIDIAiJ, a political subdivision and municipality of the State of Idaho (hcreinafier "City"). party or parties of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Licensee," ~ ~ ~~. ~I~NESSETI~--: WHEREAS, the parties hereto entercd into a Master Pathway Agreement For Developing and Maintaining Pathways Cor public use along and across some of the Uistrict's ditches and within some of the District's easements and fee title lands dated December ly, 2000, recorded as Instrument No. 1401029, . • records of Ada County, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as Use "Master Pathway Agreement;" and, • WHEREAS, the District and the City intended by entering the Master Pathway Agreement to accomplish the fallowing in. a manner that is consistent with their respective legal and fiduciary responsibilities; to enhance the City's pathway planning though early consultation between the City and the District; to establish a process Iix the Gity's submission of pathway requests and the District's consideration of such requests; and to provide the general conditions for the District's approval and authorization of pathway requests affecting the District's ditches, properly, operations and maintenance; and, WHEREAS, the District grants to Licensee the right develop pathways to encroach within the District's easements along and across the District's ditches, canals and easements therefor upon the terms and conditions of said Master Pathway Agreement and after the execution of a license agreement for each propnsed crossing and encroachment; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee is the owner of the nal property easement /right of way (burdened with the easement ofthe District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in tha "Legal Description" attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hcrcof; and, WHEREAS, the District controls the irrigation ditch or canal known as HUNTER LATERAL (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal") together with the real properly and/nr casements to convey irrigation water, to operate and maintain the ditch or canal, and which crosses and interscetti said dcuribed real property of the Licensee as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference made a part hcrcof; and, ,~. .~• • L 'e WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to perform construction to pave a pathway within the District's easement for the Hunter Lateral under the terms and conditions of said Master Pathway Agreement and those hereinafter set forth, NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set Earth and those set Corth in said Master Pathway Agreement, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Licensee may perform construction involving the paving of the pathway on the east side of the Hunter lateral, within the District's easement Cor said drain, located within the Sagecrest Subdivision, southeast of the intersection of Overland Road and Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. 2. Any construction, widening or crossing of said ditch or canal shall be performed in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit C, attached hereto and by this reference made part thereof. 3. The permitted hours of use of the pathway shall be from one half hour before sunrise and one half hour after sunset. 4. The partie,5 hereto incorporate in and make pari of this License Agreement all the covenants, conditions, and agreements of said Master Pathway Agreement unchanged except as the result of the provisions of this License Agreement. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained and incorporated by reference shall constitute covenants to run with, and running with, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall he binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the benefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. ~ . 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the DisMct has hereunto caused its corporate name to be subscribed by its officers first hereunto duly authorized by resolution of its 13oard of Directors and the Licensee has hereunto subscribed its corporate name to be subscribed and its seal to be affixed thereto, all as of the day and year herein first above written. . :., ` ,;y~~ : "~^.~ NAMPA & MERIDIAN 1RRIGATTON DISTRICT ~~ ~.~ _ ~ ~~ ~ y ~~~.~ ~~ ~ I3y .... ~ .. a ~' • :.• its Preside ~~',be~ :~---~1~~ ATTEST: ~' . Its Secretary ': ~+ LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 • ' - THE CITY OF MERIDIAN . `~~ ~ „(~.i;~f'+,~Pa~.i .,; `,'' Ln r'e (/~`~r/ ~,dZr.'+rt/`r G ~' ~r!/ / ... ` `~F1'" N ATTEST: ~~a~ ~ d~ ~ ~ 's ~ ~, ~GG_.,. 1~~ rte, ~~. STATE OF IDAHO ) rrnh„ n,tit» ss: County of Canyon ) On this ~ day of , 2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared cnry Wcick and Daren R. Coon, known to me to he the President and Secretary, respectively, oC NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that -. a; executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district executed the same. TN WITNESS WHEREOF, i have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year • in this certificate first above written. ','~LN~u1llej~~, I ~o~~ p N. ry •.. • •.t•`p ~~••••••^•.~p'••,~ Notary Public for Idaho . '. •• QS •'~~T,,~Rr••~c~'•~Rcsiding at IdaDDho~~~~// ~ . „•„ ~ 31~Iy Commission Expires:_~1'Z w • ' . S l .• ,PUBL G-• •• - . ~ STATE OF IDAHO ) 1 County of ,•;~(~l ) '~.'~TF OF ; ;;.. `°, ~ ~ ~ . ~ • On this ~~' day of • c_.~) - , , , 2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public: in and for said State, personally appeared "~ ~ ~ t. c.< <., ~ r:~ and G~ ,~i, r ~. ~ f, ts:~ ~~;;~~ ~ ,known to me to be • the . , r ~ t:~.~ } r ~ and ' ; ~ 4.. ' . ; _. • , respectively, of The CITY OF MERIlliAN, the entity that executed the foregoing instrumen and acknowledged to me that such entity executed the same. IN WITNESS W HEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first about written. f ~ Notary Public for ~ ~.i t;..~..' Residing at . r ~.. 1• ~,r ~ - .~.a My Commission Expires: /G IS' i t LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 :ff ;~ Leal Description In the North West 114, Section 20, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. ~ EXHIBIT C - i . ~ Special Conditions a. Construction of the pathway shall be in accordance with Exhibit C-1, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. I b. The District's casement for this section of the Hunter Lateral is 40 feet, 20 feet to either side of the centerline. ,,i ~ c. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this agreement. Time if of the essence. ... i • i :.. i . _ ,~ •. ~ ~ • i ~ .. A i ..,; .. . ~ .~ LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 •r .1,. ~ KI In ~~~ ~ 1 ~a~~ N .•.~,--~~~. `--nand I~c~ad. Hun~~rla~r , , ~- _ ::.~:__.~.~. _ . ~ -~ ~ ~ • t ~.~~~ T.3N R.1 E, 8.~., Ada ~o , ~~ ., ~ ..~ II ~. :. ~ -: ~ ~ , . ~ :~ s . : ~ ~a~ A u~ 1994 ~~ w ..~._. ._ ..,, ~ . ~~ .:, .: .. s . .. . ~.r .. ~~ -Hu~~r lat~rai ~ ~ - ~~fi:' '' ' ~ ~-•S. ~. ~r~' lr.. a - rqr i~~. ' ~ ~. ~ ~ ... ~ •, ,~ - C fff.~~~ .. ~ ' ~~ . ,~~, . R ' ~.. f 1 J ~w Exhibit B f 3 .i ~ ~ 1 '`. ~1r, . r~"'„ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~t ~ .~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ z ~~~ ~ ~~ c ~ .a ~ ti ~ r . ~, ~ ~ .- ~ ~ ~„~ ~ ~: i ~'~ .r ` ~ r` ~ ` f Q ~' `~ ~VQ Sr+L 3 r ..- v: " S . 3 eCZ.~ 2++ '+ e~ t ~C,'~ I a '~,~ '1ti ti &L ~5ti 3 ~- ~~~ 5 • ~ ~; ~. ~ •~ x ~ s ~., ~ o ~l e~~ ~ V ~ p ~ ~ :,r i 1 T y Q f $ to to g r*e eD es+ -_ ~Nic• ~ a~ic ~, why, ~ ~ ~ o ,mac ,_„ 71.57 . o ~C-~! m ~ _....~~,.t.5,_, ~ ,y .`~~ 81.32' I I ~ -. i ~ ~f4.4U' `e' ~ ~, 63 ~fl ~ N 00'Oq' ' ~ ..~ `'"~ ~ 1 t Ilr17i7'd1' W ~'. .a a.t .. ;~ S QO'Q~'00° --' .. i'~-,,., . .. ~ Exhibit C-1, page 1 I ~ 6 ~, ~ ~ ' .. ~ S. LC3GLtST GRC»!E Rc:~~,.C~ • ~ ~~ r., ~~ ~~ ~ ~ii1~ fw~~ ~ ~ ` • ~+ .r.. ` r I ~4~~ ~l ~ ~ ~ -' " ~ i ~ ~~ • ~ `~ i ~ t . ' ~ ~ / ' p ' ' . ~ . I Q ~ . I. ,~ , ~ it .+ ~a ~ i I ~ N' 0I~00 00 A. ~` sc .3 ~~1 p y. I PJ ~ ~ ~ I } I i ~ ~° ~ N N I ~ I i O R1~ ~ "yet dp 3` ~' ACS 41 ~ a ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • `% ~ 7 R i T +U~~` ` rlt~~~' ~ ' ~ 84 90' i /j ~~SS l I ,1.~~ ~ . ~ ~ ,A ~ S OQ'On'00" E (~ ~ S ~ x g i I~ `°• - ~, ~~. ~ Q m . $ 4 ~ ~ . ~ I IN ' ~' 84.90' w ~ is "`~ ~, ~ ~ I ® ~ m I i ~ ~ ti to ~ 1D' ica ""° ° `~ ~ I ' tqR .^., `_ ~„ ~ o = ~ s~.90 ' " i 68.so I ~ ' ' ' ,~'; g S 00'40 OD E I v I ~ N ~0 00 W ~ ~. Q0 ~: . i O Q O C ? ( 6$.PU' ~ ( I to i vl C7~ ~ ^j~ `~.,. x i C3 ~ cc 3' 00'00'QD° E i '~ I N I I ~ r o p ~ ~ ~ ..., G7 ~. ~ i f~ ' ^ ~T t"'"- I I c ~ o ~ ~ r v . a a. o ~ ~++ i- ate. 10 ~ 4 90 8 I I g £~ . 4£0 6 . 28.?9 4 ., ~• 66.90' i5 9 £0 £ -- 00"Ol}'Ofl" W 139.99' - ~. -- ' '`. !~ -1 ` :~ S CO'OG'00" E 6 4 ~ 0~~7 1E~1i9~;--~~ ~ V ~ -~ " ' ~ ~ ' e : 9a 00 (10 00 w 139.92 -- w: o, N OQ'~7Q'00" W 71.40' 9 ~ g C ~ 6 £ 0 42.1 U' 68.90' x.92' cn 4 ~ i ~' 10' I~ 1 I ~ ` c n ~ ~ ~ 1$+ ~ i r+ ~ ~ ~ ~ + Q ~ ~ Q p b Q Exhibit C-1, page 2 ~ • February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-L REQUEST Award Bids and Approve Contracts for 22 Packages for New Water Dept Building AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See Memos /Documents from Purchasing Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Mertdlan. ~: To: Will Berg, City Clerk Fiotn: Keith Watt, Purchasing Agent CC: Brad Watson, P.E. Qate: ?J15/07 Ile: February 20 City Coundl Meeting Agenda Item C] c~r~r~ ~~~ 9 6 2~0~ pity of Mericli~ ~it~- ~1er>~ ®f£ace The Purd7asin+g Department rE~lty requests that the followir~ item be paced on the Febn~ary 20 City Council Consent Ag®nda for Coursril's consideration. A~roval of Award of t~ 22 consfiuction bid packages for the new Water Depa_ trrient Adm~nislXation Bu~ldinp. The bid packages weroa devek~l by KrSeizenbedc with input from myself and the City's I~al staff. Eat~t bid package will be oontrac~ed using a modified AIA Agreement put together by Ted Baird. Recommended Council Action; Approve award of fie 22 Bid iackages with a Not-To-Exc1 amount of $1,523,233.x, and aui~orize the Mayor to sign ire modif~d AfA A®reements and City C~rlc to att. Thank you for your oonsid~aration. • Page 1 H V a M0 W ~~~ ~~t~ .-~ - ~ p @~; a~ ' ~ ' ~'v o~ r~ti F U O O N ti O O N W ~_ H W a 0 W D i m a .~ 03 3 w D m s O V N N P P 0 0 0 m Z m • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ri o o u~ o o o o o o~ o P o o ~c ti t~ o o o o ~ ri I~ P OD O O O Op t{~ IA tp P tp ~ O~ 1~ 0 0 0 0 0 N M I~ N N ~Ll O O N I~ d~ 1~ M M OD OD I~ M 0 0 0 1p 00 N N ~ I~ I~ O CA M ~ 4'l N 1~ OO OD ~ M OO I~ OO O~ I~ N M M N eI' 1~ ~ 1~ O P I~ N IA N OD tf~ OS P P P P c~ OD P 1~ N N tf) V3 K? P P tf? Ei} ER to EA tf? tf? Ei? EA !A ER tf? Eii P P 10 E/! t9 tR t!3 Ei? P ~' O O O O ~ o ~ m a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ ~, N a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ O M Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ N ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o o ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ o o o o ~ ~' ln (O O O O Op tp lp f~ lA ~ O d' O) I~ O O O O O N N OO N O O O N I~ ~ O) C7 M ~ C4 Cfl I~ M lp 0 0 0 0 ~ I~ I~ I~ I~ ~ ~ O M ~ f~ ~A N Ch O f~ N OO O ~ d~ O M a0 l~ aO Cfl l~ O ~ ti ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ EA EA EA ~ ~ tf? ~ ff3 Ef3 Ef? Ef3 C~3 d3 E9 ~ Ei? Ef? ff3 Efl E/-? rn .m N L f6 ~ p H ~ ~ O H C Z Q ~ O m ~ ~ C Q ~ O m ~ m .E w as o 3 k 3 = ,~ w ~$ v ~ ~ N u- m E W H ~ ~ c o!s m E -E o _ m 8 C7 m E O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :p ~ ~ m ~ ~m ~ ~c ~ ~ c Sn o - E m p m a ~ ~ Z o ~ 'c~ o o t i ~ o a i a o o ~ o ~ ~° e- F m m E U Q ~ W v E o c ~ c i c Uo N ~ v ~ ~ o ~ o ^ ad m cn ^ m U C~ m a o. cn ~ ii > o.. > = m w C~C ~ i ~ O ~ N O CO V In CO I~ W W OO ~ N G _ ~ ~ # ~ t(~ ik ~p # ~ pp # p~ ~ _ ~ _ ~ _ ~# to ~ ~ # ~ ~ ik ~# 3k 7Nk N N ik W d' Y V w m Z O) o m N N ~p U O ~ ~ ~ y U ~ O U1 ~ U ,;: N ~ Y O 'O O 'C ~ ~. ;~ ~ ~ Y p J i U c iq E 3 w w ~ o° ~ ~ ~ w F=_- , o co ~ O U •. ~ ~ s ~ o m 'o `i ~ ~ ~ C7 c C9 s ~i c 3 c 3 ~ C C ~ O ~ ~ ~ N N y ~ ~ ~ N ~ - ~~ ~ ~ F ` ~° ~ i ~ L ~ ~ ~ ¢ Q i ~ i ~ z a ~ ~ ~ = ° ~ ~ n i - ~ o c a ~ c i z • • F- H m 4 o m ~, ~ ~~ a o ~ ~ is r w ~~ a oa = r ~ r ~ U0= ~j~ ~~^: O~~ ~ ~ UQ~ m g y a¢ ~o o~ c z o~ ~ o a ~a m m =~ N 0 0 : 0 ~ 0 ° ~ ,~ , o ,'.~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ g o ~ ~ -Z# PP!d ~ Pp'd x x ~lSM 4~4i x x `, puOg x x 'oN aat x x -c ~ a ~ 4H [L. H m Q m ~i Z _Q ~ _~ OU ~~ ~--. Z UO N Y W UQ ~~ m !L Q o°-~ O~ 0 0 2 O w r+ C m m M d .Q c O O d D N O a m R a ~_ m m a a w~ ss d s °o °o g °rn a o°°, g g G ri $ ~ ~ ~° RP1I ppy x x x s~~ rtd x x x x x x 'oN IiJJI x x x ~ ~ F- ° a V I Q 4 i 1 ~_ ~._0y LL. CW G ~ U vo ~~_ Y ~' ~~ U Q J ~? Q=. d~ LL.. ~_ ~cc _~ G _~ .~`' s 0 0 W E .~ L m c 'a c ~a J M O Z a ~. • m ..+ '8 .e M N ,d °o G N , tOD f9 Z# PPT/ 6# PPti x x ~NAp q-td x x puo@ U x 'aN'Lt9! x x w - ~ ~ m 1 ~ C C ~"' U ~- Q m 'mil Z Q W ~ d g~ a u- U O `~ t? c ~ ~ V O = _ fA Q ~ Ct ~ 0 Z ~ ~ Q LL ~ , V Q W Z m~~ ~ a ~ .C tL ~ O~ y a O~ ~ m m h ~d v - ~, .. a .d ~~ `,r ~ a° ~ ~ ZA PP1d. t~ PPV x x x ~NM qn~ x x x puoa x x x .W+I t#~l x x x o~ W ~_ C LL LL ~ ~ . .- }" U O 00 u Z O rO d f"' ~ UO ~~ Y ~ O~ ~~ U Q J a¢ ~o O~ O~ _> w L V O ~ = o Q v o ~ Q Z ~ ~ W Y ~ ~ a m m ~d ~d ~v ~` '~' N ,.d ~ ~ ' ."° o ~ m W ~ ~ ' Z!~ PpV - I# pPV x x t?NM 9!4! x x puog U x 'aH aa{ x x "~ 3 H U 00 d D ' oD n _~ ~_~ OV ~_ ~ UO Y ~' O~ ~~ UQ J ag u. ^ O~ O ~ _> c ~Q Q ~ ~ ~ Z ~ Q z ~ ~ ~ ~ W d ~ a a m • . a a v N o a 0 0 € .~ o ~+ o a Z~ PPV °L~PP~d x x ~N11A.4-1d x x puog x x 'oN, 21~F x x ~~' i • m H m ~ Q ~_ ~ m ' 0 W ~ W J = !0 O Q LL ~ ~ O UO ~° v Y~o O ~¢ ~ UQ~ m ~ ~ r. azd' z° ~ ~ O~ m ~ O~ ~ r~ as a > '~ ~ m _,_ a `o _ ~ ui L# PPt~ 4# pl ~. I H U Q 00 J ~ N ~ _ ~ ~ ~ H ~ W ~ ~ J O O . ~ o to UO~ ~ mjo E L Q zZ O ~ ¢ LL ' Li U Q R: ~ m ~ ~ dQ ~ LL ~ O ~ Z ~ 0 ~ Y tl) v RJ > a o 'o m m H a {'R -. n 0 o S n ~ ~ 03 v ti °o ~i ~ ~ ~ r~'~d '4# PPV X x x eK,t~y-"q~d X x x puog x x x 'oT~ ~l~i x x x ~ .~ 's a m ;:a ~ ~ J ~ ~ Q' m • i H N m Q 0 m d ~ ~ ~ w x o ~ J 0 UQ V L 1.. ~ ~ UOz to ~ D 'o ~ ~ Z ~ O ~ Q ~ ~~~ U 0_ ~ Q ~ p Z 0.. ¢ ~ m Y ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ p~ a a ~ m >_ M N _- a ' `~ iq t# P¢V L# PP1f x ~M qRd x `puog x 'aN 2191 x u°~ 4 _n ~' _~ g .6 _~ a a H ~ U I- t]a ~ Q i ~_ m ,~ Z Q OV U0= a Y~~ O~Q U Q [~ ?fig n. ~o O~ O~ ?_ D m 0 0 r C z O~ a ~_v m a a c' 'ml Zip-PPV k#F PPV 'oN 2t~! ,_a ~~ ~" QaU LiLL.. f,"n' YJ Q M©_ W ~t i z Q a~ ~ 0 w~ 3 ~ J ~ Ua ~ L L Z M Q7 ~ ryy~Q G tL Y y " ~ ~ Z O ~ W~ Q ~ ~ ~ U ~ Q ' tt1 m ~ g ~- r' d" a ° _ z LL D Q ~ ~ .~ og v~ a > 'v ' o m m ~ ~ 0 0 d ~ 0 0 $ ~ s ~- o a 0 0 a o ~ ~ ry 4 N ~ es u> v Q v 9Q ee a N ~. 4 i ~.~ ~:, o 0 ~ 0 N ~: ~.R~-lf -° _ ~~ x x ~` x x ,.2~ ~- ,~ pu x x tl•o~ ~ x x . x _ ~~ -,,(-~ ~. • 3 ~~ Q ~R' . :¢ U ~J H U H oD Q GO W J ~- U OQ UO Y ~ ~ ~ O~ ~~ UQ J?~ d Q ~o o~ ~ ~ to ?_ D Z Q O W c m 0 '~ c H V c +~ c W W c a N O Z Y V t4 a v m ~i U r oc] d a m Z _Q O OU ~z UO Y ~ o° ~~ H _UQ J a¢ ~o O~ o~ 0 O 2 Q O W g O .a A m .r 0 ~a c O V y M T 0 z d a a m J g~ 6L m Q O m j 4 ~C u- U Od ~~ `U 0= ~~z~ O~¢ U d W ~ Z ~ a¢ ~o o~ o~ _~ _~ N m .Q N v N 0 Q c ~a ea st ri z m Y V a m m °o °o °o u ~ i c ° ad a u v v °o °o w ~ ~ ~ ~ x R H a - ~ u g Q o ~ ~ Q ~ ~ _ Z ~ 7~ PPV ppy x x x z _ ~M~~ x X X Z puo@ x x x z "aN`Zl~l x x x z ,. x m ~ _ ~ ~ y ,~ ~ ~ z a t.._, Li. F-" d W pi i Q 0 w~ ~ J_ OU a ~~ _z UO N Y ~ w UQ J m aQ o~ O~ _~ W g V E L V O z 8f Y a m ~m - ~ a a a N a r a 0 0 $ ~ o <a c~ &i 3 rn ~ ~ m W ~ ~ .- ~ Z~ PPK h~ PPV x x x x x Bx~M qn~ x x x x x puog x x x x x -'oN b~) x x x x x m O ££ Q ~ c m ` ~ •~ m F ~ i ~ m C Cm ~C Q Q F"_ U F- G0 L7 Z o ~ O W ~ LL ~ J _ _ O (~ W d O~ ~ n' U b c ~ Y ~' ~ +~+ O~~ UQ~ V mfg a ¢ _ z _~ O ~ ~ O N a > ~a ~ m m a -e -a 1 ~ .s - _ a N ti - ds~ 0 0 S g ~'~ A ~~ 1 Of W ~, ~ ,W ~ ~ d0 W O - ~ ~ ~ N aav ' {_.~ ppy 2 x x x ml~M qnd x x x x ,.,puog x x x x 'O~a~~ x x x x :~ ° ~ _ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ 0 F- m Q 0 i i Z Q W ~''-' J LL U Oa LL . Z UO N ~ D H U Q J ag u. p ~_ ~_ v W c i~ C o a Q ' p ~ Z p ~ ~ ~ a m m 0 O 0 O 0 O M N R ~ i i ~ f ~ I ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o t`o u ~ i ir i it i ~ .~ a .- ~ ~ M -'; '.~' ,` N ~.i ~. r;~4 "y ~; 3 ~ o Q $ _ ~ ~ NN za Ppv 1.~ pPtlr. x x x M qnd x x x puO~ ~ x x x ' 'oN 2l~. x x x O 4 ~ ` . z ~ G~ t- U 1- { to p , 00 ! i Q ~~ W J ~- U O~ ~z vo Y ~ H vQ ~~ a_¢ LL p O p~ O~ O O Z~ Q p w m a e- C Z a '~ m }"' U !-- Q 0 m i Q LL }. W F- ~ J ~- v rO LL r UO~ _~ Y~~ ~ DZ O~Q UQ~ j ~ ~ a_ O~ o~ `~ /_ C O r+ V vs C Z Of .~ is a ~a m m d~ a a .' ~-ry ~. ~, ~. ~-~ ~~ °o o °o ,~ o ~ g o ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ti fir, ._~~'Y -* L~ PpV x x x ~M.~ x x x ,;~_::~~ p1108' `~• x x x •oK ~~ x x x ~, -,_: ; S 0 >,.¢: -~ ~ i'i U H m Q j ~_ M i W 4 i Z 0 ~~ DU r i.4 r Z UO ~~_ Y W U Q J .~"'~ m a W ~ O~ O~ } O 0 OC W c a a a N CI Z m .~C a m ~ i .~ a a N °o ~ o 0 ~ ~ ~ ,~ o ~ ti i'# PPd ppy x x x ~NNI Vnd x x puCg x x x 'oH 19~i x x 0 4 cc R' ~ m m ~^- U H m Q m ~ 7 0 ~~ w ~_~ OU _~~ UO~ ~ Cn 'd Y ~ ~ O~Q U ~ LL' m ~ ~ a¢ O~ Q ~_ .~' m a a a a 6 q ~a ila 0 0 ~ ~ $ ` _ID •- N '- ~ d! to ~ ~~ (~ per/ % x ~M q~d x x puo8 x x 'aN a9f x x a W O L1 O 2 Q r N C Z m Y V t0 a m ~"' U H U1 00 Q GO u z 0 w ~ w E ~ _, .~ w O ,~ y U0= ~~ ~ ~ Y>.w W O~Q ~ vas d a m ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ . u.. ~ O~ ,~ ~ a O~ ~ m _~ O m -~ a a o 0 o N W N o g o o S r' ~ N !H fA tH PPt/ ~ PPV x x x x x ~M 4~d x x x x x pugg x x x x x 'oH ~~ x x x x x v a ~_ ~ ~ w ,a ~ _ g m i' U C _ Z ~ ~ F W . a Page 1 of 1 C~2 -Zc~ -off ~~C Sharon Smith -~,. From: Keith Watts Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 2:32 PM To: Will Berg; Sharon Smith Cc: Brad Watson Subject: Agenda Memo Attachments: Council Memo for Request of Award Packages 1-22.doc Will, we will be using the standard AIA Agreement for the Water Department not a modified AIA. Keith Watts Purchasing Agent „~ City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 ~~g Ph. 208-888-4433 x207 Fax: 208-887.4813 Cit3~ of 16>a~a~d!rerr~ ~''it~~ ~'tl~a~}~ (1~Rac~. 2/16/2007 • Memo To: Will Berg, City Clerk From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Agent CC: Brad Watson, P.E. Date: 2/15/07 Re: .February 20 City Council Meeting Agenda Item • ~~ ~E~ 9 ~ ~ City ®#',~l~riel~an Cxt~ CA~~r~ ~ffi~~ The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the February 20 City Council Consent Agenda for Council's consideration. Approval of Award of the 22 construction bid packages for the new Water Department Administration Building.. The bid packages were developed by Kreizenbeck with input from myself and the City's legal staff. Each bid package will be contracted using a modified AIA Agreement put together by Ted Baird. Recommended Council Action: Approve award of the 22 Bid Packages with a Not-To-Exceed amount of $1,523,233.00, and authorize the Mayor to sign the Standard AIA Agreements and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. • Page 1 ~~~ AIA Document A101/CMa~ - 1992 Standard Form of Agreement Between Or~mer and Contractor where the basis of payment is a STIPULATED S~ AGREEMENT made as of the day of in the year of (In words, indicate day, month and year) BETWEEN the Owner: (Name and address) For the following Project: (Include detailed description of Project, location, address and scope.) - --- ;Water Dept - -. ~ ~; I 'm• inx efJ .,,. ~ , The Construction Manager is: (Name and address) [iu 1:L'1V1Y:3 tuVU iJ1+J+l.'1'1VNt3: Thy author of this document ha added information ne ded for its completion. The author may also habe re ised the text of the or'ginal AI s andard form. An Addition a d Deletions Re ort that no es added in ormation as well as re isions t t e stand8rd fo a ' the author and should be This document has impo legal consequence Consultatio h an attor~, s enc~ur ged with 1992 io o AIA Docume 201/ a, ner~ Conditions o e Con' for Construction, Construction Manager- Adviser Edition, is ado i is doc~iment by efe~, D"o\\not se w: ss this~doct is fied. The Owner and Contractor agree as set forth below. --~ ~~ ELECTRONIC COP7CING of shy portion of this AIA® Document to another electronic file is prohibited and constitutes a violation of copyright laws as set forth in the footer of this document. AIA Document A101/CMa° - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. APdiNING: This AIA° Document is protested by U.S. Copyright I.aw and International Treaties. Unauthorized repradvation or distribution o£ this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the ma:+m„m extent possible under the ~- law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 12:54:48 on 01/07/2007 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (2628090192) ARTICLE 1 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The Contract Documents consist of this Agreement, Conditions of the Contract (General, Supplementary and other Conditions), Drawings, Specifications, Addenda issued prior to execution of this Agreement, other documents listed in this Agreement and Modifications issued after execution of this Agreement; these form the Contract, and aze as fully a part of the Contract as if attached to this Agreement or repeated herein. The Contract represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes prior negotiations, repre ns or agreements, either written or oral. An enumeration of the Contract Documents, other than Modificatio~~ears in Article 9. ARTICLE 2 THE WORK OF THIS CONTRACT The Contractor shall execute the entire Work described in the Contract Documents, except o the extent specifically indicated in the Contract Documents to be the responsibility of others, or as follows: ARTICLE 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION § 3.1 The date of commencement is the date from which the Contract Time of Section 3.2 ' me ed, and shall be the date of this Agreement, as first written above, unless a different date is stated below or ro 'ion is de or the date to be fixed in a notice to proceed issued by the Owner. (Insert the date of commencement, if it dyers from the date of this Agreement or, if applic le, state that he ate will be fixed in a notice to proceed.) - -- - - - -- --_ -- - ~ _ Unless the date of commencement is established by a notice to proceed issued by the Owner, the Contractor shall notify the Owner, through the Construction Manager, in writing not less than five days before commencing the Work to permit the timely filing of mortgages, mechanic's liens and other security interests. - - -, § 3.2 The Contractor shall achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work not later than ~_ ~ days after the Date of Commencements ~~~ (Insert the calendar date or number of calendar days after the date of commencement. Als itis~" require en for earlier Substantial Completion of certain portions of the Wor1~ if not stated elsewhere in ontra Documents.) Portion of Wark Substantial Completion date ~ - - -~~ _: i --- subject to adjustments of this Contract Time as provided in the Contract Documents. (Insert provisions, if any, for liquidated damages relating to failure to complete on time.) ARTICLE 4 CONTRACT SUM § 4.1 The Owner shall pa~the Contractor in current funds for the Contractor's performance o e o - e Contract Sum of'i_J ($ ~__), subject to additions and deductions as provided in the Contract Documents. § 4.2 The Contract Sum is based upon the following alternates, if any, which are described in 'Contract Documents and are hereby accepted by the Owner: (State the numbers or other ident~ation of accepted alternates. If decisions on other alts - to are to be made by the Owner subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, attach a schedule of such other to ates showing the amount for each and the date until which that amount is valid.) § 4.3 Unit prices, if any, aze as follows: ALA Document A101/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING;: This ALA Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Doaumant, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maaimim extent possible under the 2 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 12:54:96 on 01/07/2007 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (2628090192) Description Units _ __ P~ rice ($ 0.00) ARTICLE 5 PROGRESS PAYMENTS § 5.1 Based upon Applications for Payment submitted by the Contractor to the Construction Manager, and upon Project Applications and Certificates for Payment issued by the Construction Manager and Architect, the Owner shall make progress payments on account of the Contract Sum to the Contractor as provide~-e, ow and elsewhere in the Contract Documents. ~~~~ ~~ § 5.2 The period covered by each Application for Payment shall be one calendar month month, or as follows: of the § 5.3 Provided an Application for Payment is submitted to the Construction Manager not la er t n the '! ~ day of a month, the Owner shall make payment to the Contractor not later than the ^ day of the same month. If an Application for Payment is received by the Construction Manager after the application date d above, ayment shall be made by the Owner not later than !~ ~~ days after the Construction Manager r cei es the Applic tion for Payment. (~~' § 5.4 Each Application for Payment shall be based upon the Schedule of Values submitted ~y e Contrac or~~- accordance with the Contract Documents. The Schedule of Values shall allocate the entire on act Sum o the various portions of the Work and be prepared in such form and supported by such data to~bstantiate rts accuracy a the Construction Manager or Architect may require. This schedule, unless objected to by g-~enstr~c~omll4anag~ or Architect, shall be used as a basis for reviewing the Contractor's Applications for Payment. § 5.5 Applications for Payment shall indicate the percentage of completion of each portion of the Work as of of the period covered by the Application for Payment. § 5.6 Subject to the provisions of the Contract Documents, the amount of each progress as follows: § 5.6.1 Take that portion of the Contract Sum properly allocable to completed Work as determined b~y~m~plying ~ the percentage completion of each portion of the Work by the share of the total Contract Sum allocated to tlia~- portion of the Work in the Schedule of Values, less retainage of [~ (~ ). Pending final determination of cost to the Owner of changes in the Work, amounts not in dispute maybe included as provided in Section 7.3.7 of the General Conditions; ~~ § 5.6.2 Add that portion of the Contract Sum properly allocable to materials and equipment eliv~ied stored at the site for subsequent incorporation in the completed construction (or, if approve in ~advar Owner, suitably stored off the site at a location agreed upon in writing), less retainage of ~ (~f ); § 5.6.3 Subtract the aggregate of previous payments made by the Owner; and § 5.6.4 Subtract amounts, if any, for which the Construction Manager or Architect has wig eld Certificate for Payment as provided in Section 9.5 of the General Conditions. § 5.7 The progress payment amount determined in accordance with Section 5.6 shall be further following circumstances: § 5.7.1 Add, upon Substantial Completion of the Work, a sum sufficient to increase the total~pa of the Contract Sum, less such amounts as the Construction Manager recommends and the c incomplete Work and unsettled claims; and § 5.7.2 Add, if final completion of the Work is thereafter materially delayed through no fa t of additional amounts payable in accordance with Section 9.10.3 of the General Conditions. § 5.8 Reduction or limitation of retainage, if any, shall be as follows: or nullified a sto r_i(~ ) determines for Contractor AIA Document A101/CMa®- 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserrred. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Doaument, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 3 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 12:54:48 on 01/07/2007 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (2628090192) (If it is intended, prior to Substantial Completion of the entire Work, to reduce or limit the retainage resulting from the percentages inserted in Sections 5.6.1 and 5.6.2 above, and this is not explained elsewhere in the Contract Documents, insert here provisions for such reduction or limitation.) ARTICLE 8 FINAL PAYMENT Final payment, constituting the entire unpaid balance of the Contract Sum, shall be made b th Owner to the Contractor when (1) the Contract has been fully performed by the Contractor except for the Co tractor's responsibility to correct nonconforming Work as provided in Section 12.2.2 of the General ~Co ditions and to satisi other requirements, if any, which necessarily survive final payment; and (2) a final Project ertificate for Payment has been issued by the Construction Manager and Architect; such final payment shall be m de - more than 30 days after the issuance of the final Project Certificate for Payment, or as folla~ ARTICLE 7 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS § 7.1 Where reference is made in this Agreement to a provision of the General Conditions other Con c Document, the reference refers to that provision as amended or supplemented by other pro ' i ~ of the on ct Documents. § 7.2 Payments due and unpaid under the Contract shall beaz interest from the date paymen is ue at the p to below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the place here a ro~ect is located. (Insert rate of interest agreed upon, if any.) --- - --_ -- ~ _~ per annum (Usury laws and requirements under the Federal Truth in Lending Act, similar state and local and other regulations at the Owner's and Contractor's principal places of business, the loc c elsewhere may affect the validity of this provision. Legal advice should be obtained with re pe modifications, and also regarding requirements such as written disclosures or waivers.) ~~ § 7.3 Temporary facilities and services: (Here insert temporary facilities and services which are d~erent from or in addition to those included elsewhere in the Contract Documents.) § 7.4 Other Provisions: (Here list any special provisions affecting the Contract.) ~~ ARTICLE 8 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION § 8.1 The Contract maybe terminated by the Owner or the Contractor as provided in Article o e ever Conditions. § 8.2 The Work maybe suspended by the Owner as provided in Article 14 of the General ARTICLE 9 ENUMERATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS § 9.1 The Contract Documents, except for Modifications issued after execution of this Agre m t, are enumerated as follows: § 9.1.1 The Agreement is this executed Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and on ctor, AIA Document A101/CMa, 1992 Construction Manager-Adviser Edition. ALA Document A101/CMa°1 - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Unauthorized raproduation or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the Law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 12:54:48 on 01/07/2007 under order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (2628090192) r i § 9.1.2 The General Conditions aze the General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, AIA Document A201/CMa, 1992 Construction Manager-Adviser Edition. § 9.1.3 The Supplementazy and other Conditions of the Contract aze those contained in the Project Manual dated and aze as follows: Document Title pages F --- - § 9.1.4 The Specifications are those contained in the Project Manual dated as in Section 9.1 3, daze as follows: (Either list the Specifications here or refer to an exhibit attached to this Agreement.) 1 ills of S ecifications exhibit: ~ ~ , § 9.1.5 The Drawings are as follows, and aze dated unless a different date is shown belo (Either list the Drawings here or refer to an exhibit attached to this Agreement.) -- -- - Title of Drawings exhibit: { . § 9.1.6 The Addenda, if any, aze as follows: Number Date pay Portions of Addenda relating to bidding requirements aze not part of the Contract Documents unless the bidding requirements are also enumerated in this Article 9. § 9.1.7 Other documents, if any, forming part of the Contract Documents aze as follows: (List here any additional documents which are intended to form part of the Contract Do. Conditions provide that bidding requirements such as advertisement or invitation to bid, sample forms and the Contractor's bid are not part of the Contract Documents unless en They should be listed here only if intended to be part of the Contract Documents.) This Agreement is entered into as of the day and year first written above and is executed in at least four original copies of which one is to be delivered to the Contractor, one each to the Construction Mana er tect for use in the administration of the Contract, and the remainder to the Owner. g~ ~ OWNER CONTRACTOR (Signature) __ (Signature) (Printed name and title) (Printed name and title) ALA Document A101/CMa° - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA® Document is protested by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document(, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the ms=++~+^^ estent possible under the 5 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 12:54:48 on 01/07/2007 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (2628090192) 9 .~ AIA Document A2 O 1 /CMa~ - 19 92 General Conditions of the Contract for Construction where the Construction Manager is NOT a Cons~~,uctor for the following PROJECT: (Name and location or address): Water Dept THE OWNER: (Name and address): THE ARCHITECT: (Name and address): TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS 2 OWNER 3 CONTRACTOR 4 ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT 5 SUBCONTRACTORS 6 CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY OTHER CONTRACTORS 7 CHANGES IN THE WORK 8 TIME 9 PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION 10 PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS 12 UNCOVERING AND CORRECTION OF WORK 13 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 14 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE CONTRACT AU 1'1'1(71YS3 AlV1J liYi],i:T10N3: Th author of this document ha added information n~ded for its completion. The author may also have re ised the text of the or'ginal AI s andard form. An Addition a d Deletions Re ort that no es added in ormation as well as re isions t tie standard fo a the author and should be revrewe- . This document has impol legal consequence Consultatio h an attorn s enc ur ged with ect to s om letion or ication ELECTROIJIC COPYING of any portion of this AIA® Document to another electronic file is prohibited and constitutes a violation of copyright laws as set forth in the footer of this document. AIA Document A201/CMa°1 - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document ie protested by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AIA° Dornment, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maaimum extent possible under the ~- law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261460_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705.) INDEX Acceptance of 9.6.6, 9.9.3. Architect, Definition of 4.1.1 Nonconforming Work 12.3 Architect, Extent of 2.4.1, 3.12.6, Acceptance of Work 9.6.6, 9.8.2, Authority 4.6.6, 4.7.2, 9.9.3, 9.10.1, 5.2, 6.3, Access to Work 9.10.3 3.16, 6.2.1, , 7.2.1, 7.4~ 9.2, 12.1 9.3 ~1 9.4 Accident Prevention 4.6.6, 10 , , 9.5~ 9.6.3, Acts and Omissions 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 9.8.2, 9.8.3, 3.3.2, 3.12.8, j9.1~. , 3.18, 4.6.6, 9.1 ! .3, 12.1, 4.6.2., 4.7.9, 12..1, 8.3.1, 10.1.4, 13..1, 10.2.5, 13.5.2, 13.4.2, 13.7, ..2, 14.2.4 14.1 Architect, Limitations of 3.3 , 3.12.8, Addenda 1.1.1, 3.11 Authority and 1 11, ~ Additional Costs, Claims 4.7.6, 4.7.7, Responsibility .6 ~5 4.6.6 for 4.7.9, 6.1.1, , , 4 610, ~ 10.3 4.6 12, Additional Inspections and 4.6.10, 9.8.2, ,6, ~ ' Testing 12.2.1, 13.5 _ Additional Time, Claims 4.7.6, 4.7.8, 4.6.20, 4.7.2, for 4.7.9, 8.3.2, 5.2.1, 7.4, 10.3 9.6.4 ADMINISTRATION OF 3.3.3, 4, 9.4, Architect's Additional 2.4, 9.8.2 THE CONTRACT 9.5 Services and Expenses 11 3 , Advertisement or Invitation 1.1.1 ~`L.2.1 to Bid ~12. . Aesthetic Effect 4.6.20, 4.9.1 , Allowances All i k I 3.8 ' 13.14.2_ -r s nsurance 11.3.1.1 Architect s Administration 4.6, 4.7.6, Applications for Payment 4.6.9, 7.3.7, of the Contract 4.7.7, 4.8, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.4, 9.5 9.5.1, 9.6.3, Architect's Approvals 2.4~3~=~a 9.8.3, 9.10.1, 3r 0.3, 9.10.3, .12.x, ~~''a~, 9.10.4, .1 .8, 11.1.3, 14.2.4 3.1 .3, 4.6.12 Approvals 2.4, 3.3.3, Architect's Authority to 3.5 1, 4.6.10, 3.5, 3.10.3, Reject Work 12..2, 12.2.1 3.12.4 Architect's Copyright 1. through Architect's Decisions .6.10, 3.12.8, 3.18.3, 4.6.18, 4.6.12, 9.3.2, 4.6.19, 11.3.1.4, 4.6~ .4.7.2 ~a 13.4.2, 13.5 4 .6„ ..14~; ~ Arbitration 4.5, 4.7.4, .8. ; 4.9, 4.9, 8.3.1, 10.1.2, 6.3 8.1.3, ~8.3 ~ 1 9.2 11.3.9, , , 9.4~ 9.5.1, 11.3.10 9.8 ~2 9.9.1 Architect 4.1 , , 10.1.2, Architect, and Certificate 4.6.9 of Payment 14.2.2, 14.2.4 AL4 Document A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute o£ Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AL4® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be proeeauted to them +~ extent possible under the 2 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which=expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Ueer Notes: (3560762705) Architect's Inspections 4.6.5, 4.6.16, 4.7.6, 9.4.3, Asbestos 9.8.2, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, 13.5 Attorneys' Fees Architect's Instructions 4.6.10, 4.6.12, 7.4.1, Awazd of Separate 9.4.3, 12.1, Contracts 13.5.2 Award of Subcontracts Architect's Interpretations 4.6.18, and Other Contracts for 4.6.19, 4.7.7 Portions of the Work Architect's On-Site 4.6.5, 4.6.9, Basic Definitions Observations 4.7.6, 9.4.3, Bidding Requirements 9.5.1, 9.10.1, 13.5 Boiler and Machinery Architect's Project 4.6.17 Insurance Representative Bonds, Lien Architect's Relationship 1.1.2, 3.2.1, Bonds, Performance and with Contractor 3.2.2, 3.3.3, Payment 3.5.1, 3.7.3, 3.11, 3.12.8, Building Permit 3.12.11, 3.16, Capitalization 3.18, 4.6.6, Certificate of Substantial 4.6.7, 4.6.10, Completion 4.6.12, Cert~cates for Payment 4.6.19, 5.2, 6.2.2, 7.3.4, 9.8.2, 10.1.2, 10.1.4, 10.1.5, 11.3.7, 12.1, 13.5 Architect's Relationship 1.1.2, 2.4.1, Certificates of Inspection, with Construction Manager 3.12.6, Testing or Approval 3.12.8, 4.6.8, Certificates of Insurance 4.6.10, 4.6.14, Change Orders 4.6.16, 4.6.18, 6.3.1, 9.7.1, 9.8, 9.9.1,9.9.2, 9.10.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3, 12.2.4, 13.5.1, 13.5.2, 13.5.4, 14.2.4 Change Orders, Definition Architect's Relationship 1.1.2, 4.6.6, of with Subcontractors 4.6.7, 4.6.10, Changes 5.3.1, CHANGE5 IN THE 9.6.3,9.6.4, WORK 11.3.7 Architect's Representations 9.4.3, 9.5.1, 9.10.1 Claim, Definition of Architect's Site Visits 4.6.5, 4.6.9, Claims and Disputes 4.6.16, 4.7.6, 9.4.3, 9.5.1, 9.8.2, 9.9.2, 1. 13.5.41 9.3.2, 9.10.2, 11.1.3 1.1.1, 2.4.1, 3~ 1.1, 5.2 , 7.1, 7.2 7.3.2, 8.3 1, 9.3.1.1, 9.1 .3, 11.' _L2~~ 11.3.4, 7.2.1 7.1~~'" _ 3~~11, },x:13, ~•6•~4, 7, ~.3 , 9.3.1.1, 10..3 4.7 1 4.7~ 4.8, 4.9, 9.10.4, 10.1.4 AL4 Document A201/CMa°' - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALAS Document ie protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Docwnent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maxims extent possible under the 3 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261480_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) 9.10.1, 13.5 10.1.2, 10.1.3,.10.1.4 3.18.1, 9.10.2, 10.1.4 6.1.1 9.3.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.1, ®,~'~i 9.6.6, 9.7.1, 9.8.3, 9.1 ~' 9.10,3; I3.7, ~~ Claims and Timely Assertion of Claims Claims for Additional Cost Claims for Additional Time Claims for Concealed or Unlaiown Conditions Claims for Damages Claims Subject to Arbitration Cleaning Up Commencement of Statutory Limitation Period Commencement of the Work, Conditions Relating to Commencement of the Work, Defimition of Communications, Owner to Architect Communications, Owner to Construction Manager Communications Facilitating Contract Administration Completion, Conditions Relating to COMPLETION, PAYMENTS AND Completion, Substantial Compliance with Laws 4.9.6 4.7.6, 4.7.7, 4.7.9, 6.1.1, 10.3 4.6.9, 4.7.6, 4.7.8, 4.7.9, 8.3.2 4.7.6 3.18, 4.7.9, 6.1.1, 6.2.5, 8.3.2, 9.5.1.2, 10.1.4 4.7.2, 4.8.4, 4.6.1 3.15, 6.3 13.7 2.12 ,2.2.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.7.1, 3.10.1 3.12.6, 4.7.7, 5.2.1, 6.2.2, 8.1.2, 8.2.2, 9.2, 11.1.3, 11.3.6, 11.4.1 8.1.2 2.2.6 2.2.6 3.9.1 4.6.7, 5.2.1 3.11, 3.15, 4.6.5, 4.6.16, 4.7.2, 9.4.2, 9.8, 9.9.1, 9.10, 11.3.5, 12.2.2, 13.7.1 Concealed or Unknown Conditions Conditions of the Contract Consent, Written CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY OTHER CONTRACTORS Construction Change Directive, Definition of Construction Change Directives 14.2.1.3 4.7.6 1.1.1, 1.1.7, 6.1.1 1.3.1, 3.12.8, 2, 4.7.4. 4.9 ~S, 9.3.2, 9.8 ~ , 9.9.1, 9.1 ~ 2 _ 9.10.3, 10.12, 10.., 1 L .1, 11..1.4, 1 L .11, 13.2, Construction Manager Construction Manager, and Building Permits Construction Manager, Claims against Construction Manager, Communications through Construction Manager, and Construction Schedule Construction Manager, Definition of Construction Manager, and Documents and Samples at the Site Construction Manager, Extent of Authority 4.6.16, 4.7.5.2, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.3, 9.8, 9.9.1, 12.2.2, 13.7 Construction Manager, 1.3, 3.6, 3.7, Limitations of Authority 3.13, 4.1.1, and Responsibility 10.2.2, 11.1, Construction Manager, and 11.3, 13.1, Submittals 13.5.1, Construction Manager's 13.5.2, 13.6, Additional Services and 14.1.1, Expenses 4.2 2.2.3 4.7.-x" ~7 3y°0 i~3 1~0~-~ 4.2.1 3.11.1 .1 ~ .8, 4.3, .6 ~3, 4.6.11, .1 2, 7.2.1, .3 1, 8.3.1, ~ .2 ,3 .4.1, 9.4.3, ALa. D~+mo~t A201/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute o£ Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Doc~vnent is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and international Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AL?i Dacwrtent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maaimmn extent possible order the 4 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) 9.9.1, 12.1, Construction Manager's 4.6, 9.4, 9.5 Administration of the Contract Construction Manager's 2.4.1, 3.10.3 Approval Construction Manager's 4.6.10, 12.2.1 Authority to Reject Work Construction Manager's 7.3.6, 7.3.7, Decisions 7.3.8, 9.3.1, 9.4.1, 9.5.1 Construction Manager's 4.6.10, 9.4.3, Inspections 9.8.2, 9.9.2, 12.1.1 Construction Manager's 9.5.1 On-Site Observations Construction Manager's 1.1.2, 4.6.8, Relationship with Architect 4.6.10, 4.6.11, Construction Manager's 4.6.14, Relationship with Owner 4.6.16, Construction Manager's 4.6.18, 6.3.1, Relationship with Other 9.2.1, 9.4.2, Contractors and Owner's 9.4.3, 9.51, Own Forces 9.6.1, 9.6.3, Construction Manager's 9.8.2, 9.8.3, Relationship with 9.9.1, 9.10.1, Subcontractors 9.10.2, Construction Manager's 9.10.3, Representations 11.1.3, Construction Manager's 12.2.4, Site Visits 13.5.1, Construction Schedules, 13.5.2, Contractor's 13.5.4, Contingent Assignment of 14.2.2, 14.2.4 Subcontracts Construction Manager's 3.2.1, 3.2.2 Continuing Contract Relationship with 3.3.1, 3.3.3, Performance Contractor 3.5.1, 3.7.3, Contract, Definition of 3.10.1, CONTRACT, 3.10.2, TERMINATION OR 3.10.3, SUSPENSION OF THE 3.11.1, Contract Administration 3.12.5, 3.12.6, Contract Awazd and 3.12.8, Execution, Conditions 3.12.9, Relating to 3.12.10, 3.12.11, Contract Documents, The 3.13.2, Contract Documents, 3.14.2, Copies Furnished and Use 3.15.2, of 3.16.1, Contract Documents, 3.17.1, Definition of 3.18.1, Contract Performance 3.18.3, 4.6.3, During Arbitration 4.6.4, 4.6.6, Contract Sum 4.6.11, 5.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.4, 7.3.6, 7.3.9, 8.3.1, 9.2.1,9.3.1, 9.4.1, 9.4.2, 9.4.3, 9.7.1, 9.8.2, 9.9.1, .1, 9.1 +.2, 9.1 ~ .3, 10. •1, 10.1.2, 10.1~~ 1..7, 12.1, 3.~.1, 3.5.2, 3:~.3, 13.5.4 .2 ~, 4.6.1, .6~2, 10.1.6 9.6.3, 9.6.4 9.4.3, 9.5.1 `J.4~f~:~.1 f%"` i 3.1 ,, 3, 5, 4 ~'`~~ 4.7.4 7, 5.4.1.1, 4 y rr 3.3 3, 4, 9.4, 9.5 3.7 1, 3.10, 5.2 u2 11.1.3, 1.1, 1.2, 7 1.3, 2.2~ 7.3, 9.1, 9.7, AIA Docunent A201/CMam' - 1992. Copyright 6 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduotion or distribution o£ this AIA® Docla¢ent, or any portion o£ it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosawted to the +~ +m extent possible under the Jr law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) Contract Sum, Definition of Contract Time Contract Time, Defimition of CONTRACTOR Contractor, Definition of Contractor's Bid Contractor's Construction Schedules Contractor's Employees Contractor's Liability Insurance Contractor's Relationship with Other Contractors and Owner's Own Forces Contractor's Relationship with Subcontractors Contractor's Relationship with the Architect 11.3.1, 12.2.4, 12.3, 14.2.4 9.1.1 4.7.6, 4.7.8.1, 4.8.4, 7.2.1.3, 7.3, 8.2.1, 8.3.1, 9.7, 12.1.1 8.1.1 3 3.1.1, 6.1.2 1.1.1 3.10 3.3.2, 3.4.2, 3.8.1, 3.9, 3.18, 4.6.6, 4.6.10, 8.1.2, 10.2, 10.3, 11.1.1, 14.2.1.1 11.1, 11.3.1.5 3.12.5, 3.14.2, 4.6.3, 4.6.7, 12.2.5 1.2.4, 3.3.2, 3.18.1, 3.18.2, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 9.6.2, 11.3.7, 11.3.8, 14.2.1.2 1.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.3.3, 3.5.1, 3.7.3, 3.10.1, 3.10.3, 3.11.1, 3.12.6, 3.12.8, 3.12.9, 3.16.1, 3.18, 4.6.6, 4.6.7, 4.6.10, 4.6.12, 4.6.19, 5.2, 6.2.2, 7.3.4, 9.2, 9.3.1, 9.8.2, 9.10.3,10.1.2, 10.1.5, 10.2.6, 11.3.7, 12.1, 13.5 C Contractor's Relationship with the Construction Manager 4.6.4, 4.6.6, 5.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.4, 7.3.6, 7.3.9, 8.3.1, 9.2.1, 9.3.1, 9.4.1, 9.4.2, 9.4.3, 9.7.1, 9.8.2, 9.9.1, 9.10.1, 9.10.2, 9.10.3, 10.1.1,10.1.2, 10.1.5, 10.2.6,11.3.7,12.1,13.5.1, 13.5.2, 13.5.3, 13.5.4 Contractor's Representations Contractor's Responsibility for Those Performing the Work Contractor's Review of Contract Documents Contractor's Right to Stop the Work Contractor's Right to Terminate the Contract Contractor's Submittals .3 3.3.2, 3.18, 4.6.6, 10 ~~1.3 ~~ ~.7 , 4.~ .1 , 3.11, .1 G.12 ~ .2.1, 5.2.3, 9.3.1, 9.8.2, 9.9.1, 9 9.llk~ Contractor's Superintendent .9, - 0.2.6 Contractor's Supervision 1.2 , 3.3, and Construction 3.4 ~ 4.6.6, Procedures 8.2 ~ 10 , 8.2.3, Contractual Liability 11.1 .1.7, Ins r n u ce a . , 11.3.1.5 AIA Docwnent A201/CMa - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Dociment is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA Docwnent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be proaeoated to the m==+m++m extent possible under the law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) 1.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2,3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.5.1, 3.7.3, 3.7.4, 3.10.1, 3.10.2, • Coordination and 1.2.2, 1.2.4, 14.2.2, 14.2.4 Correlation 3.3.1, 3.10, Decisions of the 4.3, 7.3.6, 3.12.7, 6.2.1 Construction Manager 7.3.7, 7.3.8, Copies Furnished of 1.3, 2.2.5, 9.3.1, 9.4.1, Drawings and 3.11 9.4.3, 9.5.1 Specifications Decisions to Withhold 9.5, 9.7, Correction of Work 2.3, 2.4, Certification ..1.3 3.2.1, 4.6.1, Defective or 9.8.2, 9.9.1, Nonconforming Work, 12.1.2, 12.2, Acceptance, 13.7.1.3 Rejection and Correction of 2.3, 2.4, Cost, Defimition of 7.3.6 3.5 .. , Costs 2.4, 3.2.1, ,4.6 10, 4.7.5, 3.7.4, 3.8.2, 9.5 9.8.2, 3.15.2., 4.7.6, X9.9 1, 10.2.5, 4.7.7, 4.7.8.1, 12, 13.7.1.3 5.2.3, 6.1.1, Defective Work, Definition 3-S 1 6.2.3, 6.3.1, of 7.3.3.3, 7.3.6, Definitions 1.1, 2.1.1, 7.3.7, 9.7, 3.13.5.1, 9.8.2, 9.10.2, 3.1 .1, 11.3.1.2,11.3. 3.1 .2, 1.3, 11.3.4, 3.1_- .. , 11.3.9, 12.1, 4-~4-~..1~® 12.2.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 12.2.4, 7.2.1, 7.3.1, 12.2.5, 13.5, 7.3.6, 8.1, 14 9.1, 9.8.1 ~ Cutting and Patching Damage to Construction of 3.14, 6.2.6 Delays and Extensions of Time 4:7.~/.8.1~ 8 2 Owner or Other . .. , 6,2, , " Contractors 3.14.2, 6.2.4, . ~7.3~.4~, 9.5.1.5, 7.3.5, 7.~8~ 10.2.1.2, 7.3.9, 8.1.1, 10.2.5, 10.3, 8.3, 10.3.1, 11.1, 11.3, 14.1.1.4 12.2.5 Disputes 4.7,~8~:9; Damage to the Work 3.14.2, 9.9.1, 6f~.5, 6.3 10.2.1.2, .3. ;~93.1~.~., 10.2.5, 10.3, Documents and Samples at +3.1 11.3 the Site Damages, Claims for 3.18, 4.6.9, Drawings, Definition of 1.1 5 6.1.1, 6.2.5, Drawings and 8.3.2, 9.5.1.2, Specifications, Use and 10.1.4 Ownership of 1.1.1, 1.3, Damages for Delay 6.1.1, 8.3.3, .. , 9.5.1.6, 9.7 5.3 Date of Commencement of 8.1.2 Duty to Review Contract 3.2 the Work, Definition of Documents and Field Date of Substantial 8.1.3 Conditions Completion, Definition of Effective Date of Insurance .2. ~ 11.1.2 Day, Defimition of 8.1.4 Emergencies 4.7 ,103 Decisions of the Architect 4.6, 4.7, 6.3, Employees, Contractor's 3.3 f2., 3.4.2, 8.1.3, 8.3.1, 3.8 ~1, 3.9, 9.2, 9.4, 3.1..1, 9.5.1, 9.8.2, 3.18.2, 4.6.6, 9.9.1, 10.1.2, .. , 8~2; 13.5.2, 10.2, 10.3, AIA Document A201/CMa'~ - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Doc~unent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maa+'~=^_ extent possible under the law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) • • 11.1.1, 14.2.1.1 Equipment, Labor, 1.1.3, 1.1.6, Materials and 3.4, 3.5.1, 3.8.2, 3.12.2, Information and Services 3.12.3, Required of the Owner 3.12.7, 3.12.11, 3.13, 3.15.1, 4.6.12, 6.2.1, 7.3.6, 9.3.2, 9.3.3, 11.3, 12.2.4, Injury or Damage to 14.1.2, Person or Property 14.2.1, 14.2.2 Inspections Execution and Progress of 1.2.3, 3.4.1, the Work 3.5.1, 4.6.5, 4.6.6, 4.7.4, 4.7.8, 6.2.2, 7.1.3, 8.2, 8.3, 9.5, 9.9.1, 10.2.3, Instructions to Bidders 10.2.4 Instructions to the Execution, Correlation 1.2, 3.7.1 Contractor and Intent of the Contract Documents Insurance Extensions of Time 4.7.1, 4.7.8, 7.2.1.3, 8.3, 10.3.1 Failure of Payment by 9.5.1.3, Insurance, Boiler and Contractor 14.2.1.2 Machinery Failure of Payment by 4.7.7, 9.7, Insurance, Contractor's Owner 14.1.3 Liability Faulty Work (See Insurance, Effective Date Defective or of Nonconforming Work) Insurance, Loss of Use Final Completion and 4.6.1, 4.6.16, Insurance, Owner's Final Payment 4.7.2, 4.7.5, Liability 9.10, 11.1.2, Insurance, Property 11.1.3, Insurance, Stored Materials 11.3.5, 12.3.1, 13.7 INSURANCE AND Financial Arrangements, 2.2.1 BONDS Owner's Insurance Companies, Fire and Extended 11.3.1.1, Consent to Partial Coverage Insurance 11.3.5, 11.3.7 Occupancy GENERAL 1 Insurance Companies, PROVISIONS Settlement with Governing Law 13.1 Intent of the Contract Guarantees (See Warranty Documents and Warranties) Hazardous Materials 10.1, 10.2.4 Identification of Contract 1.2.1 Documents Interest Identification of 5.2.1 Interpretation Subcontractors and Suppliers Indemnification 3.17, 3.18, 9.10.2, 10.1.4, 11.3.1.2, 11.3.7 2.1.2, 2.2, 4.7.4, 6.2.6, 9~2j , 9.6.1, 9.6 ~, 9.8.3, 9.9 , 9.10.3, 10. 4 11.2, 11.3, 13.5.1, 13..2 4.7._ 313, 3.3.4, .7.1, 4.6.5, 6~6, 4.6.16, .7 ~6, 9.4.3, .8 , 9.9.2, .1 i .1, 2..1, 13.5 .1 1 8 13.5.2 4.7.9, 6.1.1, 7.3.6.4, 9.3.2, 9.8.2, 9.9.1 9.10.2, f1 °~.2 ~11~ ~ 11.3.1.1~~ ~ 8.2.2, 11.1.2 ~~ 11.33 0.2.~; .3 2, 1.' .1.4 1 .9 _ 11.3.10 ALA Doaument A201/CMa®' - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Doc~miant, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the m~v++m*~ extent possible under the 8 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) 6.1.2, 8.1.4 • • Interpretations, Written 4.6.18, 4.6.12, 4.6.19, 4.7.7 4.6.18, 4.7.2, Joinder and Consolidation 4.9.5 4.7.3, 4.7.4, of Claims Required 4.7.6,.4.7.9, Judgment on Final 4.9.1, 4.9.4.1, 4.6.4.2, 5.2.1, Award 4.9.7 5.2.3, 6.2.4, Labor and Materials, 1.1.3, 1.1.6, ,~}~ 7,4~ Equipment 3.4, 3.5.1, 8.2, 9.2, 9.5, 3.8.2, 3.12.2, 9.6 , 9.8, 3.12.3, 9.1 ~, 11.1.3 3.12.7, 11.3.1, 3.12.11, 3.13, 11.:2; 3.15.1, 11..5, 4.6.12, 6.2.1, 11..6, 7.3.6, 9.3.2, 12. .1, 9.3.3, 12.2.4, 12.2.2, 13.5, 14.1.2, r3- , 14.3 14.2.1, 14.2.2 Limitations of Time, 2.1 , 2.2.1, Labor Disputes 8.3.1 Specific ~2.4, 3.10, Laws and Regulations 1.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.1 , 3.15.1, 3.13, 4.1.1, 4 9 5 4 9 7 4.6 1, 4.6.18, 4 71 4 8 4 . . , . . , . , .9, 9.9.1,10.2.2, 5.3~. , 11.1, 11.3, ? 2- 13.1, 13.4.1, 8.2, 9.3.1, 13.5.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.1, 13.5.2, 13.6 9.6.1, 9.7, Liens 2.1.2, 4.7.2, 9.8.2, 9.10.2~~ 4.7.5.1, 8.2.2, 11.1. , 9.3.3, 9.10.2 .3.6 Limitation on 4.9.5 11. :~ Consolidation or Joinder ~ 1, Limitations, Statutes of 4.9.4.2, 12.2.2, 12.2.6, 13.7 12.2.4, Limitations of Authority 3.3.1, 4.6.12, 12.2.6, 13.7, 4.6.17, 5.2.2, 14.1, 14.2.2 5.2.4, 7.4, Loss of Use Insurance 11.3---;~ 11.3.10 Material Suppliers 1~~.1, 3.12.1, "~ Limitations of Liability 2.3, 3.2.1, 3 5 1 3 7 3 .6. ;'4~6~ ~ . . , . . , .2 1, 9.3.1, 3.12.8, ~9.3 1.2, 9.3.3, 3.12.11, 3.17, ~9.4 3, 9.6.5, 3.18, 4.6.10, 9.1 .4 4.6.12, Materials, Hazardous 10. 0_2~ 4.6.19, 6.2.2, Materials, Labor, 1.1.3, 1.1.6, 9.4.3, 9.6.4, Equipment and .. , .. , 9.10.4, 3.8.2, 3.12.2, 10.1.4, 10.2.5, 3.12.3, 3.1 . , 11.1.2, 3 2.1 ,x; .13 11.2.1, , .15/Ij, 11.3.7, 4.6 ~12, 6.2.1, 13.4.2, 13.5.2 7.3 ~ 6, 9.3.2, Limitations of Time, 2.2.1, 2.2.4, ~ 9.3 ~3, 12.2.4, General 3.2.1, 3.7.3, 14. .2, 3.8.2, 3.10, 14.2.1, 14.2.2 3.12.5, Means, Methods, 3.15.1, 4.6.1, Techniques, Sequences and ALA Document A201/CMa - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to them ^^ extent possible under the law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (35607627051 ~J Procedures of Construction Minor Changes in the Work MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Modifications, Definition of Modifications to the Contract Mutual Responsibility Nonconforming Work, Acceptance of Nonconforming Work, Rejection and Correction of Notice Notice, Written Notice of Testing and Inspections Notice to Proceed Notices, Permits, Fees and Observations, Architect's On-Site 3.3.1, 4.6.6, 4.6.12, 9.4.3 1.1.1, 4.6.13, 4.7.7, 7.1, 7.4 13 1.1.1 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 3.7.3, 3.11, 4.1.2, 4.6.1, 5.2.3, 7, 8.3.1, 9.7 6.2 12.3 2.3.1, 4.7.5.2, 9.5.2, 9.8.2, 12, 13.7.1.3 2.3, 2.4, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.7.3, 3.7.4, 3.9, 3.12.8, 3.12.9, 3.17, 4.7, 4.8.4, 4.9, 5.2.1, 5.3, 5.4.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.4.1, 9.5.1, 9.7, 9.10, 10.1.2, 10.2.6, 11.1.3, 11.3, 12.2.2, 12.2.4, 13.3, 13.5.1, 13.5.2, 14, 2.3, 2.4, 3.9, 3.12.8, 3.12.9,4.7, 4.8.4, 4.9, 5.2.1, 5.3, 5.4.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.4.1, 9.5.1, 9.7, 9.10, 10.1.2, 10.2.6, 11.1.3, 11.3, 12.2.2, 12.2.4, 13.3, 13.5.2, 14 13.5.1, 13.5.2 8.2.2 2.2.3, 3.7, 3.13, 7.3.6.4, 10.2.2 4.6.5, 4.6.9, 4.6.10, 4.7.6, Observations, Construction Manager's On-Site Observations, Contractor's Occupancy On-Site Inspections by the Architect On-Site Observations by the Architect On-Site Observations by the Construction Manager Orders, Written Other Contracts and Contractors OWNER Owner, Definition of Owner, Information and Services Required of the Owner's Authority Owner's Financial Capability Owner's Liability Insurance Owner's Loss of Use Insurance Owner's Relationship with Subcontractors Owner's Right to Carry Out the Work Owner's Right to Clean Up Owner's Right to Perform Construction 9.4.4, 9.5.1, 9.10.1, 12.1.1, 13.5 9.4.4, 12.1.1 1.2.2, 3.2.2 ~6~?6, 9.8.1, 9.9)11.3.11 4.6 ~~5, 4.6.16, 4.7~~6 9.4.4, 9.8.2, 9.9.2,- 9.1(~~~m 4.6 ~ , 4.6.9, 4.716, 9.4.4, 9.51, 9.10.1, 9.5.1 2.3; 3.9, 4.7~~1, 7, 8.2 , 11.3.9, 12. , 12.2, 13.. .. 4.6.7, 4.9.5, 6, 11.3.7, 12.1.2, 12.2.5 2 2.1 ~-~"~ 10.1.6, 1~`~,~ 11.3, 13.5.1, 14.1.1.5, 14.1.3 3.8.E-3~1-, ~: 51.4, 5.4.1, j~1.3.}"8.2.2~,~ 9.3 1, 9.3.2, 11..1, 12..4, 13..2, 14.2, 14. _' 2.2.1, 11.2 AIA Document A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Documtent is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maai.mum extent possible under the ~-~ law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) • with Own Forces and to Award Other Contracts Owner's Right to Stop the Work Owner's Right to Suspend the Work Owner's Right to Terminate the Contract Ownership and Use of Architect's Drawings, Specifications and Other Documents Partial Occupancy or Use Patching, Cutting and Patents, Royalties and Payment, Applications for Payment, Certificates for Payment, Failure of Payment, Final Payment Bond, Performance Bond and Payments, Progress PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION Payments to Subcontractors PCB Performance Bond and Payment Bond Permits, Fees and Notices 3.13, 7.3.6.4, 10.2.2 2.3, 4.7.7 PERSONS AND 10 PROPERTY, 14.3 PROTECTION OF Polychlorinated Biphenyl 10.1.2, 14.2 .3, 10.1.4 Product Data, Definition of 3.1 .2 1.1.1, 1.3, Product Data and 3.1 , 3.12, 2.2.5, 5.3 Samples, Shop Drawings 4.2.(7 Progress and Completion 14.6.5, 4.7.4, 9.6.6, 9.9, 11.3.11 3.14, 6.2.6 3.17 4.6.9, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5.1, 9.8.3, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 9.10.4, 14.2.4 4.6.9, 4.6.16, 9.3.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6.1, 9.6.6, 9.7.1, 9.8.3, 9.10.1, 9.10.3, 13.7, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.4 4.7.7, 9.5.1.3, 9.7, 9.10.2, 14.1.1.3, 14.2.1.2 4.6.1, 4.6.16, 4.7.2, 4.7.5, 9.10, 11.1.2., 11.1.3, 11.3.5, 12.3.1 7.3.6.4, 9.10.3, 11.3.9, 11.4 4.7.4, 9.3, 9.6, 9.8.3, 9.10.3, 13.6, 14.2.3 9, 14 5.4.2, 9.5.1.3, 9.6.2, 9.6.3, 9.6.4, 11.3.8, 14.2.1.2 10.1.2, 10.1.3, 10.1.4 7.3.6.4, 9.10.3, 11.3.9, 11.4 2.2.3, 3.7, Progress Payments Project, Definition of the Project Manual, Definition of the Project Manuals Project Representatives Property Insurance PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY Regulations and Laws Rejection of Work Releases of Waivers and Liens Representations Representatives Resolution of Claims and Disputes Responsibility for Those Performing the Work Retainage Review of Contract Documents and Field Conditions by Contractor Review of Contractor's 1.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.13, 4.1.1, 4.9.7, 10.2.2 11.1.. . , .1, 13 , 13.~~-,~ 13. , 14 ~` 3.5.1, 4.6.10, ~"~ 12.2. 9.10.2 ],'~2, 3.51, ~~ ~~ '8.21,9.3.3, 9.4 3, 9.5.1, ) ~`~ 9.8 2, 9.10.1 2.1 1, 3.1.1, 3.9 _h 4.6.1, 4.6.17, .. .. , 13.2.1 4.8, 4~ ~" 3.2,,:..6' ~.2.~~0 9.311, 9.6.2, 9.8 ~ti, 9.9.1, s 9.1.2, 9.10.3 1.2 2, 3.2, 3.7.3, 3.12.7 AIA Document A201/CNa° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Docent is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Vnauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, 11 or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the mazimt~ eztent possible under the law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) '4.7 ~' , 9.3, 9.6~ 9.8.3, 9.1 ~.3, 13.6, 14.2.3 Submittals by Owner, Construction 3.10.1, Manager and Architect 3.10.3, 3.11, Statute of Limitations 3.12, 4.6.12. 4.6.16, 5.2.1, Stopping the Work 5.2.3, 9.2, 9.8.2 Review of Shop Drawings, 3.12.5 Stored Materials Product Data and Samples by Contractor Rights and Remedies 1.1.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.5.1, Subcontractor, Definition 3.15.2, of 4.6.10, 4.7.6, SUBCONTRACTORS 4.9, 5.3, 6.1, Subcontractors, Work by 6.3, 7.3.1, 8.3.1, 9.5.1, 9.7, 10.2.5, 10.3, 12.2.2, 5ubcontractual Relations 12.2.4, 13.4, 14 Royalties and Patents 3.17 Rules and Notices for 4.9.2 Arbitration Safety of Persons and 10.2 Property Safety Precautions and 4.6.6, 4.6.12, Programs 10.1 Submittals Samples, Definition of 3.12.3 Samples, Shop Drawings, 3.11, 3.12, Product Data and 4.6.12 Samples at the Site, 3.11 Documents and Schedule of Values 9.Z, 9.3.1 Schedules, Construction 3.10 Separate Contracts and 1.1.4 Subrogation, Waivers of Contractors Shop Drawings, Definition 3.12.1 Substantial Completion of Shop Drawings, Product 3.11, 3.12, Data and Samples 4.6.11, 4.6.12, 4.6.15 Site, Use of 3.13, 6.1.1, Substantial Completion, 6.2.1 Definition of Site Inspections 1.2.2, 3.3.4, Substitution of 4.6.5, 4.6.16, Subcontractors 4.7.6, 9.8.2, Substitution of Architect 9.10.1, 13.5 Substitution of Site Visits, Architect's 4.6.5, 4.6.9, Construction Manager 4.7.6, 9.4, Substitutions of Materials 9.5.1, 9.8.2, Sub-subcontractor, 9.9.2, 9.10.1, Definition of 13.5 Subsurface Conditions Special Inspections and 4.6.10, Successors and Assigns Testing 12.2.1, 13.5 Superintendent Specifications, Definition 1.1.6 Supervision and of the Construction Procedures Specifications, The 1.1.1, 1.1.6, 1.1.7, 1.2.4, 1.3, 3.11 4.9.4.2, 12.2.6, 13.7 2.3, 4.7.7, 9.7, 10.1.2, . , 14.1 ':6.2.1, 9.3.2, 10..1.2, 11..1.4, 12.2.4 5.1 ~'~ L2~4, 3.3.2, 3.12.1, 4.6.6, ~10, 5.3, 5.4 5.3, 5.4, 9.31.2, 9.6.2, 9.6 ~3, 9.6.4, 10.:1, 11. - . 14.1.1, 14.2.1.2, 14.1.3 1.3, 3.2.3, ~ 3.10 -. , ~, 4.. 'S•2 ;~~, '1:39.2, ~ 9.3.1, 9:$~~; ~~,~ 9.9.1, 9.10.2, ~ 9.10.3, 11.1.3 6.1.1, 11.3.5, ~~.16, 8_1 1, .1. ;`8.23~a .8 X9.9.1, 2. .1, 2..2, 13.7 .8 1 .2.3, 5.2.4 4.4 ALA Docuunent A201/ a° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion o£ it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the mn4i.m,... extent possible under the 12 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uses Notes: (3560762705) 4.7.4, 6.2.4, 7.1.3, 7.3.4, 8.2, 8.3.1, 10, Title to Work 12, 14 UNCOVERING AND Surety 4.8.1, 4.8.4, CORRECTION OF 5.4.1.2, WOE 9.10.2, Uncovering of Work 9.10.3, 14.2.2 Unforeseen Conditions Surety, Consent of 9.10.2, 9.10.3 Surveys 2.2.2, 3.18.3 Unit Prices Suspension by the Owner 14.3 Use of Documents for Convenience Suspension of the Work 4.7.7, 5.4.2, 14.1.1.4, 14.3 Use of Site Suspension or Termination 4.7.7, 5.4.1.1, of the Contract 14 Values, Schedule of Taxes 3.6, 7.3.6.4 Waiver of Claims: Final Termination by the 14.1 Payment Contractor Waiver of Claims by the Termination by the 5.4.1.1, 14.2 Architect Owner for Cause Waiver of Claims by the Termination of the 4.4 Contractor Architect Waiver of Claims by the Termination of the 4.4 Owner Construction Manager Termination of the 14.2.2 Contractor TERMINATION OR 14 Waiver of Liens SUSPENSION OF THE Waivers of Subrogation CONTRACT Tests and Inspections 3.3.3, 4.6.10, Warranty and 4.6.16, 9.4.3, Warranties 12.2.1, 13.5 TIME 8 Time, Delays and 4.7.8, 7.2.1, Extensions of 8.3 Weather Delays Time Limits, Specific 2.1.2, 2.2.1, When Arbitration May 2.4, 3.10, Be Demanded 4.6.18, 4.7, Work, Definition of 4.8.1, 4.8.3, Written Consent 4.8.4, 4.9.1, 4.9.4.1, 4.9.4.2, 5.3, 5.4, 7.3.5, 7.3.9, 8.2, 9.2, 9.3.1, 9.3.3, 9.4.1, 9.6.1, 9.7, 9.8.2, 9.10.2, 11.1.3, 11.3.6, 11.3.10, Written Interpretations 11.3.11, 12.2.2, Written Notice 12.2.4, 12.2.6, 13.7, 14 Time Limits on Claims 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.6, 4.7.9, 4.8, 4.9 9.3.2, 9.3.3 12 12.1 4~6, 8.3.1, 10.~ 7.1.4, 7.3.3.2 1.1 ~1 1.3, 2.2.5, 3.12.7, 5.3 j 3.1 , 6.1.1, 6.2 1 9.2 ~ 9.3.1 x.7.5, 4.9.1, 11.3.5, 11.3.7, 13.4.2 9.10.2 6.1.1, 1 L 11.3~~ ~4.6 , X4.7. ~ 3, ~~9.1, - ..2, 13.7.1.3 ~ 4.7.8.2 4.9.4 f .3 .3. ; 3 Z 3.11.2, 4.7.4, 4.9 5, 9.3.2, 9.8 2, 9.9.1, 9.1.2, 9.1 3 10.1.2, _..._._, 11.3.1, 11.3.1.E 1 L3:~1. 13.2. 6~8, 6 9, 4.7.7 3 ~ 2.4, 3.9, 1 .8, 1 .9, 4.7.1 7.6, 4.7.9. 5.2.1, 5.3, AIA Document A201/CMa®- 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be proaeauted to the ma=i m+~ extent possible under the 1 3 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705( 5.4.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.4, 9.5.1, 9.7, 9.10, Written Orders 10.1.2, 10.2.6, 11.1.3, 11.3, 12.2.2, % _~ I ~~ AIA Document A201/CMa" - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA® Doa~ent is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 1.4 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.10002614B0_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) 12.2.4,13.3, 13.5.2, 14 2.3, 3.9, 4.7.7, 8.2.2, 11.3.9, 12.1, 12.2, 13.5.2, ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS § 1.1 BASIC DEFINITIONS § 1.1.1 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The Contract Documents consist of the Agreement between Owner and Contractor (hereinafter the Agreement), Conditions of the Contract (General, Supplementary and other Conditions), Drawings, Specifications, addenda issued prior to execution of the Contract, other documents listed in the Agreement and Modifications issued after execution of the Contract. A Modification is (1) a written amendment to the Contract signs both parties, (2) a Change Order, (3) a Construction Change Directive or (4) a written order for a minor than the Work issued by the Architect. Unless specifically enumerated in the Agreement, the Contract Documents d not mclude other documents such as bidding requirements (advertisement or invitation to bid, Instructions to Biers, sample forms, the Contractor's bid or portions of addenda relating to bidding requirements). § 1.1.2 THE CONTRACT The Contract Documents form the Contract for Construction. The Contract represents the e agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes prior negotiations, representations or or oral. The Contract maybe amended or modified only by a Modification. The Contract 1; construed to create a contractual relationship of any kind (1) between the Architect and Co: Construction Manager and Contractor, (3) between the Architect and Construction Manage and a Subcontractor or Sub-subcontractor or (5) between any persons or entities other than Contractor. The Construction Manager and Architect shall, however, be entitled to perform obligations under the Contract intended to facilitate performance of their duties. and integrated ments, either written cents shall not be or, (2) between the and enfo~ce~ent of § 1.1.3 THE WORK ~ - ~ The term "Work" means the construction and services required by the Contract Documents ~ partially completed, and includes all other labor, materials, equipment and services provided or to be provided by the Contractor to fulfill the Contractor's obligations. The Work may constitute the whole or a part of the Project. § 1.1.4 THE PROJECT The Project is the total construction of which the Work performed under the Contract Documem y or a part and which may include construction by other Contractors and by the Owner's o ~ orces or entities under separate contracts not administered by the Construction Manager. -~„ § 1.1.5 THE DRAWINGS `~ The Drawings aze the graphic and pictorial portions of the Contract Documents, wherever located and whene issued, showing the design, location and dimensions of the Work, generally including plans, elevations, sections, details, schedules and diagrams. § 1.1.6 THE SPECIFICATIONS ,~" The Specifications aze that portion of the Contract Documents consisting of the written req ire tents f equipment, construction systems, standazds and workmanship for the Work, and perfo ~e related § 1.1.7 THE PROJECT MANUAL The Project Manual is the volume usually assembled for the Work which may include the id g requi sample forms, Conditions of the Contract and Specifications. § 1.2 EXECUTION, CORRELATION AND INTENT § 1.2.1 The Contract Documents shall be signed by the Owner and Contractor as provided in the Agreement. If either the Owner or Contractor or both do not sign all the Contract Documents, the Architect shall identi~u~igned~ Documents upon request. ~- § 1.2.2 Execution of the Contract by the Contractor is a representation that the Contractor ,' vi yted the site, become familiar with local conditions under which the Work is to be performed and correl ted ersonal observations with requirements of the Contract Documents. § 1.2.3 The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the prop ex cution and completion of the Work by the Contractor. The Contract Documents aze complementary, d hat is required one shall be as binding as if required by all; performance by the Contractor shall be require only to the extent consistent with the Contract Documents and reasonably inferable from them as being nets sapredu€e~he intended results. AIA Document A201/CMaa~ - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the ~^_~++~+++* extent possible under the 1rJ law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not. for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) i M § 1.2.4 Organization of the Specifications into divisions, sections and articles, and arrangement of Drawings shall not control the Contractor in dividing the Work among Subcontractors or in establishing the extent of Work to be performed by any trade. § 1.2.5 Unless otherwise stated in the Contract Documents, words which have well-known technical or construction industry meanings aze used in the Contract Documents in accordance with such recognizedimr- e~nings. § 1.3 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OTHER D~DCI~MENTS § 1.3.1 The Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepazed by the Architect aze ins ~ ents of the Architect's service through which the Work to be executed by the Contractor is described. a Contractor may retain one contract record set. Neither the Contractor nor any Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor o ma ' supplier shall own or claim a copyright in the Drawings, Specifications and other documen p azed by the Architect, and unless otherwise indicated the Architect shall be deemed the author of them d +will retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, in addition to the copyright. All copies o th ~ except the Contractor's record set, shall be returned or suitably accounted for to the Architect, on request, upon completion of the Work. The Drawings, Specifications and other documents prepazed by the Architect, c pies thereof furnished to the Contractor, aze for use solely with respect to this Project. They aze not to b us d by the ~ on actor or any Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor or material or equipment supplier on other projec or,for additi ns do this Project outside the scope of the Work without the specific written consent of the Owner ~d chitect. e Contractor, Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors and material or equipment suppliers are gr to ~ a limited lic ' e to use and reproduce applicable portions of the Drawings, Specifications and other documen pre~azed by e Architect appropriate to and for use in the execution of their Work under the Contract Doc en s. copies ma e under this license shall beaz the statutory copyright notice, if any, shown on the Drawings, - ns_-and-athe~-. documents prepared by the Architect. Submittal or distribution to meet official regulatory requirements or for other purposes in connection with this Project is not to be construed as publication in derogation of the Architect's ~~ copyright or other reserved rights. ~` § 1.4 CAPITALIZATION ~ § 1.4.1 Terms capitalized in these General Conditions include those which aze (1) specifics y defin ,~) the of numbered articles or (3) the titles of other documents published by the American Institui~ of~tects. § 1.5 INTERPRETATION ~~, § 1.5.1 In the interest of brevity the Contract Documents frequently omit modifying words such as "all" a d ' and articles such as "the" and "an," but the fact that a modifier or an article is absent from one statement and in another is not intended to affect the interpretation of either statement. ARTICLE 2 OWNER § 2.1 DEFINITION § 2.1.1 The Owner is the person or entity identified as such in the Agreement and is referre to Contract Documents as if singulaz in number. The term "Owner" means the Owner or the wx representative. § 2.1.2 The Owner upon reasonable written request shall furnish to the Contractor in writin o~ation_. hic necessary and relevant for the Contractor to evaluate, give notice of or enforce mechanic's 'en rights. Such information shall include a correct statement of the record legal title to the property on whic a ro~ec is oca , usually referred to as the site, and the Owner's interest therein at the time of execution of the Agreement and, within five days after any change, information of such change in title, recorded or unrecorded. a~"~ § 2.2 INFORMATION AND SERVICES REQUIRED OF THE OWNER ~ - ~~ § 2.2.1 The Owner shall, at the request of the Contractor, prior to execution of the Agreem 't ~ promptly from time to time thereafter, Punish to the Contractor reasonable evidence that financial arrange en have been made to fulfill the Owner's obligations under the Contract. { [Note: Unless such reasonable evidence were furnished on request prior to the execution o th Agreement, the prospective contractor would not be required to execute the Agreement or to commence th , W ,rk.J § 2.2.2 The Owner shall furnish surveys describing physical characteristics, legal the site of the Project, and a legal description of the site. AIA Dociment A201/CPSa° - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AL?.6 Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximmn extent possible under the 1 6 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) § 2.2.3 Except for permits and fees which aze the responsibility of the Contractor under the Contract Documents, the Owner shall secure and pay for necessary approvals, easements, assessments and chazges required for construction, use or occupancy of permanent structures or for permanent changes in existing facilities. Unless otherwise provided under the Contract Documents, the Owner, through the Construction Manager, shall secure and pay for the building permit. § 2.2.4 Information or services under the Owner's control shall be furnished by the Owner promptness to avoid delay in orderly progress of the Work § 2.2.5 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Contractor will be Earn copies of Drawings and Project Manuals as aze reasonably necessary for execution of the § 2.2.6 The Owner shall forward all communications to the Contractor through the contemporaneously provide the same communications to the Architect. § 2.2.7 The foregoing are in addition to other duties and responsibilities of the Owner enu especially those in respect to Article 6 (Construction by Owner or by Other Contractors), Completion) and Article 11 (Insurance and Bonds). free of chazge, such Manager and shall ~d herein and e 9 (Pay~;ent ,and § 2.3 OWNER'S RIGHT TO STOP THE WORK § 2.3.1 If the Contractor fails to correct Work which is not in accordance with the requirem is of the Co tract Documents as required by Section 12.2 or persistently fails to carry out Work in accordant vv~ a ontrac~ Documents, the Owner, by written order signed personally or by an agent specifically so empew~r~d~y~he=0vu~~ in writing, may order the Contractor to stop the Work, or any portion thereof, until the cause for such order has been eliminated; however, the right of the Owner to stop the Work shall not give rise to a duty on the part of the Owner to exercise this right for the benefit of the Contractor or any other person or entity. ~~' § 2.4 OWNER'S RIGHT TO CARRY OUT THE WORK § 2.4.1 If the Contractor defaults or neglects to carry out the Work in accordance with the C retract uments ~ d fails within aseven-day period after receipt of written notice from the Owner to comment ~and~ ue cone 4 do of such default or neglect with diligence and promptness, the Owner may after such seven-da~pe~riod gi e + '~ Contractor a second written notice to correct such deficiencies within a second seven-day penod. I~~~~~ontractor within such second seven-day period after receipt of such second notice fails to commence and continue to~co~r~ct any deficiencies, the Owner may, without prejudice to other remedies the Owner may have, correct such deficiencies. In such case an appropriate Change Order shall be issued deducting from payments then or thereafter due the Contractor the cost of correcting such deficiencies, including compensation for the Co~on~anager': and Architect's and their respective consultants' additional services and expenses made nece~ary b such fault,,, neglect or failure. Such action by the Owner and amounts chazged to the Contractor aze both s~~ect to ~ 'orh, ,~- approval of the Architect, after consultation with the Construction Manager. If payments then 'i thereafter dde the Contractor aze not sufficient to cover such amounts, the Contractor shall pay the difference~to e Owner. ~ ,~" ARTICLE 3 CONTRACTOR § 3.1 DEFINITION § 3.1.1 The Contractor is the person or entity identified as such in the Agreement and is ref ed to throughout this Agreement as if singulaz in number. The term "Contractor" means the Contractor or the Con ac or s au orize representative. § 3.1.2 The plural term "Contractors" refers to persons or entities who perform construction un~ Conditions of th Contract that are administered by the Construction Manager, and that aze identical or substa~tiallysi 1-az t th e Conditions. § 3.2 REVIEW OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND FIELD CONDITIONS BY CONTRACTOR § 3.2.1 The Contractor shall carefully study and compare the Contract Documents with ear o er and with information furnished by the Owner pursuant to Section 2.2.2 and shall at once report to th C nstruction Manager ~ and Architect errors, inconsistencies or omissions discovered. The Contractor shall not be 1 able to the Owner, ` Construction Manager or Architect for damage resulting from errors, inconsistencies or o ~ht~~nu a~~ -' Documents unless the Contractor recognized such error, inconsistency or omission and knowingly failed to report it ALA Docianent A201/CMae' - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. NARKING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 17 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.10002614B0 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) to the Construction Manager and Architect. If the Contractor performs any construction activity knowing it involves a recognized error, inconsistency or omission in the Contract Documents without such notice to the Construction Manager and Architect, the Contractor shall assume appropriate responsibility for such performance and shall beaz an appropriate amount of the attributable costs for correction. § 3.2.2 The Contractor shall take field measurements and verify field conditions and shall cazefully compaze such field measurements and conditions and other information known to the Contractor with the ~ o tract Documents before commencing activities. Errors, inconsistencies or omissions discovered shall be rep~rte to the Construction Manager and Architect at once. § 3.2.3 The Contractor shall perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents end submittals pursuant to Section 3.12. , § 3.3 SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES § 3.3.1 The Contractor shall supervise and direct the Work, using the Contractor's best skill ;and attention. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for and have control over construction means, metho ,techniques, sequences and procedures and for coordinating all portions of the Work under this Contract, subject t ov rall coordination of the Construction Manager as provided in Sections 4.6.3 and 4.6.4. ~~ § 3.3.2 The Contractor shall be responsible to the Owner for acts and omissions of the Cox Subcontractors and their agents and employees, and other persons performing portions of with the Contractor. § 3.3.3 The Contractor shall not be relieved of obligations to perform the Work in accordance=KCith~~ontrast Documents either by activities or duties of the Construction Manager or Architect in their administration of the Contract, or by tests, inspections or approvals required or performed by persons other than the Contractor. § 3.3.4 The Contractor shall inspect portions of the Project related to the Contractor's Work in order to ~r~ine tl such portions aze in proper condition to receive subsequent Work. ~ § 3.4 LABOR AND MATERIALS § 3.4.1 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall provide an fora l materials, equipment, tools, construction equipment and machinery, water, heat, utilities, transportaho d other facilities and services necessary for proper execution and completion of the Work, whether temporary or pe e~ and whether or not incorporated or to be incorporated in the Work. § 3.4.2 The Contractor shall enforce strict discipline and good order among the Contractor's emp~cayees=aid other persons carrying out the Contract. The Contractor shall not permit employment of unfit persq~is or ersons`~ot skilled in tasks assigned to them. ~ ~~, ~~ , ~' § 3.5 WARRANTY § 3.5.1 The Contractor warrants to the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect that ma ri sand eq ~m nt furnished under the Contract will be of good quality and new unless otherwise required or ~ e ~ 'tted by tl~, C ~ ntrac Documents, that the Work will be free from defects not inherent in the quality required or a 'ttei~_ht at Work will conform with the requirements of the Contract Documents. Work not conforxrux~~ to these requirements, including substitutions not properly approved and authorized, may be considered defective. ~e ~ntrac~or s wazranty excludes remedy for damage or defect caused by abuse, modifications not executed by the Contractor, improper or insufficient maintenance, improper operation, or normal weaz and tear under normal u~ge.~~roq by the Construction Manager or Architect, the Contractor shall fiunish satisfactory evidence as~~the kind and quality of materials and equipment. ~~~ ~~~'~ § 3.6 TAXES § 3.6.1 The Contractor shall pay sales, consumer, use and similaz taxes for the Work or po ~o thereof provided by the Contractor which aze legally enacted when bids aze received or negotiations concluded wh ther or not yet effective or merely scheduled to go into effect. AIA Document A201/CMa°' - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the ro=:;,.,,,..~ extent possible under the 18 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) § 3.7 PERMITS, FEES AND NOTICES § 3.7.1 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, the Owner shall secure and pay for the building permit and the Contractor shall secure and pay for all other permits and governmental fees, licenses and inspections necessary for proper execution and completion of the Work which are customarily secured after execution of the Contract and which are legally required when bids aze received or negotiations concluded. § 3.7.2 The Contractor shall comply with and give notices required by laws, ordinances, rul s - d regulations and lawful orders of public authorities bearing on performance of the Work. § 3.7.3 It is not the Contractor's responsibility to ascertain that the Contract Documents are a cordance with applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, building codes, and rules and regulations. However, th Contractor obser that portions of the Contract Documents aze at variance therewith, the Contractor shall pro ptly notify the Construction Manager, Architect and Owner in writing, and necessary changes shall be ac m ' Modification. § 3.7.4 If the Contractor performs Work knowing it to be contrary to laws, statutes, ordinan~e rules and regulations without such notice to the Construction Manager, Architect and Owner, assume full responsibility for such Work and shall bear the attributable costs. § 3.8 ALLOWANCES § 3.8.1 The Contractor shall include in the Contract Sum all allowances stated in the covered by allowances shall be supplied for such amounts and by such persons or er but the Contractor shall not be required to employ persons or entities against which 1 objection. § 3.8.2 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents: .1 materials and equipment under an allowance shall be selected promptly by the Owner to avoid delay in the Work; ~ .2 allowances shall cover the cost to the Contractor of materials and equipment delivered a ~ anc~ all required taxes, less applicable trade discounts; ~„~~~; .3 Contractor's costs for unloading and handling at the site, labor, installation c sts, ov , pro t d other expenses contemplated for stated allowance amounts shall be include in t~ ntract S d not in the allowances; ~ `~ i .4 whenever costs aze more than or less than allowances, the Contract Sum shall be adjus~~~ rdin by Change Order. The amount of the Change Order shall reflect (1) the difference between actaal~~ costs and the allowances under Section 3.8.2.2 and (2) changes in Contractor's costs under Section 3.8.2.3. § 3.9 SUPERINTENDENT ~~°~ -~ § 3.9.1 The Contractor shall employ a competent superintendent and necessary assistants wl~'o sl~afl be m~ tte~,~nce at the Project site during performance of the Work. The superintendent shall represent the ~ on actor, an ~~ communications given to the superintendent shall be as binding as if given to the Contract. ~ portant `'~ communications shall be confirmed in writing. Other communications shall be similazly co ed on request in each case. § 3.10 CONTRACTOR'S CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE § 3.10.1 The Contractor, promptly after being awazded the Contract, shall prepaze and subml or a wne s an Architect's information and the Construction Manager's approval a Contractor's Construction Schedule for the Work. Such schedule shall not exceed time limits current under the Contract Documents, shall be revised ropriate-~, intervals as required by the conditions of the Work and Project, shall be related to the entire Protect construction schedule to the extent required by the Contract Documents, and shall provide for expeditious~and, acticable execution of the Work § 3.10.2 The Contractor shall cooperate with the Construction Manager in scheduling and p o g the Contractor's Work to avoid conflict, delay in or interference with the Work of other Contra for or the construction or operations of the Owner's own forces. ALA Document A201/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA® Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Docw¢ent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum eatent possible under the 1 9 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705( s, puilding codes, and the Contractor shall § 3.10.3 The Contractor shall prepaze and keep current, for the Construction Manager's and Architect's approval, a schedule of submittals which is coordinated with the Contractor's Construction Schedule and allows the Construction Manager and Architect reasonable time to review submittals. § 3.10.4 The Contractor shall conform to the most recent schedules. § 3.11 DOCUMENTS AND SAMPLES AT THE SITE § 3.11.1 The Contractor shall maintain at the site for the Owner one record copy of the Dra s, Specifications, addenda, Change Orders and other Modifications, in good order and marked currently to r or~ changes and selections made during construction, and in addition approved Shop Drawings, Product Da , S~~ples and simile required submittals. These shall be available to the Construction Manager and Architect an shall be delivered tc Construction Manager for submittal to the Owner upon completion of the Work § 3.12 SHOP DRAWINGS, PRODUCT DATA AND SAMPLES § 3.12.1 Shop Drawings are drawings, diagrams, schedules and other data specially prepaze fo I the Work by the Contractor or a Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor, manufacturer, supplier or distributor to ' usirate some portion of the Work. § 3.12.2 Product Data aze illustrations, standard schedules, performance charts, instructions (brochures, di gr and other information furnished by the Contractor to illustrate materials or equipment for some o ion of the ~Vo k. § 3.12.3 Samples aze physical examples which illustrate materials, equipment or workmans 'p d establi h standards by which the Work will be judged. § 3.12.4 Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and similaz submittals aze not Contract Documents. The purpose of their submittal is to demonstrate for those portions of the Work for which submittals aze required the way the Contractor proposes to conform to the information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract ~~ Documents. Review by the Architect is subject to the limitations of Section 4.6.12. ~ § 3.12.5 The Contractor shall review, approve and submit to the Construction Manager, in ~r " th the; schedule and sequence approved by the Construction Manager, Shop Drawings, Product D ta, les and s~ulz submittals required by the Contract Documents. The Contractor shall cooperate with the Co tion ei~ in the coordination of the Contractor's Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and similaz submittals vvi ~ elated documents submitted by other Contractors. Submittals made by the Contractor which aze not required by the Contract Documents maybe returned without action. § 3.12.6 The Contractor shall perform no portion of the Work requiring submittal and review ofd Product Data, Samples or similar submittals until the respective submittal has been approve , 'by the Con Manager and Architect. Such Work shall be in accordance with approved submittals. %`~~~ fl § 3.12.7 By approving and submitting Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and similaz s ~ 'ttals, the represents that the Contractor has determined and verified materials, field measurements d ld constr criteria related thereto, or will do so, and has checked and coordinated the information con d within ; submittals with the requirements of the Work and of the Contract Documents. ~~ _ § 3.12.8 The Contractor shall not be relieved of responsibility for deviations from requirem n o ~ e on~act- Documents by the Construction Manager's and Architect's approval of Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples or similar submittals unless the Contractor has specifically informed the Construction Manager and~~ of such deviation at the time of submittal and the Construction Manager and Architect have giy~wnttenap~rov; to the specific deviation. The Contractor shall not be relieved of responsibility for errors or o ssi Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples or similaz submittals by the Construction Manager's and ~r~c)~tect's approval thereof. ~i § 3.12.9 The Contractor shall direct specific attention, in writing or on resubmitted Shop Dr~ gs, Product Data, Samples or similaz submittals, to revisions other than those requested by the Construction I~ _ger and Architect on previous submittals. AIA Docianent A201/CMa1° - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 20 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) § 3.12.10 Informational submittals upon which the Construction Manager and Architect aze not expected to take responsive action maybe so identified in the Contract Documents. § 3.12.11 When professional certification of performance criteria of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the Construction Manager and Architect shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness of such calculations and certifications. § 3.13 USE OF SITE § 3.13.1 The Contractor shall confine operations at the site to azeas permitted bylaw, ordin ce ,permits and the Contract Documents and shall not unreasonably encumber the site with materials or equipnt § 3.13.2 The Contractor shall coordinate the Contractor's operations with, and secure the Construction Manager before using any portion of the site. § 3.14 CUTTING AND PATCHING § 3.14.1 The Contractor shall be responsible for cutting, fitting or patching required to complete the Work or to make its parts fit together properly. § 3.14.2 The Contractor shall not damage or endanger a portion of the Work or fully or p all complete construction of the Owner's own forces or of other Contractors by cutting, patching, excav tin or othe se tering such construction. The Contractor shall not cut or otherwise alter such construction by othe~ C ntractors r b the Owner's own forces except with written consent of the Construction Manager, Owner and ch other Co~trac ors; such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Contractor shall not unreasonably wi o om e o er Contractors or the Owner the Contractor's consent to cutting or otherwise altering the Wor a § 3.15 CLEANING UP § 3.15.1 The Contractor shall keep the premises and surrounding azea free from accumulation of waste material~e rubbish caused by operations under the Contract. At completion of the Work the Contractor shall remo om aJ about the Project waste materials, rubbish, the Contractor's tools, construction equipment, machi~~y and s materials. ~ - ~ ~ I § 3.15.2 If the Contractor fails to clean up as provided in the Contract Documents, the Cons Ms nager~m y so with the Owner's approval and the cost thereof shall be chazged to the Contractor. •~~-~, § 3.18 ACCESS TO WORK § 3.18.1 The Contractor shall provide the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect access to the Work in preparation and progress wherever located. § 3.17 ROYALTIES AND PATENTS ~'~ ~~ `~ § 3.17.1 The Contractor shall pay all royalties and license fees. The Contractor shall defend suit or claims fo 1,~`f infringement of patent rights and shall hold the Owner, Construction Manager and Archite t ess fro ~ lo~~on account thereof, but shall not be responsible for such defense or loss when a particular desi rocess or ro uct of a particulaz manufacturer or manufacturers is required by the Contract Documents. Howev r, ' the Contr cto has reason to believe that the required design, process or product is an infringement of a patent th Contracto' s be responsible for such loss unless such information is promptly furnished to the Architect. § 3.18 INDEMNIFICATION § 3.18.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless th er, Construction Manager, Architect, Construction Manager's and Architect's consultants, and ag sand employees of any of them from and against claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limits to attorneys' fee- s~ arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work, provided that such claim, damag ; to or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to or destruction of tan ~~bl properiy (other than the Work itself) including loss of use resulting therefrom, but only to the extent caused in hole or in part by negligent acts or omissions of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectl em~loyed by them or anyone for whose acts they maybe liable, regazdless of whether or not such claim, damage los os r expense is caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. Such obligation shall not be construed to egate, abridge or reduce other rights or obligations of indemnity which would otherwise exist as to a party or perso 3.18. ALA Document A201/CMa - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Docivmnt is protected by U.9. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and oriminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the mew+m+^^ extent possible under the 21 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) ~ ~ § 3.18.2 In claims against any person or entity indemnified under this Section 3.18 by an employee of the Contractor, a Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them or anyone for whose acts they maybe liable, the indemnification obligation under this Section 3.18 shall not be limited by a limitation on amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable by or for the Contractor or a Subcontractor under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts or other employee benefit acts. § 3.18.3 The obligations of the Contractor under this Section 3.18 shall not extend to the lia ili of the Construction Manager, Architect, their consultants, and agents and employees of any of them arising ou of i) the preparation or approval of maps, drawings, opinions, reports, surveys, Change Orders, designs or specific do ~ or (, the giving of or the failure to give directions or instructions by the Construction Manager, Architect, sir consultants, and agents and employees of any of them provided such giving or failure to give is the primary cau~of~ damage. ~+, ARTICLE 4 ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT ~~ § 4.1 ARCHITECT § 4.1.1 The Architect is the person lawfully licensed to practice acchitecture or an entity la .practice architecture identified as such in the Agreement and is referred to throughout the Contract oc sets as in number. The term "Architect" means the Architect or the Architect's authorized represen ti e. § 4.2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER § 4.2.1 The Construction Manager is the person or entity identified as such in the Agreeme aid is throughout the Contract Documents as if singulaz in number. The term "Construction Man ger' me Construction Manager or the Construction Manager's authorized representative. ~ § 4.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the Construction Manager and Architect as set forth in the Contract Documents shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written consent of the Owner, Construction Manager, Architect and Contractor. Consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. § 4.4 In case of termination of employment of the Construction Manager or Architect, the ~ ner s appoint construction manager or azchitect against whom the Contractor makes no reasonable objection a~~ose stab under the Contract Documents shall be that of the former construction manager or azchitect, r ctively~~ § 4.5 Disputes arising under Sections 4.3 and 4.4 shall be subject to azbitration. § 4.6 ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT § 4.6.1 The Construction Manager and Architect will provide administration of the Contract as describec~in the Contract Documents, and will be the Owner's representatives (1) during construction, (2) un~final~ayme t is and (3) with the Owner's concurrence, from time to time during the correction period described ` Secti2~n Construction Manager and Architect will advise and consult with the Owner and will have u onty to ac on~~ of the Owner only to the extent provided in the Contract Documents, unless otherwise mo a by writte ~ instrument in accordance with other provisions of the Contract. s § 4.6.2 The Construction Manager will determine in general that the Work is being perform d ' accordan a ~' requirements of the Contract Documents, will keep the Owner informed of the progress of a Work, and will endeavor to guazd the Owner against defects and deficiencies in the Work. § 4.8.3 The Construction Manager will provide for coordination of the activities of other Contractorunct-o~t e Owner's own forces with the Work of the Contractor, who shall cooperate with them. The Contractor shal participate with other Contractors and the Construction Manager and Owner in reviewing th ~ cotion ~~~ schedules when directed to do so. The Contractor shall make any revisions to the constructi, n s edule deemed necessary after a joint review and mutual agreement. The construction schedules shall cons 'tutthe schedules to be used by the Contractor, other Contractors, the Construction Manager and the Owner until ~ bs quently revised. § 4.6.4 The Construction Manager will schedule and coordinate the activities of the Contra tors in accordance with the latest approved Project construction schedule. AIA Document A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. Ail rights reserved. AARNING: This AL4 Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximtm extant possible under the 22 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) • ~ § 4.8.5 The Architect will visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction to become generally familiaz with the progress and quality of the completed Work and to determine in general if the Work is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the Architect will not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check quality or quantity of the Work. On the basis of on-site observations as an azchitect, the Architect will keep the Owner informed of progress of the Work, and will endeavor to guard the Owner against defects and deficiencies in the Work § 4.6.8 The Construction Manager, except to the extent required by Section 4.6.4, and Arcl over or charge of and will not be responsible for construction means, methods, techniques, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, since these are solely responsibility as provided in Section 3.3, and neither will be responsible for the Contractor Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Neither the Construction Manager nor ~ control over or charge of or be responsible for acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcon employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the Work § 4.8.7 Communications Facilitating Contract Administration. Except as otherwise provi Documents or when direct communications have been specially authorized, the Owner a communicate through the Construction Manager, and shall contemporaneously provide 1 the Architect. Communications by and with the Architect's consultants shall be through ~ Communications by and with Subcontractors and material suppliers shall be through the Communications by and with other Contractors shall be through the Construction Manal contemporaneously provided to the Architect. tl) will not have control ~ences or procedures, Contractor's chitect will have rs, or their agents or i the Contract tractor s e comet ~ 'ca ~ons to hitect. ~sthall be § 4.6.8 The Construction Manager will review and certify all Applications for Payment by the Contractor, including final payment. The Construction Manager will assemble each of the Contractor's Applications for Payment with similar Applications from other Contractors into a Project Application and Project Certificate for Payment. After- reviewing and certifying the amounts due the Contractors, the Construction Manager will submit the ct Application and Project Certificate for Payment, along with the applicable Contractors' Applica ' - and C ' }ca~e for Payment, to the Architect. ~~ ~~ ''~~~ § 4.8.9 Based on the Architect's observations and evaluations of Contractors' Applications foray certifications of the Construction Manager, the Architect will review and certify the amounts due and will issue a Project Certificate for Payment. § 4.6.10 The Architect will have authority to reject Work which does not conform to the Contract Documents, and to require additional inspection or testing, in accordance with Sections 13.5.2 and 13.5..3, whethe~u~h Work is fabricated, installed or completed, but will take such action only after notifying the Constructrion Manager~~ ubjegt~` to review by the Architect, the Construction Manager will have the authority to reject Wor ~wh~c~d s ot~o~orm to the Contract Documents. Whenever the Construction Manager considers it necessary or d~'{'~sable for ~° ~~'' implementation of the intent of the Contract Documents, the Construction Manager will ha , e auuthority to zeq ' e additional inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with Sections 13.5.2 and 13.5.3, wh ther or nobs su Work is fabricated, installed or completed. The foregoing authority of the Construction M g will be s~bj t to the provisions of Sections 4.6.18 through 4.6.20 inclusive, with respect to interpretations d cisions_oflthe Architect. However, neither the Architect's nor the Construction Manager's authority to act ~ der this Section 4.6.10 nor a decision made by either of them in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise suc au on s give e to a duty or responsibility of the Architect or the Construction Manager to the Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers, their agents or employees, or other persons performing any of the Work--- § 4.6.11 The Construction Manager will receive from the Contractor and review and approve~ll Sh~f~Drawings, Product Data and Samples, coordinate them with information received from other Contractc~rs,d transmit to the Architect those recommended for approval. The Construction Manager's actions will be en th such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work of the Contractor or in the activities of other on actors, the Owner, or the Architect. ~ § 4.6.12 The Architect will review and approve or take other appropriate action upon the C ' ntractor's submittals such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checkin -fv~ee$f information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The Architect's action will be taken AIA Document A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright (9 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AAfiNING: This AIA° Docimment is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AIA® Document, 23 or any portion o£ it, may result in severe civil and criminal panaltiea, and will be prosecuted to the m=~+m+^^ extent possible under the law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. Usar Notes: (356076270b) ~ ~ with such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work of the Contractor or in the activities of the other Contractors, the Owner, or the Construction Manager, while allowing sufficient time in the Architect's professional judgment to permit adequate review. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities, or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance of equipment or systems, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor as required by the Contract Documents. The Architect's review of the Contractor's submittals shall not relieve the Contractor of the obligations under Sections 3.3, 3.5 and 3.12. The Architect's review shall no constitute approval of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the Architect, of any cons cti n means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The Architect's approval of a specific item shall not ' dic to approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. § 4.6.13 The Construction Manager will prepare Change Orders and Construction Change ire . § 4.6.14 Following consultation with the Construction Manager, the Architect will take app op ate action on Change Orders or Construction Change Directives in accordance with Article 7 and will have authaetrity to order minor changes in the Work as provided in Section 7.4. § 4.8.15 The Construction Manager will maintain at the site for the Owner one record copy ' f Contracts, Drawings, Specifications, addenda, Change Orders and other Modifications, in good order d ked c e tly to record all changes and selections made during construction, and in addition approved Shop Dr wings, Pr du t Data, Samples and similar required submittals. These will be available to the Architect and the C n ctor, and be delivered to the Owner upon completion of the Project. § 4.6.16 The Construction Manager will assist the Architect in conducting inspections to de rmine~~dates=o.~~ Substantial Completion and final completion, and will receive and forward to the Architect written warranties and related documents required by the Contract and assembled by the Contractor. The Construction Manager will forward to the Architect a fmal Project Application and Project Certificate for Payment upon compliance with'' requirements of the Contract Documents. ~ ~ § 4.8.17 If the Owner and Architect agree, the Architect will provide one or more project carrying out the Architect's responsibilities at the site. The duties, responsibilities and lin such project representatives shall be as set forth in an exhibit to be incorporated in the G § 4.8.18 The Architect will interpret and decide matters concerning performance under and requirements of~~~ Contract Documents on written request of the Construction Manager, Owner or Contractor. The Architect's respon: to such requests will be made with reasonable promptness and within any time limits agreed upon. If no agreement is made concerning the time within which interpretations required of the Architect shall be fiunishod~r~ompliance with this Section 4.6, then delay shall not be recognized on account of failure by the Archite~o furnish such ~~ ~'~~ interpretations until 15 days after written request is made for them. ~ ~` ~ ~, ,(i § 4.6.19 Interpretations and decisions of the Architect will be consistent with the intent of from the Contract Documents and will be in writing or in the form of drawings. When ma and decisions, the Architect will endeavor to secure faithful performance by both Owner show partiality to either and will not be liable for results of interpretations or decisions so § 4.6.20 The Architect's decisions on matters relating to aesthetic effect will be final if expressed in the Contract Documents. § 4.7 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES ~~ _ § 4.7.1 Definition. A Claim is a demand or assertion by one of the parties seeking, as a matte~~ oof ,' t, adjustme t rt r interpretation of Contract terms, payment of money, extension of time or other relief vv~th r spe to the terms of the Contract. The term "Claim" also includes other disputes and matters in question between ~ O er and Contractor arising out of or relating to the Contract. Claims must be made by written notice. The respo i ility to substantiate Claims shall rest with the party making the Claim. § 4.7.2 Decision of Architect. Claims, including those alleging an error or omission by the onstruction Manager or Architect, shall be referred initially to the Architect for action as provided in Section 4.8. A~ Architect, as provided in Section 4.8.4, shall be required as a condition precedent to arbitration or litigation of a ALA Document A201/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document ie protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AIA® DoClanent, or any portion o£ it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 2~ law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980_1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) ~ ~ Claim between the Contractor and Owner as to all such matters arising prior to the date final payment is due, regardless of (1) whether such matters relate to execution and progress of the Work or (2) the extent to which the Work has been completed. The decision by the Architect in response to a Claim shall not be a condition precedent to azbitration or litigation in the event (1) the position of Architect is vacant, (2) the Architect has not received evidence or has failed to render a decision within agreed time limits, (3) the Architect has failed to take action required under Section 4.8.4 within 30 days after the Claim is made, (4) 45 days have passed after the Claim has been referred to the Architect or (5) the Claim relates to a mechanic's lien. § 4.7.3 Time Limits on Claims. Claims by either party must be made within 21 days after giving rise to such Claim or within 21 days after the claimant first recognizes the conditic whichever is later. Claims must be made by written notice. An additional Claim made aft been implemented by Change Order will not be considered unless submitted in a timely n § 4.7.4 Continuing Contract Performance. Pending final resolution of a Claim including at agreed in writing the Contractor shall proceed diligently with performance of the Contract continue to make payments in accordance with the Contract Documents. § 4.7.5 Waiver of Claims: Final Payment. The making of final payment shall constitute a v Owner except those arising from: .1 liens, Claims, security interests or encumbrances arising out of the Contract .2 failure of the Work to comply with the requirements of the Contract Docum .3 terms of special warranties required by the Contract Documents. rence of the event ng rise to the Claim,_ initial Claim has ion, unless otherwise he Owner shall r of Cla' b the wsettled; or § 4.7.6 Claims for Concealed or Unknown Conditions. If conditions are encountered at the ~si~whish=arm-1)~~s~ subsurface or otherwise concealed physical conditions which differ materially from those indicated in the Contract Documents or (2) unknown physical conditions of an unusual nature, which differ materially from those ordinarily found to exist and generally recognized as inherent in construction activities of the character provided for in th_e%-~`~ Contract Documents, then notice by the observing party shall be given to the other party promptly befo bnditio aze disturbed and in no event later than 21 days after first observance of the conditions. The Arc~l 'fit will ptl(~ investigate such conditions and, if they differ materially and cause an increase or decrease ' 'the C ctor's c~ st of, or time required for, performance of any part of the Work, will recommend an equitabl ad u~tm~nt m the Contract Sum or Contract Time, or both. If the Architect determines that the conditions at the aze no te~}ia different from those indicated in the Contract Documents and that no change in the terms of the Conte - ,is ~ustifiec~ the Architect shall so notify the Owner and Contractor in writing, stating the reasons. Claims by either party~~ opposition to such determination must be made within 21 days after the Architect has given notice of the decision. _~ the Owner and Contractor cannot agree on an adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, the adjustment shall be referred to the Architect for initial determination, subject to fiuther proceedings pursuant to Seetica~kz8. § 4.7.7 Claims for Additional Cost. If the Contractor wishes to make Claim for an increase written notice as provided herein shall be given before proceeding to execute the Work. P~ for Claims relating to an emergency endangering life or property arising under Section 10. believes additional cost is involved for reasons including but not limited to (1) a written in Architect, (2) an order by the Owner to stop the Work where the Contractor was not at fau minor change in the Work issued by the Architect, (4) failure of payment by the Owner, (_' Contract by the Owner, (6) Owner's suspension or (7) other reasonable grounds, Claim shy with the procedure established herein. § 4.7.8 Claims for Additional Time. § 4.7.8.1 If the Contractor wishes to make Claim for an increase in the Contract Time, herein shall be given. The Contractor's Claim shall include an estimate of cost and of progress of the Work. In the case of a continuing delay only one Claim is necessary. § 4.7.8.2 If adverse weather conditions are the basis for a Claim for additional time, such C by data substantiating that weather conditions were abnormal for the period of time and co reasonably anticipated, and that weather conditions had an adverse effect on the scheduled ~~ r otice is no rec~uir~' I~I'the Contra tor~`~ p~~'etation fro ~ b (3~ a written , rd for a 'on_o , th be filed in accordance .~~ ~~. t~noti~ as provided ~ le e~ect of delay on m shall be documented i of have been AIA Document A201/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA® Document is protested by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 2Jr law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) • § 4.7.9 Injury or Damage to Person or Property. If either party to the Contract suffers injury or damage to person or property because of an act or omission of the other party, of any of the other party's employees or agents, or of others for whose acts such party is legally liable, written notice of such injury or damage, whether or not insured, shall be given to the other party within a reasonable time not exceeding 21 days after first observance. The notice shall provide sufficient detail to enable the other party to investigate the matter. If a Claim for additional cost or time related to this Claim is to be asserted, it shall be filed as provided in Sections 4.7.7 or 4.7.8. § 4.8 RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS AND DISPUTES § 4.8.1 The Architect will review Claims and take one or more of the following preliminary act~;ons within ten days of receipt of a Claim: (1) request additional supporting data from the claimant, (2) submit ~ sc ~edule to the parties indicating when the Architect expects to take action, (3) reject the Claim in whole or in p stating reasons for rejection, (4) recommend approval of the Claim by the other party or (5) suggest a compro ~ - also, but is not obligated to, notify the surety, if any, of the nature and amount of the Claim § 4.8.2 If a Claim has been resolved, the Architect will prepaze or obtain appropriate § 4.8.3 If a Claim has not been resolved, the party making the Claim shall, within ten days~ er the Architect's preliminary response, take one or more of the following actions: (1) submit additional supp" g data re 'ues ed by the Architect, (2) modify the initial Claim or (3) notify the Architect that the initial Claim s~ s. ~ I § 4.8.4 If a Claim has not been resolved after consideration of the foregoing and of further e~wid~nce press ~ ted~~by the parties or requested by the Architect, the Architect will notify the parties in writing that thel Architect's d isi~n will be made within seven days, which decision shall be fmal and binding on the parties but sub~1'ect to~itrafion.` p expiration of such time period, the Architect will render to the parties the Architect's writteision>r-€lat~ve_~a-thy Claim, including any change in the Contract Sum or Contract Time or both. If there is a surety and there appeazs to be a possibility of a Contractor's default, the Architect may, but is not obligated to, notify the surety and request the surety's assistance in resolving the controversy. ~~~ § 4.9 ARBITRATION ~-~ § 4.9.1 Controversies and Claims Subject to Arbitration. Any controversy or Claim arising u't of o ated to e Contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by azbitration in accordance with the Const~ict~ dustry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award re~r~y bi at or arbitrators maybe entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof, except controversies or Claims ting to aesthetic effect and except those waived as provided for in Section 4.7.5. Such controversies or Claims upon 'c the Architect has given notice and rendered a decision as provided in Section 4.8.4 shall be subject to azbitration upon written demand of either party. Arbitration maybe commenced when 45 days have passed after a Claim has been referred to the Architect as provided in Section 4.7 and no decision has been rendered. ~-~~ § 4.9.2 Rules and Notices for Arbitration. Claims between the Owner and Contractor not shall, if subject to azbitration under Section 4.9.1, be decided by azbitration in accordance Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association currently in effect, un agree otherwise. Notice of demand for arbitration shall be filed in writing with the other p between the Owner and Contractor and with the American Arbitration Association, and a Construction Manager and Architect. § 4.9.3 Contract Performance During Arbitration. During azbitration proceedings, the comply with Section 4.7.4. § 4.9.4 When Arbitration May Be Demanded. Demand for azbitration of any Claim may not bi of (1) the date on which the Architect has rendered a final written decision on the Claim, (2) parties have presented evidence to the Architect or have been given reasonable opportunity o has not rendered a final written decision by that date, or (3) any of the five events describe in § 4.9.4.1 When a written decision of the Architect states that (1) the decision is final but a demand for azbitration of a Claim covered by such decision must be made within 30 d the party making the demand receives the fmal written decision, then failure to demand days' period shall result in the Architect's decision becoming final and binding upon the 4.8 ;parties ' u y the Agre me t call be fit d 'th the day after the so, if the Architect ction 4.7.2. ~ azbitration and (2) the date on which .n within said 30 AIA Doctsoent A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. RARNING: This AIA' Docwnent is psotected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 2 6 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) the Architect renders a decision after arbitration proceedings have been initiated, such decision maybe entered as evidence, but shall not supersede azbitration proceedings unless the decision is acceptable to all parties concerned. § 4.9.4.2 A demand for azbitration shall be made within the time limits specified in Sections 4.9.1 and 4.9.4 and Section 4.9.4.1 as applicable, and in other cases within a reasonable time after the Claim has arisen, and in no event shall it be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such Claim would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations as determined pursuant to Section 13.7. § 4.9.5 Limitation on Consolidation or Joinder. No azbitration arising out of or relating to t shall include, by consolidation or joinder or in any other manner, the Construction Manage Construction Manager's or Architect's employees or consultants, except by written consent reference to the Agreement and signed by the Construction Manager, Architect, Owner, Cc person or entity sought to be joined. No azbitration shall include, by consolidation or joind( parties other than the Owner, Contractor, other Contractors as described in Article 6 and of involved in a common question of fact or law whose presence is required if complete relief azbitration. No persons or entities other than the Owner, Contractor or other Contractors as shall be included as an original third party or additional third party to an arbitration whose is insubstantial. Consent to azbitration involving an additional person or entity shall not cos azbitration of a dispute not described therein or with a person or entity not named or descril foregoing agreement to azbitrate and other agreements to azbitrate with an additional person to by parties to the Agreement shall be specifically enforceable under applicable law in any thereof. Documents test, or the specific n any other manner, arsons substantially be accorded in ed in Section 3.1.2 st or responsibility having § 4.9.6 Claims and Timely Assertion of Claims. A party who files a notice of demand for a~hitration-must~ssur~in~ the demand all Claims then known to that party on which arbitration is permitted to be demanded. When a party fails to include a Claim through oversight, inadvertence or excusable neglect, or when a Claim has matured or been acquired subsequently, the arbitrator or azbitrators may permit amendment. _ § 4.9.7 Judgment on Final Award. The awazd rendered by the azbitrator or azbitrators shall be , an~ - nt maybe entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction ereof. ARTICLE 5 SUBCONTRACTORS , § 5.1 DEFINITIONS '` § 5.1.1 A Subcontractor is a person or entity who has a direct contract with the Contractor to perform a po 'on Work at the site. The term "Subcontractor" is referred to throughout the Contract Documents as if singulaz in number and means a Subcontractor or an authorized representative of the Subcontractor. The term "Subcontractor" does not include other Contractors or subcontractors of other Contractors. ~, § 5.1.2 ASub-subcontractor is a person or entity who has a direct or indirect contract with a~Sub~ntf perform a portion of the Work at the site. The term "Sub-subcontractor" is referred to throu~ o t the Documents as if singulaz in number and means aSub-subcontractor or an authorized repre~en five c subcontractor. ~ § 5.2 AWARD OF SUBCONTRACTS AND OTHER CONTRACTS FOR PORTIONS OF THE WOR~ § 5.2.1 Unless otherwise stated in the Contract Documents or the bidding requirements, the Contractor, as soon as practicable after awazd of the Contract, shall furnish in writing to the Construction Manager or review y e Owner, Construction Manager and Architect the names of persons or entities (including those who aze to furnish materials or equipment fabricated to a special design) proposed for each principal portion of the Wyk. Thee Construction Manager will promptly reply to the Contractor in writing stating whether or not t~a~wner Construction Manager or Architect, after due investigation, has reasonable objection to any such pFbp so ed p n entity. Failure of the Construction Manager to reply promptly shall constitute notice of no r~aso~Yable objection. § 5.2.2 The Contractor shall not contract with a proposed person or entity to whom the O ~er,~onstruction Manager or Architect has made reasonable and timely objection. The Contractor shall not be r quired to contract with anyone to whom the Contractor has made reasonable objection. § 5.2.3 If the Owner, Construction Manager or Architect has reasonable objection to a pers the Contractor, the Contractor shall propose another to whom the Owner, Construction Manager or Architect has no AIA Document A201/CMaa - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reaerv~l. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this ALA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to them +m eztent possible under the 27 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not £or resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) • reasonable objection. The Contract Sum shall be increased or decreased by the difference in cost occasioned by such change and an appropriate Change Order shall be issued. However, no increase in the Contract Sum shall be allowed for such change unless the Contractor has acted promptly and responsively in submitting names as required. § 5.2.4 The Contractor shall not change a Subcontractor, person or entity previously selected if the Owner, Construction Manager or Architect makes reasonable objection to such change. § 5.3 SUBCONTRACTUAL RELATIONS ~ § 5.3.1 By appropriate agreement, written where legally required for validity, the Contracto' s require each Subcontractor, to the extent of the Work to be performed by the Subcontractor, to be boon to the Contractor by terms of the Contract Documents, and to assume towazd the Contractor all the obligations ~ d responsibilities which the Contractor, by these Documents, assumes towazd the Owner, Construction Manager an~ ' subcontract agreement shall preserve and protect the rights of the Owner, Construction M g~~r and Architect under the Contract Documents with respect to the Work to be performed by the Subcontractor soat subcontracting thereof will not prejudice such rights, and shall allow to the Subcontractor, unless specific , y rovided otherwise in the subcontract agreement, the benefit of all rights, remedies and redress against the Contractor that the Contractor, by the Contract Documents, has against the Owner. Where appropriate, the Contractor shal re ' e each Subcontractor to enter into similar agreements with Sub-subcontractors. The Contractors ake avail ble o each proposed Subcontractor, prior to the execution of the subcontract agreement, copies of the on act Doc a its to which the Subcontractor will be bound, and, upon written request of the Subcontractor, ide ti to the Su co tractor terms and conditions of the proposed subcontract agreement which maybe at variance wit~the Contract oc' ents. Subcontractors shall similazly make copies of applicable portions of such documents avail le o their re ec 've proposed Sub-subcontractors. ~; - '- § 5.4 CONTINGENT ASSIGNMENT OF SUBCONTRACTS § 5.4.1 Each subcontract agreement for a portion of the Work is assigned by the Contractor to the Owner provided that: _~ .1 assignment is effective only after termination of the Contract by the Owner for cause Pgr~ Section 14.2 and only for those subcontract agreements which the Owner accepts~notif' Subcontractor in writing; and .2 assignment is subject to the prior rights of the surety, if any, obligated under bon ting to Contract. § 5.4.2 If the Work has been suspended for more than 30 days, the Subcontractor's compensation shall be adjusted. ARTICLE 6 CONSTRUCTION BY OWNER OR BY OTHER CONTRACTORS § 6.10WNER'S RIGHT TO PERFORM CONSTRUCTION WITH OWN FORCES AND TO AWARD O~IiER CONTF § 6.1.1 The Owner reserves the right to perform construction or operations related to the Pro~ect,;vf=ith eth 1 own forces, which include persons or entities under sepazate contracts not administered by a onstructi~ Manager. The Owner further reserves the right to awazd other contracts in connection with oth portions Project or other construction or operations on the site under Conditions of the Contract ide tic 1 or substa similaz to these including those portions related to insurance and waiver of subrogation. If ~ e ~ ontractor delay or additional cost is involved because of such action by the Owner, the Contractors ake~uch_ provided elsewhere in the Contract Documents. § 6.1.2 When the Owner performs construction or operations with the Owner's own forces including persons or entities under sepazate contracts not administered by the Construction Manager, the Owner shall pr-for coordination of such forces with the Work of the Contractor, who shall cooperate with them. ,,~ to that § 6.1.3 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, when the Owner performs co tn3ction or operations related to the Project with the Owner's own forces, the Owner shall be deemed to be subjec to a same obligations and to have the same rights which apply to the Contractor under the Conditions of the Con~act including, without excluding others, those stated in this Article 6 and in Articles 3, 10, 11 and 12. § 6.2 MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY ' § 6.2.1 The Contractor shall afford the Owner's own forces, Construction Manager and oth ars=reasen~ opportunity for introduction and storage of their materials and equipment and performance of their activities, and ALa. Document A201/C47a~ - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AL4® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the mAY+m++m extent possible under the 2 e law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) shall connect and coordinate the Contractor's construction and operations with theirs as required by the Contract Documents. § 6.2.2 If part of the Contractor's Work depends for proper execution or results upon construction or operations by the Owner's own forces or other Contractors, the Contractor shall, prior to proceeding with that portion of the Work, promptly report to the Construction Manager and Architect appazent discrepancies or defects in such other construction that would render it unsuitable for such proper execution and results. Failure - -Contractor so to report shall constitute an acknowledgment that the Owner's own forces or other Contracto ' co pleted or partially completed construction is fit and proper to receive the Contractor's Work, except as to defe is of then reasonably discoverable. § 6.2.3 Costs caused by delays or by improperly timed activities or defective construction responsible therefor. § 6.2.4 The Contractor shall promptly remedy damage wrongfully caused by the Contractor~t~ompleted construction or partially completed construction or to property of the Owner or other Contractors as provided in Section 10.2.5. § 6.2.5 Claims and other disputes and matters in question between the Contractor and o subject to the provisions of Section 4.7 provided the other Contractors have reciprocal § 6.2.6 The Owner and other Contractors shall have the same responsibilities for cuttint described for the Contractor in Section 3.14. § 6.3 OWNER'S RIGHT TO CLEAN UP § 6.3.1 If a dispute arises among the Contractor, other Contractors and the Owner as to the responsibility under their respective contracts for maintaining the premises and surrounding azea free from waste materials and rubbish as described in Section 3.15, the Owner may clean up and allocate the cost among those responsible as the Construction Manager, in consultation with the Architect, determines to be just. .~ ARTICLE 7 CHANGES IN THE WORK ~ { § 7.1 CHANGES _ § 7.1.1 Changes in the Work maybe accomplished after execution of the Contract, and wttho~ufii~vali~ e, Contract, by Change Order, Construction Change Directive or order for a minor change in the Work 'e,~ ct to limitations stated in this Article 7 and elsewhere in the Contract Documents. ""~~ § 7.1.2 A Change Order shall be based upon agreement among the Owner, Construction Manager, Architect and Contractor; a Construction Change Directive requires agreement by the Owner, Construction Managed Architect and may or may not be agreed to by the Contractor; an order for a minor change in the Wor ~inay be issue~by theme'' Architect alone. ~ p~'~, ~, § 7.1.3 Changes in the Work shall be performed under applicable provisions of the Contract Do~buments, Contractor shall proceed promptly, unless otherwise provided in the Change Order, Cons cti~n Change or order for a minor change in the Work § 7.1.4 If unit prices aze stated in the Contract Documents or subsequently agreed upon, an~if quantities originally contemplated are so changed in a proposed Change Order or Construction Change Directive t app ca ion o suc unit prices to quantities of Work proposed will cause substantial inequity to the Owner or Contractor, the applicable unit prices shall be equitably adjusted. § 7.2 CHANGE ORDERS § 7.2.1 A Change Order is a written instrument prepazed by the Construction Manager an Construction Manager, Architect and Contractor, stating their agreement upon all of the .1 a change in the Work; .2 the amount of the adjustment in the Contract Sum, if any; and .3 the extent of the adjustment in the Contract Time, if any. § 7.2.2 Methods used in determining adjustments to the Contract Sum may include those ALA Document A201/CMa - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maaimwn extent possible under the 2 9 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No. 1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) § 7.3 CONSTRUCTION CHANGE DIRECTIVES § 7.3.1 A Construction Change Directive is a written order prepazed by the Construction Manager and signed by the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect, directing a change in the Work and stating a proposed basis for adjustment, if any, in the Contract Sum or Contract Time, or both. The Owner may by Construction Change Directive, without invalidating the Contract, order changes in the Work within the general scope of the Contract consisting of additions, deletions or other revisions, the Contract Sum and Contract Time being adjusted accordingly. § 7.3.2 A Construction Change Directive shall be used in the absence of total agreement on Order. § 7.3.3 If the Construction Change Directive provides for an adjustment to the Contract 5~ based on one of the following methods: .1 mutual acceptance of a lump sum properly itemized and supported by suff permit evaluation; .2 unit prices stated in the Contract Documents or subsequently agreed upon; .3 cost to be determined in a manner agreed upon by the parties and a mutual percentage fee; or .4 as provided in Section 7.3.6. or § 7.3.4 Upon receipt of a Construction Change Directive, the Contractor shall promptly pro • ee with the o"`han~~e in the Work involved and advise the Construction Manager and Architect of the Contractor's gre went or ~ (~_ disagreement with the method, if any, provided in the Construction Change Directive ford tenmmng a proposes adjustment in the Contract Sum or Contract Time. ~~_~ § 7.3.5 A Construction Change Directive signed by the Contractor indicates the agreement of the Contractor therewith, including adjustment in Contract Sum and Contract Time or the method for determining them. Si agreement shall be effective immediately and shall be recorded as a Change Order. _~ § 7.3.8 If the Contractor does not respond promptly or disagrees with the method for adjus ~ ent in ontrac ~~ S the method and the adjustment shall be determined by the Construction Manager on the b is of aa~nable ~ expenditures and savings of those performing the Work attributable to the change, including tease o cr' as in the Contract Sum, a reasonable allowance for overhead and profit. In such case, and also under Sec ' ; 7.3.3.3, the Contractor shall keep and present, in such form as the Construction Manager may prescribe, an itemize ,, ~_ accounting together with appropriate supporting data. Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, costs for the purposes of this Section 7.3.6 shall be limited to the following: .1 costs of labor, including social security, old age and unemployment insurance, fx~ng~lien~fits required by agreement or custom, and workers compensation insurance; ~ `~. .2 costs of materials, supplies and equipment, including cost of transportation, hetlier uicoitpor~,t~ or consumed; ~ ~ 4~/ ~, .3 rental costs of machinery and equipment, exclusive of hand tools, whether r te' from the ~ one acts or others; ; ~ .4 costs of premiums for all bonds and insurance, permit fees, and sales, use or s' ' az taxes ~ la ~ d to the Work; and j .5 additional costs of supervision and field office personnel directly attributabl to the change. § 7.3.7 Pending final determination of cost to the Owner, amounts not in dispute maybe included in Applications for Payment. The amount of credit to be allowed by the Contractor to the Owner for a deletion or char, ge~rc re in a net decrease in the Contract Sum shall be actual net cost as confirmed by the Constructio~anager. _ en both additions and credits covering related Work or substitutions are involved in a change, the all~wan for overhead and profit shall be figured on the basis of net increase, if any, with respect to that change. § 7.3.8 If the Owner and Contractor do not agree with the adjustment in Contract Time ~ t}~ rq~ethod for determining it, the adjustment or the method shall be referred to the Construction Mans er or ~ etermina § 7.3.9 When the Owner and Contractor agree with the determination made by the Construction Manager concerning the adjustments in the Contract Sum and Contract Time, or otherwise reach agreement upo~~ '' ~~,~~p-,-~-~rl- AIA Dociment A201/CMa®1 - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. ALl rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA° Docwnent is protected by V.S. Copyright iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Docimment, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maxim~aa extent possible under the 30 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) agreement shall be effective immediately issued through the Construction Manager and shall be recorded by preparation and execution of an appropriate Change Order. § 7.4 MINOR CHANGES IN THE WORK § 7.4.1 The Architect will have authority to order minor changes in the Work not involving adjustment in the Contract Sum or extension of the Contract Time and not inconsistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. Such changes shall be effected by written order issued through the Construction Manager ~1 be binding on the Owner and Contractor. The Contractor shall carry out such written orders promptly. i ARTICLE 8 TIME § 8.1 DEFINITIONS § 8.1.1 Unless otherwise provided, Contract Time is the period of time, including the Contract Documents for Substantial Completion of the Work § 8.1.2 The date of commencement of the Work is the date established in the Agreement.T e d to shall not be postponed by the failure to act of the Contractor or of persons or entities for whom the Contractor is responsible. § 8.1.3 The date of Substantial Completion is the date certified by the Architect in § 8.1.4 The term "day" as used in the Contract Documents shall mean calendaz day defined. § 8.2 PROGRESS AND COMPLETION § 8.2.1 Time limits stated in the Contract Documents aze of the essence of the Cont the Contractor confirms that the Contract Time is a reasonable period for performing the Work § 8.2.2 The Contractor shall not knowingly, except by agreement or instruction of the Owner in writing, prema~i commence operations on the site or elsewhere prior to the effective date of insurance required by Artie be furnished by the Contractor. The date of commencement of the Work shall not be changed by th ective o such insurance. Unless the date of commencement is established by a notice to proceed giv n b er, th Contractor shall notify the Owner in writing not less than five days or other agreed period efor encing ~ e Work to permit the timely filing of mortgages, mechanic's liens and other security interests.~~ ~~~~ § 8.2.3 The Contractor shall proceed expeditiously with adequate forces and shall achieve Substantial within the Contract Time. § 8.3 DELAYS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME § 8.3.1 If the Contractor is delayed at any time in progress of the Work by an act or neglect o the Owner forces, Construction Manager, Architect, any of the other Contractors or an employee of ofthe~m~,_ o ordered in the Work, or by labor disputes, fire, unusual delay in deliveries, unavoidable cas es or oth beyond the Contractor's control, or by delay authorized by the Owner pending azbitration, r b' other cap the Architect, based on the recommendation of the Construction Manager, determines may ust~ delay, Contract Time shall be extended by Change Order for such reasonable time as the Architec my determ § 8.3.2 Claims relating to time shall be made in accordance with applicable provisions of S~ction 4.7 § 8.3.3 This Section 8.3 does not preclude recovery of damages for delay by either party under other provisions of the Contract Documents. ~-~ ARTICLE 9 PAYMENTS AND COMPLETION .,~~ =~-~3 § 9.1 CONTRACT SUM § 9.1.1 The Contract Sum is stated in the Agreement and, including authorized adjustments, ~s ~ e total amount payable by the Owner to the Contractor for performance of the Work under the Contract D ~~ c ents. § 9.2 SCHEDULE OF VALUES § 9.2.1 Before the first Application for Payment, the Contractor shall submit to the Archite ~ through the Construction Manager, a schedule of values allocated to various portions of the Work, pr €or~-anrt supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the Construction Manager and Architect may require. This AIA Document A201/CMag' - 1992. Copyright (D 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. NARKING: This ALA° Docuument is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AL4 Document, or any portion of it, may result in Severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 3~. law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) schedule, unless objected to by the Construction Manager or Architect, shall be used as a basis for reviewing the Contractor's Applications for Payment. § 9.3 APPLICATIONS FOR PAYMENT § 9.3.1 At least fifteen days before the date established for each progress payment, the Contractor shall submit to the Construction Manager an itemized Application for Payment for Work completed in accordance with the schedule of values. Such application shall be notarized, if required, and supported by such data substan a g the Contractor's right to payment as the Owner, Construction Manager or Architect may require, such as co ~ ies Hof requisitions from Subcontractors and material suppliers, and reflecting retainage if provided for elsewhere in athe , ontract Documents. § 9.3.1.1 Such applications may include requests for payment on account of changes in the ' ork which have been properly authorized by Construction Change Directives but not yet included in Change Or ers. - § 9.3.1.2 Such applications may not include requests for payment of amounts the Contractor dos not intend to pay to a Subcontractor or material supplier because of a dispute or other reason. § 9.3.2 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, payments shall be made on arcco t of materials and equipment delivered and suitably stored at the site for subsequent incorporation in the Wor I approved in vans by the Owner, payment may similarly be made for materials and equipment suitably stored off a site at to ~ ation agreed upon in writing. Payment for materials and equipment stored on or off the site shall a onditione up n compliance by the Contractor with procedures satisfactory to the Owner to establish the O e~ s title to s ch materials and equipment or otherwise protect the Owner's interest, and shall include applic ble insurance, sto age and transportation to the site for such materials and equipment stored off the site. § 9.3.3 The Contractor warrants that title to all Work covered by an Application for Payment will pass to the Owner no later than the time of payment. The Contractor further warrants that upon submittal of an Application for Payment all Work for which Certificates for Payment have been previously issued and payments received from~e" Owner shall, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief, be free and cleaz of liens amts, security interests or encumbrances in favor of the Contractor, Subcontractors, material suppliers other~ ~^r~s ~'ns ~ entities making a claim by reason of having provided labor, materials and equipment rela ' to the~~'lc. § 9.4 CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT § 9.4.1 The Construction Manager will assemble a Project Application for Payment by combining the tractor's applications with similar applications for progress payments from other Contractors and, after certifying the ~a~tn~unt due on such applications, forwazd them to the Architect within seven days. § 9.4.2 Within seven days after the Architect's receipt of the Project Application for Payment,tlie~a~~~,c Manager and Architect will either issue to the Owner a Project Certificate for Payment, with~a~ copy to the Contractor, for such amount as the Construction Manager and Architect determine is prop ~ y dire, or n2sti Contractor and Owner in writing of the Construction Manager's and Architect's reasons for holding c~ in whole or in part as provided in Section 9.5.1. Such notification will be forwazded to the on actor by x~ Construction Manager. ~ ', § 9.4.3 The issuance of a separate Certificate for Payment or a Project Certificate for Paym~ t ~illC.Onsti to representations made sepazately by the Construction Manager and Architect to the Owner, ased on their individual observations at the site and the data comprising the Application for Payment submitted by a on c or, -- - e Work has progressed to the point indicated and that, to the best of the Construction Manager's and Architect's knowledge, information and belief, quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Docum~~ foregoing representations are subject to an evaluation of the Work for conformance with the Coact Documents upon Substantial Completion, to results of subsequent tests and inspections, to minor deviati ns ft the Contract '° Documents correctable prior to completion and to specific qualifications expressed by the ons ction Manager or Architect. The issuance of a separate Certificate for Payment or a Project Certificate for Pa e t will further constitute a representation that the Contractor is entitled to payment in the amount certified H wever, the issuance of a sepazate Certificate for Payment or a Project Certificate for Payment will not be a rep se ~tation that the Construction Manager or Architect has (1) made exhaustive or continuous on-site inspecti t check the uality or quantity of the Work, (2) reviewed the Contractor's construction means, methods, techniqu s, sequences or procedures, (3) reviewed copies of requisitions received from Subcontractors and material - ALA Document A201/Ctda° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 32 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) requested by the Owner to substantiate the Contractor's right to payment or (4) made examination to ascertain how or for what purpose the Contractor has used money previously paid on account of the Contract Sum. § 9.5 DECISIONS TO WITHHOLD CERTIFICATION § 9.5.1 The Construction Manager or Architect may decide not to certify payment and may withhold a Certificate for Payment in whole or in part, to the extent reasonably necessary to protect the Owner, if in the Construction Manager's or Architect's opinion the representations to the Owner required by Section 9.4. c ~ of be made. If the Construction Manager or Architect is unable to certify payment in the amount of the Appli ati n, the Construction Manager or Architect will notify the Contractor and Owner as provided in Section 9.4.2. If the ; ontractor, Construction Manager and Architect cannot agree on a revised amount, the Construction ana' er and Architect will promptly issue a Certificate for Payment for the amount for which the Construction Manag rand Architect aze able to make such representations to the Owner. The Construction Manager or Architect may a o d '~ert~~ payment or, because of subsequently discovered evidence or subsequent observations, may nulfy the whole or a part of a Certificate for Payment previously issued, to such extent as maybe necessary in a nstruction Manager's or Architect's opinion to protect the Owner from loss because of: .1 defective Work not remedied; .2 third party claims filed or reasonable evidence indicating probable filing of uc 'claims; .3 failure of the Contractor to make payments properly to Subcontractors or fo r, materi o equipment; .4 reasonable evidence that the Work cannot be completed for the unpaid bal ' e f the Con act Sum; .5 damage to the Owner or another contractor; .6 reasonable evidence that the Work will not be completed within the Contrac T' e, and t unpaid balance would not be adequate to cover actual or liquidated damages for - e anhcipat a ay; or ___ _ .7 persistent failure to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. ~~ § 9.5.2 When the above reasons for withholding certification are removed, certification will be made for previously withheld. § 9.6 PROGRESS PAYMENTS § 9.6.1 After the Construction Manager and Architect have issued a Project Certificate for F make payment in the manner and within the time provided in the Contract Documents, and Construction Manager and Architect. § 9.6.2 The Contractor shall promptly pay each Subcontractor, upon receipt of payment from the Owner, out of the amount paid to the Contractor on account of such Subcontractor's portion of the Work, the amount to which said Subcontractor is entitled, reflecting percentages actually retained from payments to the Contracto~a~°ac~ount of such Subcontractor's portion of the Work. The Contractor shall, by appropriate agreement tli each Subco tractoz require each Subcontractor to make payments to Sub-subcontractors in similaz manner. ~~ ~ ,-~ § 9.6.3 The Construction Manager will, on request, furnish to a Subcontractor, if practicabl , ' ~ orm percentages of completion or amounts applied for by the Contractor and action taken there n b the Construction Manager and Architect on account of portions of the Work done by such Sub ~ on „ cte § 9.6.4 Neither the Owner, Construction Manager nor Architect shall have an obligation to ~ ay or to see to the payment of money to a Subcontractor except as may otherwise be required by law. § 9.6.5 Payment to material suppliers shall be treated in a manner similaz to that provided in 9.6.4. § 9.6.6 A Certificate for Payment, a progress payment, or partial or entire use or occupancy f Project by the Owner shall not constitute acceptance of Work not in accordance with the Contract Docum is § 9.7 FAILURE OF PAYMENT § 9.7.1 If, through no fault of the Contractor, 1) the Construction Manager and Architect do not issue a Project Certificate for Payment within fourteen days after the Construction Manager's receipt of th Contractor's Applic for Payment or 2) the Owner does not pay the Contractor within seven days after the date e Documents the amount certified by the Construction Manager and Architect or awarded by azbitration, then the ALA Document A201/CMa - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this ALA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 33 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) Contractor may, upon seven additional days' written notice to the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect, stop the Work until payment of the amount owing has been received. The Contract Time shall be extended appropriately and the Contract Sum shall be increased by the amount of the Contractor's reasonable costs of shut-down, delay and start-up, which shall be accomplished as provided in Article 7. § 9.8 SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION § 9.8.1 Substantial Completion is the stage in the progress of the Work when the Work or d si - ted portion thereof is sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract Documents so the Owner can occu y r utilize the Work for its intended use. § 9.8.2 When the Contractor considers that the Work, or a portion thereof which the Owner agrees to accept separately, is substantially complete, the Contractor and Construction Manager shall jointl pr the Architect a comprehensive list of items to be completed or corrected. The Contractors roceed promptly to complete and correct items on the list. Failure to include an item on such list does not alter a esponsibility of the Contractor to complete all Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. Upon receipb(of a list, the Architect, assisted by the Construction Manager, will make an inspection to determine whether the Work or designated portion thereof is substantially complete. If the Architect's inspection discloses any item, whether ar not included on the list, which is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall, before (iss ce of the Certificate of Substantial Completion, complete or correct such item upon notificatio~~ b~ the Arc tec The Contractor shall then submit a request for another inspection by the Architect, assisted by a (onstructio ~~ariager, to determine Substantial Completion. When the Work or designated portion thereof is subs f dally comp ete ~ th Architect will prepaze a Certificate of Substantial Completion which shall establish the da of ~ ubstanti Completion, shall establish responsibilities of the Owner and Contractor for security, maintenance, eat, utilities, damage to the Work and insurance, and shall fix the time within which the Contractor shall ~^~sh ~tl-it~~~_the-~ list accompanying the Certificate. Warranties required by the Contract Documents shall commence on the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion thereof unless otherwise provided in the Certificate of Substantial Completion. The Certificate of Substantial Completion shall be submitted to the Owner and Contra~'~~ for their written acceptance of responsibilities assigned to them in such Certificate. ~~~'' _; § 9.8.3 Upon Substantial Completion of the Work or designated portion thereof and upon a p `catio e Contractor and certification by the Construction Manager and Architect, the Owner shall ake`~~ en reflec'tm adjustment in retainage, if any, for such Work or portion thereof as provided in the Cont etc hoc i~ment~s. ~~~ '~ § 9.9 PARTIAL OCCUPANCY OR USE § 9.9.1 The Owner may occupy or use any completed or partially completed portion of the Work at any stage wh n such portion is designated by sepazate agreement with the Contractor, provided such occupancy or use is consented to by the insurer as required under Section 11.3.11 and authorized by public authorities havingaairisi~n over the Work. Such partial occupancy or use may commence whether or not the portion is substantially com lete,~rovided''= the Owner and Contractor have accepted in writing the responsibilities assigned to each of ~e or pay~enl ~;~°~ retainage if any, security, maintenance, heat, utilities, damage to the Work and insurance, d ve agreed in concerning the period for correction of the Work and commencement of warranties require b the Contr~ct ~'"~ Documents. When the Contractor considers a portion substantially complete, the Contracto at~d Construc io Manager shall jointly prepaze and submit a list to the Architect as provided under Section 9.8.~l Consent f ~' Contractor to partial occupancy or use shall not be unreasonably withheld. The stage of the pro's ess_ofth W~irlt = shall be determined by written agreement between the Owner and Contractor or, if no agre went is reached, by decision of the Architect after consultation with the Construction Manager. § 9.9.2 Immediately prior to such partial occupancy or use, the Owner, Construction Manager, Con~to~and~-~~ Architect shall jointly inspect the azea to be occupied or portion of the Work to be used in ord~~de~ e_and record the condition of the Work. ~- -~,n t~ § 9.9.3 Unless otherwise agreed upon, partial occupancy or use of a portion or portions of a ork shall not constitute acceptance of Work not complying with the requirements of the Contract Doc en .. § 9.10 FINAL COMPLETION AND FINAL PAYMENT § 9.10.1 Upon completion of the Work, the Contractor shall forwazd to the Construction M ger a written notice that the Work is ready for final inspection and acceptance and shall also forwazd to the Cons Contractor's Application for Payment. Upon receipt, the Construction Manager will forwazd the notice and AIA Doci~ent A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Vnauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 34 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) Application to the Architect who will promptly make such inspection. When the Architect, based on the recommendation of the Construction Manager, finds the Work acceptable under the Contract Documents and the Contract fully performed, the Construction Manager and Architect will promptly issue a final Certificate for Payment stating that to the best of their knowledge, information and belief, and on the basis of their observations and inspections, the Work has been completed in accordance with terms and conditions of the Contract Documents and that the entire balance found to be due the Contractor and noted in said final Certificate is due and payable. The Construction Manager's and Architect's final Certificate for Payment will constitute a fiuth r r resentation that conditions listed in Section 9.10.2 as precedent to the Contractor's being entitled to final pa, ~ t have been fulfilled. Iln § 9.10.2 Neither final payment nor any remaining retained percentage shall become due unt the Contractor submits to the Architect through the Construction Manager (1) an affidavit that payrolls, bills for mead and other indebtedness connected with the Work for which the Owner or the Owner's prop rty 'ght be responsible or encumbered (less amounts withheld by Owner) have been paid or other wise satisfied, () a ertificate evidencing that insurance required by the Contract Documents to remain in force after final payment i~ c ently in effect and will not be canceled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days' prior written notice has been given to the Owner, (3) a written statement that the Contractor knows of no substantial reason that the insurance n t be renewable to cover the period required by the Contract Documents, (4) consent of surety, if any, to final a ent and (5), 'f required by the Owner, other data establishing payment or satisfaction of obligations, such' r ceipts, re' ass and waivers of liens, claims, security interests or encumbrances arising out of the Contract, to e e ~ tent and i~ such form as maybe designated by the Owner. If a Subcontractor refuses to furnish a release or ai er required b~ the Owner, the Contractor may furnish a bond satisfactory to the Owner to indemnify the Own r a amst such lief If such lien remains unsatisfied after payments aze made, the Contractor shall refund to the O er money that e Owner maybe compelled to pay in discharging such lien, including all costs and reasonabl rn~ys'-fees § 9.10.3 If, after Substantial Completion of the Work, final completion thereof is materially delayed through no fault of the Contractor or by issuance of Change Orders affecting final completion, and the Construction Manager aid-'`' Architect so confirm, the Owner shall, upon application by the Contractor and certification by the Cons lion Manager and Architect, and without terminating the Contract, make payment of the balance due t po 0 the Work fully completed and accepted. If the remaining balance for Work not fully compl ed or c ect'~ed is ess~ than retainage stipulated in the Contract Documents, and if bonds have been furnished the ' t~ onsent off sure to payment of the balance due for that portion of the Work fully completed and accepted s~sub uby~'the Contractor to the Architect through the Construction Manager prior to certification of such payment. us~,paymen>^ shall be made under terms and conditions governing final payment, except that it shall not constitute a waiv~~\` Claims. The making of final payment shall constitute a waiver of Claims by the Owner as provided in Section 4.4.5. § 9.10.4 Acceptance of final payment by the Contractor, a Subcontractor or material supplier sho~st~tute a waiver of claims by that payee except those previously made in writing and identified by that'paye~ a~unsb~led a~~ the time of final Application for Payment. Such waivers shall be in addition to the waiver d~scribed in Secti .nl#.7.5. ARTICLE 10 PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ~ § 10.1 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND PROGRAMS 1 Ir § 10.1.1 The Contractor shall be responsible for initiating, maintaining and supervising all s e precautio' ' d programs in connection with the performance of the Contract. The Contractor shall submit a ontracto ~ sa eta program to the Construction Manager for review and coordination with the safety pro of other Contractors. § 10.1.2 In the event the Contractor encounters on the site material reasonably believed to be asbestos or polychlorinatedhiphenyl (PCB) which has not been rendered harmless, the Contractor shall immed~' : s opt-orl in the area affected and report the condition to the Owner, Construction Manager and Architeclvin wntm .She _ Work in the affected azea shall not thereafter be resumed except by written agreement of the wn and Contractor if in fact the material is asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) and has not been rende ~ed ~ ess. The Work in the affected azea shall be resumed in the absence of asbestos or polychlorinated bipheny (P B), or when it has been rendered harmless, by written agreement of the Owner and Contractor, or in accordan a 'th final determination by the Architect on which azbitration has not been demanded, or by azbitrati n der Article 4. § 10.1.3 The Contractor shall not be required pursuant to Article 7 to perform without cons `ant any Work relating to asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). - - AIA Document A201/CMa°t - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: Thie AIA Doctment is protected by U.3. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 35 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) § 10.1.4 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the Contractor, Construction Manager, Architect, their consultants, and agents and employees of any of them from and against claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from performance of the Work in the affected azea if in fact the material is asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) and has not been rendered harmless, provided that such claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property (other than the Work itself) including loss of use resulting therefrom, but only to the extent caused in whole or in pazt y n gligent acts or omissions of the Owner, anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Owner or anyone fo'r w ose acts the Owner maybe liable, regazdless of whether or not such claim, damage, loss or expense is caused ' ~ p by a party indemnified hereunder. Such obligation shall not be construed to negate, abridge or reduce oth r rights or obligations of indemnity which would otherwise exist as to a party or person described in , 's Section 10.1.4. § 10.1.5 If reasonable precautions will be inadequate to prevent foreseeable bodily injury oz~ de to persons resulting from a material or substance encountered on the site by the Contractor the Contr cto shall upon recognizing the condition, immediately stop Work in the affected azea and report the condi 'onlto the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect in writing. The Owner, Contractor, Construction Manager and Architect shall then proceed in the same manner described in Section 10.1.2. ~Il § 10.1.6 The Owner shall be responsible for obtaining the services of a licensed laboratory o verify a pre enc or absence of the material or substance reported by the Contractor and, in the event such mate 'al ~ r substan e i found to be present, to verify that it has been rendered harmless. Unless otherwise required by the Co tract Doc a ts, the Owner shall furnish in writing to the Contractor, Construction Manager and Architect the n~am and q ~~ fictions of persons or entities who aze to perform tests verifying the presence or absence of such m ~~teri oal~ r- sn'~stance or who are to perform the task of removal or safe containment of such material or substance. ~Csntractor, +~~ a Construction Manager and the Architect will promptly reply to the Owner in writing stating whether or not any of them has reasonable objection to the persons or entities proposed by the Owner. If the Contractor, Construction Manager or Architect has an objection to a person or entity proposed by the Owner, the Owner shall propos ~anotkei to whom the Contractor, the Construction Manager and the Architect have no reasonable objection. ~,~ § 10.2 SAFETY OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ~~ § 10.2.1 The Contractor shall take reasonable precautions for safety of, and shall provide re / o -" p~ ction prevent damage, injury or loss to: ~`\ .1 employees on the Work and other persons who maybe affected thereby; ~ ` .2 the Work and materials and equipment to be incorporated therein, whether in storage on or o~~ site, under Gaze, custody or control of the Contractor or the Contractor's Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors; .3 other property at the site or adjacent thereto, such as trees, shrubs, lawns, walks,,~avemenls, roadways, structures and utilities not designated for removal, relocation or r 1acement in tl c~ of construction; and ~' .4 construction or operations by the Owner or other Contractors. § 10.2.2 The Contractor shall give notices and comply with applicable laws, ordinances, rul s, regulations ~ dflawfi orders of public authorities bearing on safety of persons or property or their protection fro damage, inj ~ o loss. § 10.2.3 The Contractor shall erect and maintain, as required by existing conditions and pe ormance of the Contract, reasonable safeguards for safety and protection, including posting danger signs and other warnings agams azaz , promulgating safety regulations and notifying owners and users of adjacent sites and utilities. § 10.2.4 When use for storage of explosives or other hazardous materials or equipment or unusual methods_,_aze~ necessary for execution of the Work, the Contractor shall exercise utmost care and carry on Mich a~es under supervision of properly qualified personnel. ~ ~~ § 10.2.5 The Contractor shall promptly remedy damage and loss (other than damage or loss ~ms ed under property insurance required by the Contract Documents) to property referred to in Sections 10.2.1.2, 10..1.3 and 10.2.1.4 caused in whole or in part by the Contractor, aSubcontractor, aSub-subcontractor, or any a ~' ectly or indirectly employed by any of them, or by anyone for whose acts they maybe liable and for which th Contractor is responsible under Sections 10.2.1.2, 10.2.1.3 and 10.2.1.4, except damage or loss attribute ~ the Owner, Construction Manager or Architect or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or by AIA Doaument A201/CMa°' - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.B. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 3 6 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) • anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, and not attributable to the fault or negligence of the Contractor. The foregoing obligations of the Contractor aze in addition to the Contractor's obligations under Section 3.18. § 10.2.6 The Contractor shall designate a responsible member of the Contractor's organization at the site whose duty shall be the prevention of accidents. This person shall be the Contractor's superintendent unless otherwise designated by the Contractor in writing to the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect. § 10.2.7 The Contractor shall not load or permit any part of the construction or site to be to ded so as to endanger its safety. § 10.3 EMERGENCIES "- -- -- § 10.3.1 In an emergency affecting safety or persons or property, the Contractor shall act, at the ~ discretion, to prevent threatened damage, injury or loss. Additional compensation or extens on (f time claimed by the Contractor on account of an emergency shall be determined as provided in Section 4.7 ~nd ~ 'cle 7. ARTICLE 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS ~"~ § 11.1 CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY INSURANCE - _ § 11.1.1 The Contractor shall purchase from and maintain in a company or companies la y uthorized~to ~ business in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located such insurance as will protect th Co tractor fr~m set forth below which may arise out of or result from the Contractor's operations under the o act and r the Contractor maybe legally liable, whether such operations be by the Contractor or by a ub ontractor ~ r b anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or by anyone for whose acts any o (the ~ maybe ~'ab),H .1 claims under workers compensation, disability benefit and other similaz employee ens t acts aze applicable to the Work to be performed; .2 claims for damages because of bodily injury, occupational sickness or disease, or death of the Contractor's employees; .3 claims for damages because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, or death of any person other t the Contractor's employees; ~~'f .4 claims for damages insured by usual personal injury liability coverage which aze " ed~ person as a result of an offense directly or indirectly related to employment ~ such on by t Contractor, or (2) by another person; .5 claims for damages, other than to the Work itself, because of injury to or des ' n of t~xa` gib property, including loss of use resulting therefrom; `~ <~_ .6 claims for damages because of bodily injury, death of a person or property damage arising ouf~ ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle; and .7 claims involving contractual liability insurance applicable to the Contractor's obligations under Section 3.18. § 11.1.2 The insurance required by Section 11.1.1 shall be written for not less than limits of g'ab' ty spec~,fie~' Contract Documents or required by law, whichever coverage is greater. Coverages, wheth written on an, R,, occurrence or claims-made basis, shall be maintained without interruption from date of co ^a~ cement o~the until date of final payment and termination of any coverage required to be maintained after ~1 payment,; § 11.1.3 Certificates of insurance acceptable to the Owner shall be submitted to the Constru { tio~~l\~+~ag~~or transmittal to the Owner with a copy to the Architect prior to commencement of the Work. ese certificates and the insurance policies required by this Section 11.1 shall contain a provision that coverages a ore un er a po ties will not be canceled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days' prior written notice has been given to the Owner. If any of the foregoing insurance coverages aze required to remain in force after final payment and ~ oria lye--~ available, an additional certificate evidencing continuation of such coverage shall be submitte~~nth the fma Application for Payment as required by Section 9.10.2. Information concerning reduction of,~ove~ge shall be furnished by the Contractor with reasonable promptness in accordance with the Contractor' mfs~imation and belief. § 11.2 OWNER'S LIABILITY INSURANCE § 11.2.1 The Owner shall be responsible for purchasing and maintaining the Owner's usual ab'~'ty insurance. Oprionally, the Owner may purchase and maintain other insurance for self-protection ag ' t c awns which may arise from operations under the Contract. The Contractor shall not be responsible for port ing and maintaining this optional Owner's liability insurance unless specifically required by the Contract Doc AIA Document A201/CMa®- 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this A7A Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the m=v+m++.• extent possible under the 3'~ law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) § 11.3 PROPERTY INSURANCE § 11.3.1 Unless otherwise provided, the Owner shall purchase and maintain, in a company or companies lawfully authorized to do business in the jurisdiction in which the Project is located, properly insurance in the amount of the initial Contract Sum as well as subsequent modifications thereto for the entire Work at the site on a replacement cost basis without voluntary deductibles. Such property insurance shall be maintained, unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents or otherwise agreed in writing by all persons and entities who are beneficiaries of such insurance, until final payment has been made as provided in Section 9.10 or until no perso or tity other than the Owner has an insurable interest in the property required by this Section 11.3 to be covered, w chewer is eazlier. This insurance shall include interests of the Owner, the Contractor, Subcontractors and Su rsu contractors in the Work. ~ i § 11.3.1.1 Property insurance shall be on an "all-risk" policy form and shall insure against tl~e p extended coverage and physical loss or damage including, without duplication of coverage,Il the vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse, faLsework, temporary buildings and debris removal including a olition occasioned by enforcement of any applicable legal requirements, and shall cover reasonable compensa 'onl~or Architect's services and expenses required as a result of such insured loss. Coverage for other perils shall not be required unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents. I~i! § 11.3.1.2 If the Owner does not intend to purchase such property insurance required by the ~Co tract and 'th~{all of the coverages in the amount described above, the Owner shall so inform the Contractor in i ' ' g prior j commencement of the Work. The Contractor may then effect insurance which will protect e ' terests o the Contractor, Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors in the Work, and by appropriate Chang der the co t th reof shall be chazged to the Owner. If the Contractor is damaged by the failure or neglect of the Owner to p- urchase or maintain insurance as described above, without so notifying the Contractor, then the Owne ~ sable costs properly attributable thereto. § 11.3.1.3 If the property insurance requires minimum deductibles and such deductibles are identified in the ~t Documents, the Contractor shall pay costs not covered because of such deductibles. If the Owner or i increases the required minimum deductibles above the amounts so identified or if the Owner ele o purc f insurance with voluntary deductible amounts, the Owner shall be responsible for payment the ad ' 'o covered because of such increased or voluntary deductibles. ~~, ~___ ~ ~~~ § 11.3.1.4 Unless otherwise provided in the Contract Documents, this property insurance shall cover por~ons o~ tl Work stored off the site after written approval of the Owner at the value established in the approval, and also~g portions of the Work in transit. § 11.3.1.5 The insurance required by this Section 11.3 is not intended to cover machinery, tools-eq~p~ent owned or rented by the Contractor which aze utilized in the performance of the Work but not incorp rated into they. ry- permanent improvements. The Contractor shall, at the Contractor's own expense, provide ' ~ c~ o~ ag~f~~ owned or rented machinery, tools or equipment which shall be subject to the provisions ofec ion 11.3.7; t~ ~-~~` § 11.3.2 Boiler and Machinery Insurance. The Owner shall purchase and maintain boiler ~d chinery ' ~ ur ~j ce required by the Contract Documents or by law, which shall specifically cover such insured ~obj cts during installation and until final acceptance by the Owner; this insurance shall include interests o th Owe C ~ nstiuct Manager, Contractor, Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors in the Work, and the Owner d Contractor shall be named insureds. § 11.3.3 Loss of Use Insurance. The Owner, at the Owner's option, may purchase and maintain will insure the Owner against loss of use of the Owner's property due to fire or other hazadds, Owner waives all rights of action against the Contractor for loss of use of the Owner's property, consequential losses due to fire or other hazards however caused. ,i _ § 11.3.4 If the Contractor requests in writing that insurance for risks other than those descri ed erein or for other special hazards be included in the property insurance policy, the Owner shall, if possible, ' clu a such insurance, and the cost thereof shall be charged to the Contractor by appropriate Change Order. § 11.3.5 If during the Project construction period the Owner insures properties, real or pers~- , adjacent to the site by property insurance under policies separate from those insuring the Project, or if after final AIA Document A201/CMa~ - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. NARKING: This AIA° Document ie protected by U.3. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 38 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) payment property insurance is to be provided on the completed Project through a policy or policies other than those insuring the Project during the construction period, the Owner shall waive all rights in accordance with the terms of Section 11.3.7 for damages caused by fire or other perils covered by this separate property insurance. All separate policies shall provide this waiver of subrogation by endorsement or otherwise. § 11.3.6 Before an exposure to loss may occur, the Owner shall file with the Contractor a copy of each policy that includes insurance coverages required by this Section 11.3. Each policy shall contain all g er lly applicable conditions, definitions, exclusions and endorsements related to this Project. Each policy sh c ntain a provision that the policy will not be canceled or allowed to expire until at least 30 days' prior written oti a has been given to the Contractor. I § 11.3.7 Waivers of Subrogation. The Owner and Contractor waive all rights against each nth ' Construction Manager, Architect, Owner's other Contractors and own forces described in ~ 'c a 6, if any, and the subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, consultants, agents and employees of any of them, for ges caused by fire or other perils to the extent covered by property insurance obtained pursuant to this Section 1;1.3 ~ r other property insurance applicable to the Work, except such rights as the Owner and Contractor may have to the proceeds of such insurance held by the Owner as fiduciary. The Owner or Contractor, as appropriate, shall r qu a of the Construction Manager, Construction Manager's consultants, Architect, Architect's consultants, Owner's sep ate contr ' t ~ described in Article 6, if any, and the subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents and emplo ee of any o~the , by appropriate agreements, written where legally required for validity, similaz waivers each ' fav r of other p 'es enumerated herein. The policies shall provide such waivers of subrogation by endorsement nor therwise. II'g'iver of subrogation shall be effective as to a person or entity even though that person or entity i~oul otherwis ha!~e a duty of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, did not pay the insurance premium directly or m ec y, an whether or not the person or entity had an insurable interest in the property damaged. ~~II ___i~_ § 11.3.8 A loss insured under Owner's property insurance shall be adjusted by the Owner as fiduciary and made payable to the Owner as fiduciary for the insureds, as their interests may appeaz, subject to requirements of an ~ applicable mortgagee clause and of Section 11.3.10. The Contractor shall pay Subcontractors their just es of insurance proceeds received by the Contractor, and by appropriate agreements, written where le requlr - or validity, shall require Subcontractors to make payments to their Sub-subcontractors in simi~ ~ er.'~ § 11.3.9 If required in writing by a party in interest, the Owner as fiduciary shall, upon occurre of an e ~ lc give bond for proper performance of the Owner's duties. The cost of required bonds shall be chazge t proceeds received as fiduciary. The Owner shall deposit in a separate account proceeds so received, which t~~, Owner shall distribute in accordance with such agreement as the parties in interest may reach, or in accordance w an arbitration awazd in which case the procedure shall be as provided in Section 4.9. If after such loss no other special agreement is made, replacement of damaged property shall be covered by appropriate C1~a~e--Qrder. § 11.3.10 The Owner as fiduciary shall have power to adjust and settle a loss with insurers ' es % of~1 interest shall object in writing within five days after occurrence of loss to the Owner's exer ise Hof this po objection be made, arbitrators shall be chosen as provided in Section 4.9. The Owner as fid ci shall, i make settlement with insurers in accordance with directions of such arbitrators. If distribuon f insuran by azbitration is required, the azbitrators will direct such distribution. § 11.3.11 Partial occupancy or use in accordance with Section 9.9 shall not commence until the insurance company or companies providing property insurance have consented to such partial occupancy or use yen orsemen~ or otherwise. The Owner and the Contractor shall take reasonable steps to obtain consent of the insurance company or companies and shall, without mutual written consent, take no action with respect to partial occup~ se ~#~ would cause cancellation, lapse or reduction of insurance. ~' __ § 11.4 PERFORMANCE BOND AND PAYMENT BOND ' § 11.4.1 The Owner shall have the right to require the Contractor to fiunish bonds covering ai 1 performance of the Contract and payment of obligations arising thereunder as stipulated in bidding requir en or specifically required in the Contract Documents on the date of execution of the Contract. § 11.4.2 Upon the request of any person or entity appearing to be a potential beneficiary of ~onds covering payment of obligations arising under the Contract, the Contractor shall promptly fiunish a copy of th , copy to be made. ALA Document A201/CMa" - 1992. Copyright 6 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Law and International Treatise. Vnauthorized reproduction or distribution o£ this ALA® Docimment, or any portion o£ it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the +~==+m+~ extent possible under the 39 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Usar Notes: (3560762705) • ARTICLE 12 UNCOVERING AND CORRECTION OF WORK § 12.1 UNCOVERING OF WORK . § 12.1.1 If a portion of the Work is covered contrary to the Construction Manager's or Architect's request or to requirements specifically expressed in the Contract Documents, it must, if required in writing by either, be uncovered for their observation and be replaced at the Contractor's expense without change in the Contract Time. § 12.1.2 If a portion of the Work has been covered which the Construction Manager or Arc 'tec~ has not specifically requested to observe prior to its being covered, the Construction Manager or Architect may req~est to see such Work and it shall be uncovered by the Contractor. If such Work is in accordance with the Contra t D currents, costs of uncovering and replacement shall, by appropriate Change Order, be chazged to the Owner. such Work is not in accordance with the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall pay such costs unless the co ~ di ' e_ Owner or one of the other Contractors in which event the Owner shall be responsible for pi~ym nt of such costs. § 12.2 CORRECTION OF WORK § 12.2.1 The Contractor shall promptly correct Work rejected by the Construction Manager or Architect or failing to conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents, whether observed before or after u tantial Com letion and whether or not fabricated, installed or completed. The Contractor shall beaz costs of co e~ing such r' jec d Work, including additional testing and inspections and compensation for the Construction ger's and~Arc~utect', services and expenses made necessary thereby. O ~ ( I~ § 12.2.2 If, within one year after the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or designs ed ortion th eo or after the date for commencement of warranties established under Section 9.9.1, or by terms of an app ca le specs warranty required by the Contract Documents, any of the Work is found to be not in accor ~with~he requirements of the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall correct it promptly after receipt of written notice from the Owner to do so unless the Owner has previously given the Contractor a written acceptance of such condition. This period of one yeaz shall be extended with respect to portions of Work first performed after Substantial ~'~ Completion by the period of time between Substantial Completion and the actual performance of the~'s obligation under this Section 12.2.2 shall survive acceptance of the Work under the Contract an th~~ Contract. The Owner shall give such notice promptly after discovery of the condition ~ ~ ~ j, § 12.2.3 The Contractor shall remove from the site portions of the Work which aze not in acco requirements of the Contract Documents and aze neither corrected by the Contractor nor accepted § 12.2.4 If the Contractor fails to correct nonconforming Work within a reasonable time, the Owner may correct it~in~~ accordance with Section 2.4. If the Contractor does not proceed with correction of such nonconforming Work within a reasonable time fixed by written notice from the Architect issued through the Construction Mere Owner may remove it and store the salvable materials or equipment at the Contractor's expense. If tke Contractor does nq~' pay costs of such removal and storage within ten days after written notice, the Owner may po ,~ a ' 'o ~ ys' written notice sell such materials and equipment at auction or at private sale and shall accor, nt or the prop ee ~ ~~` thereof, after deducting costs and damages that should have been borne by the Contractor,~cl ding com ens on for the Construction Manager's and Architect's services and expenses made necessary they y. f such pro ee of sale do not cover costs which the Contractor should have borne, the Contract Sum shall be ed ced by the deficiency. If payments then or thereafter due the Contractor aze not sufficient to cover suc sun the_ i, on cxo~ shall pay the difference to the Owner. § 12.2.5 The Contractor shall beaz the cost of correcting destroyed or damaged construction, whether completed or partially completed, of the Owner or other Contractors caused by the Contractor's correction or remol'=War1~ which is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 12.2.6 Nothing contained in this Section 12.2 shall be construed to establish a period of lin~ita 'on with respect to other obligations which the Contractor might have under the Contract Documents. Establise t of the time period of one yeaz as described in Section 12.2.2 relates only to the specific obligation of the Con ct r to correct the Work, and has no relationship to the time within which the obligation to comply with the on ~ ct Documents may be sought to be enforced, nor to the time within which proceedings maybe commenced to sta lish the Contractor's liability with respect to the Contractor's obligations other than specifically to correct the W rk. ASA Doctmient A201/CMa"~ - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.3. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maaimum extent possible under the 40 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:42 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261980 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) • § 12.3 ACCEPTANCE OF NONCONFORMING WORK § 12.3.1 If the Owner prefers to accept Work which is not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Owner may do so instead of requiring its removal and correction, in which case the Contract Sum will be reduced as appropriate and equitable. Such adjustment shall be effected whether or not final payment has been made. ARTICLE 13 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS § 13.1 GOVERNING LAW § 13.1.1 The Contract shall be governed by the law of the place where the Project is § 13.2 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS § 13.2.1 The Owner and Contractor respectively bind themselves, their partners, successors representatives to the other party hereto and to partners, successors, assigns and legal repre party in respect to covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the Contract Docum Contract shall assign the Contract as a whole without written consent of the other. If either such an assignment without such consent, that party shall nevertheless remain legally respc under the Contract. § 13.3 WRITTEN NOTICE § 13.3.1 Written notice shall be deemed to have been duly served if delivered in person of the firm or entity or to an officer of the corporation for which it was intended, or if registered or certified mail to the last business address known to the party giving notic fives of such other Neither party to the attempts to make e for all obligations § 13.4 RIGHTS AND REMEDIES § 13.4.1 Duties and obligations imposed by the Contract Documents and rights and remedies available thereunder shall be in addition to and not a limitation of duties, obligations, rights and remedies otherwise imposed or available by law. ~: § 13.4.2 No action or failure to act by the Owner, Construction Manager, Architect or Cont waiver of a right or duty afforded them under the Contract, nor shall such action or failure of or acquiescence in a breach thereunder, except as maybe specifically agreed in writing. § 13.5 TESTS AND INSPECTIONS ~~ ~`°'~ § 13.5.1 Tests, inspections and approvals of portions of the Work required by the Contract Documents or by a~ua,~ ordinances, rules, regulations or orders of public authorities having jurisdiction shall be made at an appropriate time Unless otherwise provided, the Contractor shall make arrangements for such tests, inspections and approvals with an independent testing laboratory or entity acceptable to the Owner, or with the appropriate public nom, and shall beaz all related costs of tests, inspections and approvals. The Contractor shall give the Cons ction Manager and ~'` Architect timely notice of when and where tests and inspections aze to be made so the Cons c 'on Mar1~1 ~ a~rd~ Architect may observe such procedures. The Owner shall beaz costs of tests, inspections or app ovals wlu h ~ o n~t'~` become requirements until after bids aze received or negotiations concluded. ~ ~~' § 13.5.2 If the Construction Manager, Architect, Owner or public authorities having jurisdiotiox~ determine~~tha portions of the Work require additional testing, inspection or approval not included under (ectlonl3_.5_L,~he Construction Manager and Architect will, upon written authorization from the Owner, ins ct the Contractor to make arrangements for such additional testing, inspection or approval by an entity acceptali e o e caner-an Contractor shall give timely notice to the Construction Manager and Architect of when and where tests and inspections aze to be made so the Construction Manager and Architect may observe such procedure . -he-~~v~e shall beaz such costs except as provided in Section 13.5.3. ~~ § 13.5.3 If such procedures for testing, inspection or approval under Sections 13.5.1 and 13. ~(2 r veal failure of the portions of the Work to comply with requirements established by the Contract Documents, a ontractor shall bear all costs made necessary by such failure including those of repeated procedures and comps a on for the Construction Manager's and Architect's services and expenses. § 13.5.4 Required certificates of testing, inspection or approval shall, unless otherwise Documents, be secured by the Contractor and promptly delivered to the Construction Architect. ALA Document A201/CMa° - 1992. Copyright O 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document ie protected by U.3. Copyright Law and lnternational Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this ALA® Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the 41 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - User Notes: (3560762705) § 13.5.5 If the Construction Manager or Architect is to observe tests, inspections or approvals required by the Contract Documents, the Construction Manager or Architect will do so promptly and, where practicable, at the normal place of testing. § 13.5.6 Tests or inspections conducted pursuant to the Contract Documents shall be made promptly to avoid unreasonable delay in the Work. § 13.6 INTEREST § 13.6.1 Payments due and unpaid under the Contract Documents shall bear interest from ~ d~_~ayment is due at such rate as the parties may agree upon in writing or, in the absence thereof, at the legal rat prevailing from time to time at the place where the Project is located. - § 13.7 COMMENCEMENT OF STATUTORY LIMITATION PERIOD ~ § 13.7.1 As between the Owner and Contractor: .1 Before Substantial Completion. As to acts or failures to act occurring prior to the relevant date of Substantial Completion, any applicable statute of limitations shall comment tom and an,yy_alleged cause of action shall be deemed to have accrued in any and all events not let r such ddte ~f Substantial Completion; .2 Between Substantial Completion and Final Certificate for Payment. As to cts r failures to t occurring subsequent to the relevant date of Substantial Completion and pri r to issuance f the final Certificate for Payment, any applicable statute of limitations shall comment to -un and any a~~~eged cause of action shall be deemed to have accrued in any and all events not lath than~t elate of~ issuance of the final Certificate for Payment; and .3 After Final Certificate for Payment. As to acts or failures to act occurring after the relevant date of issuance of the final Certificate for Payment, any applicable statute of limitations shall commence to run and any alleged cause of action shall be deemed to have accrued in any and all events no~te;~'` than the date of any act or failure to act by the Contractor pursuant to any warranty provi rider Section 3.5, the date of any correction of the Work or failure to correct the Work a Con ~or under Section 12.2, or the date of actual commission of any other act or fail t "p~.c~m~any d~utyio obligation by the Contractor or Owner, whichever occurs last. ~-,~ _ i ii ARTICLE 14 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF THE CONTRACT ~~, lam' ~, § 14.1 TERMINATION BY THE CONTRACTOR _~ § 14.1.1 The Contract may terminate the Contract if the Work is stopped for a period of 30 days through no act or fault of the Contractor or a Subcontractor, Sub-subcontractor or their agents or employees or any other persons performing portions of the Work under contract with the Contractor, for any of the following reasoas~- .1 issuance of an order of a court or other public authority having jurisdicfion; ~~ .y .2 an act of government, such as a declaration of national emergency, making al unav it b~ e;~1 ~~// ~ ~ / .3 because the Construction Manager or Architect has not issued a Certificate for P~,ayment an h~ ng~ notified the Contractor of the reason for withholding certification as provide in Section 9. ~, .2, because the Owner has not made payment on a Certificate for Payment wi a time state d ' the Contract Documents; ~ ~ .4 if repeated suspensions, delays or interruptions by the Owner as described ' Se do _ onstitute_ in the aggregate more than 100 percent of the total number of days schedule for completion, or 120 days in any 365-day period, whichever is less; or .5 the Owner has failed to fiunish to the Contractor promptly, upon the Contractor's request, reasonable evidence as required by Section 2.2.1. § 14.1.2 If one of the above reasons exists, the Contractor may, upon seven additional days' v~(itte„ otice to th-e Owner, Construction Manager and Architect, terminate the Contract and recover from the ~ payment for Work executed and for proven loss with respect to materials, equipment, tools, and construction e~qui merit and machinery, including reasonable overhead, profit and damages. ~ ~ § 14.1.3 If the Work is stopped for a period of 60 days through no act or fault of the Contractor ~Or a Subcontractor or their agents or employees or any other persons performing portions of the Work under con ct with the Contractor because the Owner has persistently failed to fulfill the Owner's obligations under the Contr . ~ icii respect to matters important to the progress of the Work, the Contractor may, upon seven additional days' written ALA Docimtent A201/CMa°' - 1992. Copyright m 1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. AARNING: This ALA° Document ie protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Docwvent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the m=~+m+~ extent possible under the 42 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.1000261480 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. User Notes: (3560762705) • notice to the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect, terminate the Contract and recover from the Owner as provided in Section 14.1.2. § 14.2 TERMINATION BY THE OWNER FOR CAUSE § 14.2.1 The Owner may terminate the Contract if the Contractor: .1 persistently or repeatedly refuses or fails to supply enough properly skilled workers or proper materials; .2 fails to make payment to Subcontractors for materials or labor in accordanc wi the respective agreements between the Contractor and the Subcontractors; .3 persistently disregazds laws, ordinances, or rules, regulations or orders of a ub c authori havi jurisdiction; or .4 otherwise is guilty of substantial breach of a provision of the Contract Doc ' en, . § 14.2.2 When any of the above reasons exist, the Owner, after consultation with the Cons cti n Manager, and upon certification by the Architect that sufficient cause exists to justify such action, may tho t prejudice to any other rights or remedies of the Owner and after giving the Contractor and the Contractor's surety, if any, seven days' written notice, terminate employment of the Contractor and may, subject to any pric .1 take possession of the site and of all materials, equipment, tools, and machinery thereon owned by the Contractor; .2 accept assignment of subcontracts pursuant to Section 5.4; and .3 finish the Work by whatever reasonable method the Owner may deen § 14.2.3 When the Owner terminates the Contract for one of the reasons stated in Sec not be entitled to receive further payment until the Work is finished. § 14.2.4 If the unpaid balance of the Contract Sum exceeds costs of finishing the Work, including compensation for the Construction Manager's and Architect's services and expenses made necessary thereby, such excess shall~pai to the Contractor. If such costs exceed the unpaid balance, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the - er. ~ amount to be paid to the Contractor or Owner, as the case maybe, shall, upon application, b~ - ' ed by Architect after consultation with the Construction Manager, and this obligation for paymen s ' "e termination of the Contract. ! , § 14.3 SUSPENSION BY THE OWNER FOR CONVENIENCE § 14.3.1 The Owner may, without cause, order the Contractor in writing to suspend, delay or interrupt the Woi=k i~ whole or in part for such period of time as the Owner may determine. § 14.3.2 An adjustment shall be made for increases in the cost of performance of the Contract, ine3ud~g~profit on the increased cost of performance, caused by suspension, delay or interruption. No adjustment sl~ll be made t ..the , extent: -~~,n .1 that performance is, was or would have been so suspended, delayed or in pt d by ano er aus,~-`r for which the Contractor is responsible; or .2 that an equitable adjustment is made or denied under another provision of ,pntract. ~' § 14.3.3 Adjustments made in the cost of performance may have a mutually agreed fixed AIA Document A201/CMaR - 1992. Copyright ®1992 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. NARKING: This AIA° Document is protected by U.9. Copyright Iaw and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA Doc~unent, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and arivSnal penal ties, and will be proaeoated to them ++• extent possible under the 43 law. This draft was produced by AIA software at 13:22:92 on 12/05/2006 under Order No.10002614B0 1 which expires on 9/29/2007, and is not for resale. - Uaer Notes: (3560762705) • February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-M REQUEST Approve License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile, Nine Mile and Ten Mile Drains AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See Attached Memo /Agreement 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: Stpff Initials: Materials presented of public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo RECEIVED FED 16 2007 To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer CC: File, Keith Watts Date: 2/16/07 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for February 20 City Council Meeting City Of 1Vteridian City Clerk Oi~ce The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the February 6 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: License Agreement with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile. Nine Mile. and Ten Mile Drains Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the License Agreement with Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District for flushing water mains into the Five Mile, Nine Mile, and Ten Mile Drains and authorizes the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this item. • Page 1 • • Memo To: Will Berg; Tara Green From: Kyle Radek, P.E., Staff Engineer /~~ CC: File Date: 4/17/07 Re: License Agreement with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District The original above referenced document is attached for your files. Thank you. V ~~ 1 - t U - ~~-~ ~~~~' 11:~ 0 ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~9 c~~~i~~. (~ C~ S 1 ~ `V'~ ~~ ~~ • Page 1 • LICENSE AGREEMENT LICENSE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~ day of , 2007, by and among NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, an irrigation district or anized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Idaho, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "District", and CITY OF MERIDIAN, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho 83642 party or parties of the second part, hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Licensee", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Licensee is the owner of real property/right-of-way for a water main (burdened with the easement of the District hereinafter mentioned) particularly described in the "Legal Description" attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the District owns the irrigation ditches or canals known as the FIVE MILE DRAIlV, NINE MILE DRAIN AND TEN MILE DRAIN (hereinafter collectively referred to as "ditch or canal"), an integral part of the District's irrigation works and system, together with the easement therefor to convey irrigation water, operate, clean, maintain, and repair the ditch or canal, and access the ditch or canal for those purposes; and, WHEREAS, said ditch or canal and easement crosses and intersects Licensee's real property/right- of-way for a water main as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and, WHEREAS, the Licensee desires a license to engage in construction or activity affecting said ditch or canal or the District's easement in its course across the lands of the Licensee in the manner and under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and, WHEREAS, it is necessary that the District protect absolutely its ditch or canal and its right of way along its ditch or canal; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the covenants, agreements and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Licensee shall have the right to modify the ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement along the ditch or canal in the manner described in the "Purpose of License" attached hereto as Exhibit C and by this reference made a part hereof. Any modification of the ditch or canal by the Licensee or encroachment upon the District's easement along said ditch or canal shall be performed and maintained in accordance with the "Special Conditions" stated in Exhibit D, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. Any difference or discrepancy between the items listed in Exhibit C, "Purpose of License," and any plans or drawings referenced in or attached to Exhibit D shall be resolved in favor of Exhibit C. Licensee shall only be permitted or allowed to modify the ditch or canal or encroach upon the District's easement as described in Exhibit C even if any plans or drawings referenced or attached to Exhibit D provide or show otherwise. 2. This agreement pertains only to the Licensee's modification of said ditch or canal or encroachment to the District's easement for the purposes and in the manner described herein. The Licensee shall not change the location of the ditch or canal, bury the ditch or canal in pipe, or otherwise alter the ditch or canal in any manner not described in this agreement without first obtaining the written permission of the District. 3. Each facility ("facility" as used in this agreement means any object or thing of any nature installed in or on the District's easement by the Licensee or the Licensee's predecessor in interest) shall be constructed, installed, operated, maintained, and repaired at all times by the Licensee at the cost and expense of the Licensee. 4. Licensee agrees to construct, install, operate, maintain and repair each facility and conduct its activities within or affecting the District's easement so as not to constitute or cause: a. a hazard to any person or property; b. an interruption or interference with the flow of irrigation water in the ditch or canal or the delivery of irrigation water by the District; c. an increase in seepage or any other increase in the loss of water from the ditch or canal; d. the subsidence of soil within or adjacent to the easement; e. any other damage to the District's easement and irrigation works. 5. The Licensee agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the District from all claims for damages arising out of any of the Licensee's construction or activity which constitutes or causes any of the circumstances enumerated in the preceding paragraph, 4.a. through 4.e., or any other damage to the easement and irrigation works which may be caused by the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repair, and any use or condition of any facility. 6. Licensee agrees that the work performed and the materials used in such construction shall at all times be subject to inspection by the District and the District`s engineers, and that final acceptance of such work shall not be made until all such work and materials shall have been expressly approved by the District. Such approval by the District shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. The District reserves the right, at the District's option, to remove any facility installed by the Licensee and to repair any alteration by the Licensee of said ditch or canal and the easement therefor which does not comply with the terms of this agreement, and to remove any impediment to the flow of water in said ditch or canal and any unsafe condition or hazard caused by the Licensee, at any time, and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the costs which shall be reasonably expended by the District for such purposes. If the Licensee shall fail in any respect to properly maintain and repair such facility, then the District, at its option, and without impairing or in anywise affecting its other rights and remedies hereunder, shall have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and repairs and the Licensee agrees to pay to the District, on demand, the cost or expense which shall be reasonably expended or incurred by the District for such purposes. The District shall give reasonable notice to the Licensee prior to the District`s performing such maintenance, repair or other work except that in cases of emergency the District shall attempt to give such notice as reasonable under the circumstances. Nothing in this paragraph shall create or support any LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 2 claim of any kind by Licensee or any third party against the District for failure to exercise the options stated in this paragraph, and Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any claims made against the District arising out of or relating to the terms of this paragraph except for claims arising solely out of the negligence of the District. 8. Neither the terms of this agreement, the permission granted by the District to the Licensee, the Licensee's activity which is the subject of this agreement, nor the parties exercise of any rights or performance of any obligations of this agreement, shall be construed or asserted to extend the application of any statute, rule, regulation, directive or other requirement, or the jurisdiction of any federal, state, or other agency or official to the District's ownership, operation, and maintenance of its ditches, canals, drains, irrigation works and facilities which did not apply to the District's operations and activities prior to and without execution of this agreement. In the event the District is required to comply with any such requirements or is subject to the jurisdiction of any such agency as a result of execution of this agreement or the Licensee's activity authorized hereunder, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from all costs and liabilities associated with the application of such laws or the assertion of such jurisdiction or, at the option of the District, this agreement shall be of no force and effect and the Licensee shall cease all activity and remove any facility authorized by this agreement. 9. In addition to all other indemnification provisions herein, Licensee further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from any injury, damages, claim, lien, cost and/or expense (including reasonable attorney's fees) incurred by, or asserted against, the District by reason of the negligent acts or omissions of Licensee or its agents, contractors or subcontractors in performing the construction and activities authorized by this agreement. 10. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable for any damages which shall occur to any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement area of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance or repair of said ditch or canal. The Licensee further agrees to suspend its use of the said easement area when the use of the easement area is required by the District for maintenance or repair under this or any other paragraph of this agreement. 11. Licensee shall place no structures, pathways or landscaping of any kind above or within the District's easement area except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits hereto without the prior written consent of the District. Nor shall Licensee permit, authorize or grant any other person or entity to excavate, discharge, construct or place any structures, pathways or landscaping within the District easement without the prior written consent of the District. 12. Should either party incur costs or attorney fees in connection with efforts to enforce the provisions of this agreement, whether by institution of suit or not, the party rightfully enforcing or rightfully resisting enforcement of the provisions of this agreement, or the prevailing party in case suit is instituted, shall be entitled to reimbursement for its costs and reasonable attorney fees from the other party. 13. The parties hereto understand and agree that the District has no right in any respect to impair the uses and purposes of the irrigation works and system of the District by this agreement, nor to grant any rights in its irrigation works and system incompatible with the uses to which such irrigation works and system are devoted and dedicated and that this contract shall be at all times construed according to such principles. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 3 i ~ 14. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair the right of way of the District in the said ditch or canal and all uses of said ditch or canal by the Licensee and the license herein provided therefor shall remain inferior and subservient to the rights of the District to the use of said ditch or canal for the transmission and delivery of irrigation water. 15. In the event of the failure, refusal or neglect of the Licensee to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this agreement, the license of the Licensee under the terms hereof may be terminated by the District, and any facility, structure, plant, or any other improvement in or over said ditch or canal, and the right of way therefor, which may impede or restrict the maintenance and operation of such ditch or canal by the District with its equipment for the maintenance of its said ditch or canal may be removed by the District. 16. The Licensee agrees to pay attorney fees or engineering fees charged by the attorney for the District or by the engineers for the District in connection with the preparation of this License Agreement or in connection with negotiations covering the terms and conditions of this License Agreement. Licensee also agrees to pay any fees incurred in connection with the recording of this Agreement. 17. Nothing in this agreement shall create or support a claim of estoppel, waiver, prescription or adverse possession by the Licensee or any third party against District. 18. This agreement is not intended for the benefit of any third party and is not enforceable by any third party. 19. If any provision of this agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable, all remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 20. The word "Licensee", if used in the neuter in this agreement, includes the masculine and feminine genders, the singular number includes the plural, and the plural number includes the singular. The covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained shall constitute covenants to run with, and running with, all of the lands of the Licensee described in said Exhibit A, and shall be binding on each of the parties hereto and on all parties and all persons claiming under them or either of them, and the advantages hereof shall inure to the benefit of each of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. _ ~. ~ ~t.. ;,~,. ATTEST: NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT By is President ' ' Its Secretary LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 4 CJ CITY OF MERIDIAN J~ ' J% ATTEST: .~ ~c ~ (~~'~ C~r•-a,~ ~-ZU-r~7 d ~~ s ~~,~~ ~~. STATE OF IDAHO ) l%~~~ ~~ ~`~~~ t~~`'~~ County of Canyon ) On this ~ day of ~i~, 2007, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Henry Weick and Daren R. Coon, known to me to be the President and Secretary, respectively, of NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, the irrigation district that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that such irrigation district 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. o~`~,`•4~~ oe......a~O~~, .~ _ ~,°TARr ~._ STATE OF IDAHO )ss. Z pUBLtG~: ~ s County of Ada ) ~~s~'.s~9~+E ~F I,~~,4~: ~,~ ~~® n neaor On this ~ day of (,~ G~ Notary Public for Idaho Residing at ~ ,Idaho My Commission Expires: ~ Q ZD/Z 2007, before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said state, personally appeared ~ ~~b~,,~ ~ (,{1,~,~ ~ and , , ' cam -- ty~~i ,known to me to be the ~ and ~;~ (',Q,e,~,~ ,respectively, of the CITY O MERIDIAN, the political subdivision and municipality that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that such entity 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. o®® ~~ ®®® ® ~q "r,~ o ~ ~ ® . ® ; a • ® ~ `.~'` ~' ®®9 `tee I~+®~ ®a .® ~ ~~q. ®...® LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 5 w Notary Public for ,-9~~Q~ Residing at j~_ 11~~, ~~ My Commission Expires: 10 /S-l~ EXHIBIT A Legal Description A right-of-way for a water main located where the water main: 1. intersects the Five Mile Drain at Ten Mile Road located in the SW1/4 of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, B. M., Ada County, Idaho; 2. intersects the Nine Mile Drain at N. Leann Way located in the SWl/4 of Section 2, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, B. M., Ada County, Idaho; 3. intersects the Nine Mile Drain at Washington Street located in the NEl/4 of Section 12, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, B. M., Ada County, Idaho; 4. intersects the Ten Mile Drain at Linder Road located in the NW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, B. M., Ada County, Idaho; 5. intersects the Nine Mile Drain at Central Drive located in the SWl/4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho; and 6. intersects the Five Mile Drain at Bradley Avenue located in the NWl/4 of Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, B. M., Ada County, Idaho. EXHIBIT C Purpose of License The purpose of this License Agreement is to permit Licensee to construct and install a bypass line from the Licensee's domestic/municipal water main into the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain and the District's easement, at the locations described in Exhibit A, and to flush/discharge municipal well water into the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain, at the locations described in Exhibit A, approximately one to two times per year. EXHIBIT D Special Conditions a. The construction described in Exhibit C shall be performed in accordance with those portions of certain plans attached hereto as Exhibit D-1 and by this reference made a part hereof. Licensee shall flush/discharge water into the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain only on rare occasions (approximately one to two times per year). Licensee shall notify the District's Superintendent and obtain the District's permission prior to any flush/discharge into the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain. The quantity discharged shall be 1,500 to 2,000 gpm. b. Licensee shall notify the water superintendent of the District prior to and immediately after construction so that he or the District's engineer's may inspect and approve the construction. c. Licensee shall be responsible and shall ensure that any drains which discharge into the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain do not cause any erosion or subsidence of soil within the ditches or drains. The Licensee agrees that the District shall not be liable for any damages which shall occur to the drain pipes or any other improvement of any kind or nature whatsoever which the Licensee shall install on the said easement area of the District in the reasonable exercise of the rights of the District in the course of performance of maintenance or repair of said ditch or canal. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 6 d. The Licensee recognizes and acknowledges that the license granted in this agreement by the District pertains only to the rights of the District as owner of an easement. The District has no right or power to create rights in the Licensee affecting the holder of title to the property subject to the District's easement. Any such rights affecting fee title must be acquired by the Licensee from the holder of title to the property. Should Licensee fail to obtain such rights from the holder of title to the property or should the rights obtained prove legally ineffectual, Licensee shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the District from any claim by any party arising out of or related to such failure of rights and at the option of the District this agreement shall be of no force and effect. e. Licensee represents that Licensee has complied with all federal, state or other laws, rules, regulations, directives or other requirements in any form regarding environmental matters, as may be applicable under the subject matter, terms or performance of this agreement broadly construed. Licensee recognizes its continuing duty to comply with all such requirements that now exist or that may be implemented or imposed in the future. By executing this agreement the District assumes no responsibility or liability for any impact upon or degradation of water quality or the environment resulting from the discharge or other activity by Licensee which is the subject of this agreement. f. Licensee hereby indemnifies, holds harmless and shall defend the District from any and all penalties, sanctions, directives, claims or any action taken or requirement imposed by any party or entity, public or private, with respect to environmental matters relating to the subject matter, terms or performance of this agreement unless the District shall be solely responsible for the condition or activity which gives rise to any such penalty, sanction, directive, claim ,action or requirement. g. In the event the District is required by any governmental authority to acquire or comply with any permit or other operational requirements associated with Licensee's discharge and other activity which is the subject of this agreement, Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District from all costs and liabilities associated with such permit and other requirements, including but not limited to all costs associated with all permit acquisition, construction, monitoring, treatment, administrative, filing and other requirements. h. The parties to this agreement recognize this license agreement is an accommodation to Licensee. The District by this agreement does not assume, create, or exercise legal or other authority, either express or implied, to regulate control, or prohibit the discharge or contribution of pollutants or contaminants to the District's facilities or to any groundwater, waters of the State of Idaho or the United States, or any other destination. Such authority, to the extent that it exists, is possessed and exercised by governmental environmental agencies. i. Licensee shall not excavate, discharge, place any structures, nor plant any trees, shrubs or landscaping within the District's easement, nor perform any construction or activity within the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain except as referred to in this agreement or exhibits thereto without the prior written consent of the District. j. Licensee acknowledges and confirms that the District's easement for the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain includes a sufficient area of land to convey irrigation and drainage water, to operate, clean, maintain and repair the Five Mile Drain, Nine Mile Drain and Ten Mile Drain is 100 feet, 50 feet to either side of the centerline of said drains. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 7 k. Construction shall be completed one year from the date of this Agreement. Time is of the essence. LICENSE AGREEMENT -Page 8 ~ i03/'~005 TLiE 15:27 F_~X I~jU05:'O1S 1 SCALE NION PA IFIC RAILR FRANKLIN ~ `~, z `~ I N S EL ` ~~ ^-~. I ~.-- ~ r FA ~.I W ~nnnnno ~~. m .~ ~~~E z ~ ~D INDEX ~F SHEETS SHEET NUMBER DESCRIPTION CALL DIGLlNE ~.''~ 4$ HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION 1. TITLE SHEET PHONE 1--500-342- t 565 ~~~~ TO REQUEST U.C. LOCATIONS 2.-t3. BYPASS AND FLUSHIPdG STATION! PLANS .-13. DETAILS pReP~eo ev O .,~ ~ L ##5 ~,,~ OWNER PROJECT ~ CZVIy, SU1~vEY CONSULT'AN'TS, TNC CITY OF MERIDIAN POTABLE WATER wEU X70 t3YPASS 1D0 SOUTFt dpKtNS war 66a E. WATERTOWER LN, STE. Z00 AND WATER MAIN FLUSHING STATIGNS suITE iDt MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 A7 VARIOUS SITES MgRlpuW, ID 93642 RROJEC7: 44033 DESIGNED 8Y: C.iP DRAWN Br: Grc (zos)aae-a3~z (206)8985500 FIFE= SFITOI,pwC PATE; JAN_ 2605 SHEET: 1 4F ;.' Exhibit B I I i INSTALL. 12 C.Y, OF RIP RAP 5\€E NOTE iHEET INSTALL DRAIN AND DISCHARGE PI PER DETAILS SHEETS 1 D aNC? 12. 1 INSTALL 13 LF 8°Q! PVC WATER MAIN REMOvE AND REPLACE FENC \ NECESSARY NSTALL 90° BEND, - MJxMJ ~ ~ . 1 \ RETAIN AND PROTECT UNDERGRO~ D TiLEPHONE 28 S.Y_ TYPE "P" ,SURFACE REPAIR PER ISPWC. H01 TAP EXISTING _12"® WATER M/1lN INSTALL 8'° GATE VALVE, MJxFL INSTALL 12°x8" TAPPING SADDLE o yo 20 ao so ~cAL~_ i °=zo' PREPnREp BY OWNER CIVIL SURVEY CCINSULTANfiS, YNC 100 SOUTH ADKIIdS WAY suITE roe MERIpUW, ID 133642 {206)888-x312 CITY OF MERIDL4N 660 E. WATERTOWER LRI_ STE_ 200 MER1D-Aty, IDAHO 83642 (208)898-5500 'I ~ , z ~_ r i~ iCl O m 0 m INSTALL 28 LF 8"(B PVC WATER MAIN 1 (~ ~~ R 1 ~;1 '' ~A 6 G ~~o ¢ of ~°~~: PROJECT WATER k1PJN~lNE FLUSHItdG STATION 17dT0 FIVE aAtLE CREEK a7 TEN MILE ROAD PROJECT; Oa033 DESIGrIED 81': CJP I DRAWN BY: ~ is I I FILE: STA7101V~ 9 ,pWG l DATE: JAPI, 20G5 SHEET: i OF i ,"s , Exhibit D-1e page 1 ~@ ~~ W l`~i~ ~VlA~ ~LiJSHI~ TTIN #~~ SS H O ~ W LEAN N WAY ~ ~ . t ~ z z w - - -P 1- . ~ HOT TAP EXISTING 6"® WATER MAIN ~ I Z INSTALL 6" GATE VALVE, MJxFL ', INSTALL 6"x6" TAPPING SADDLE I ~ INSTALL 42 LF $"~ PVC WATER MAIN ~ l INSTALL DRAIN AND DISCHARGE PIPING I w 1 S S; Y . T Y PE "P ° SU RFAC E PER DETAILS SHEETS 10 ANp 1 i . i REPAIR PE R fSP wC. E p~ _ INSTALL 12 C.Y. i ~, OF RIP RAP f _ ~_ 1 -~ SEE NOTE SHEET 1 ~ l - I ~ _ ~-, ,,I ~- t i T- ~ - ~ - - c~ - --- - - - _ o ~ NINE MILE CREE K P ~ I 25' ~ , o ~ c ~ ~ S S.Y. CONCRETE REPAIR PER ISPWC. l ~pE~ O~F~ s• _ ~ l N `~ . 10' Utility, Drainage, & :- Irrigation Easement ~ r i ~~' o ~ 0 t0 24 40 60 oj, 0 F by A. 6v~ SCALE: 1 "=20' PREPARED BY OWNER PROJECT ~ CIVIL SURVEY COMSITLTANTS, INC CITY OF MERIDIAN avATER MAINLINE FLUSHING SfAT10P: INTO NINE MILE CREEK AT 100 SOUTH ADKINS WAY 660 E. WATERTOWER LN, STE. 200 LFANN WAY AND KRISTEN WAY I 41ERIDIAN, ID 83642 (208)881-4372 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 20c 698-5500 ~ ~ ~ PROJECT: 04033 DESIGN1w0 8Y. CJP DRAwN 8'r: C.:~ , FILE STAT~Z.DW DATE: JAN. 2005 SrtEfT: 3 0~- i. Exhibit D-T. ~aQe 2 Al"E nlfi ~LU~-LI9~ °rAl"1 (NSTAi~L ,1,4 C.Y. -- QF' RIP RAP SEE IN©TE SHEET 1 INSTAL 11 LF 8"17~ PVC WATER MAIN I I ~II INSTALL 8"0 90' BEND, MJxMJ ,~ i ~ fi in INSTALL„6 LF 8"fa PVC WATER MAIN. 'Q N Y L.1 LrJ U l~ Z Z a.+ ~c v w a~ rn 0 c 0 C O 0 •L I~ .a.+ i ~ c . o °' v a~i _~ y w° a I ~, c ~ v o i a ~ r ~ i . .~ - i HpT TAP EXISTING 8~°fa WATER MAIN INSTALL 8" GATE VALVE, MJxFL~ IPJSTALL 8"x8° TAPPING SADDLE SSMH ~~ 0 Q 0 W J D 10 20 40 60 SCALE: 1 "=24' ALL PIPING SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF--WAY._ PREPARED B'Y OWNER PR0.IECT I'I CIVIL SLF}2'VEY CE}I~iStt1.'T'ae,NT`S, IIdC CITY OF MERIDIAN VdATER MAINLINE FLUSHING STATION I 10D SOUTH ADK1N5 WAY 660 E. YdATERTOVdER LN. S7E. 200 INTO NINE MILE CREEK AT surtE toy MERIDIAN, IDAHO E3642 CINDER RpAO AND WASHINGTON STREET µERtDUw, tD 836a2 PROJECT; 08033 pEStGhtED BY; CJP DRAwN gY: CJ~' (20$)8$$-4322 (208~~913-55Da FILE: STaTt4H,3.pw pATE: JAN. 20G5 SHEET: 4 GF i.', Exhibif. D-1, page 3 PER dETAILS SHEETS 8 S.Y. C NCRETE REPAIR PER ISP C. ISCHARGE PIPING ~ I .. `' ~ WASHINGTON STREET ~, TIE !~ I 5~~ O N o FFS ' s ! ~~ T r r1 for ~ o F yr A. B VF` j s,~,~H ~ ~~ .,~ ~ I ~~~R~TT ORS ~,~. INSTALL 8" GATE VALVE. MJxFL !x72, ~~„h,~"' J INSTALL 12°x8'° TAPPING SADDLE ~ '~~-~ _ , INSTALL 20 C.Y. ~~_ ,_,(~ Of RIP RAP ' O SEE NOTE SHEET 1 i OoO~oO _n ~ p._, 6(1~,!^~') TAl1 D N AND CHARGE P1PfNG U O PE ETA S SHEETS 10 AND 1 1. a z ~ Tfi"~ ~~ °c~c ~ .C ;~' ~ . ~~~ J <v° J INS ~ LF 8'°~ P~IC WAT MAIN \co°~o°c 10 S.Y. TYPE. URFACE O~~ c~~~ ~ REPAIR PER ISPWC. j o 8 S.Y GONCI~ETE REPAIR PER ISPWC. \ i - \ \~ I \ ~\ 10 5.Y. TYPE "P" SURFACE I~ REPAIR PER ISPWC. ~ \ .• C~ ~~~, PRo~cF i I \ \ O !„~• ~ ~ ~ I N Ss .~ y ~ ``~ J`~a ~' ~ O 0 20 ~ 40 80 OL ~~~ \ ~ j. F 0 P ~ by a. e~ ,~ S E: 1 °- PREPARED BY OWNER PROJECT I WATER MAINLINE FLUSHfNG STATIDN C%'~'IL SiJ~t'EY COIVSIIL'TA3V1"S, IA1C CIN O<° MERIDIAN INTO TEN MILE CREEK AT i t OD 50uTH AOKINS WAY 680 E. W1+TER70WER LN. STE. 200 suiTE io+ dAEFtIDIAN. IDAHO 83642 uraoER RoAn AND BARRF_TT DRIVE ! taERtDtAni, ID 83[aZ r PROJECT; OaQ33 DE51GNED 9~`: CJP DRnwN yr c~F (2oBj®$8-4312 {209)~s:~-5500 FILE $TATIOt~f~4.DW DATE: JAN. 2D05 SHF£T: 5 OF i? na csP • ~ 6a o~ \d~9at~ ...._ ~- _ N t~ Pressure I r_ nd 5/8" Pin .'~~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ . / QI o• 20' ility, brig tiOn Eosementc' ~ / ~ l ._--• a o --\ .. o ~~ F-- 8 S.Y. CONCRETE ~ REPAIR PER ISPWC. CENTRAL DRIVE 14 S.Y. TYPE °'P°' SURFACE REPAIR PER ISPWC. Power Vault End 1 /2" Pin ° RETAIN SAND PROTECT ~ UNDERGROUND TELEPH .. J ~~STALL) 23 LF 8'°0 P WATER MAIN a, v ~ H T TAP EXISTIN 12°°B WATER IN " VA V MJxFL IN TALL 12'°x$'° PP1NG SADDL '`j \ ! s~!•i~ ' ;~ Ppw~~ -P-~. nn I\ \ ~ '_. AL PI ING SHAL BE INS ALL D WITHIN THE PUB IC iGHT-OF- AY AND TH 0' TILITY E EMENT o ~o zo 40 60 SCALE: 1 "=20' PREPARED BY pWNER CIVIL, SUBr1EY CQNSLti.7AN'TS, 8NC CITY OF MERIDIAN ioo souTH ADKtNS wAY 660 E. waTERTOwER L>v. STE. 200 surtE ~o~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO B3642 MERtOw.tt, t0 63PaCm (2Da}asa-a3~2 (208)896-SSQO PRDF~ ~,2`~S 9 r I I 1 ~P~I~~ O D~ TyY A. 6~~ PRQJECT waTEFt A~AINLINE FLUSHING STATION INTO NINE BILE CREEK a7 STRATFORD DRtvE 4N0 CENTRdL DRIVE 04D33 DE.ilGNEO HY: CJP DRAWN 8Y' CJ TION~S.DYaG DATE: _ JRN. 2005 SHEET; 6 OF C] INSTALL ©RAIN AND DISCHARGE PIPE I PER DETAILS SHEETS 10 AND 11. ~ ~ 1 o N >: INSTALL 21 LF 6 to PVC WATER, MA1NI ~! / REMOVE AND REPLACE ~ I i ~-FENCE AS NECESSARY - - -~- Pvc 1 ~' Utility and Irrigation Ease ent CHAIN LINK Q _ O ~'- 1 n o= HOT TAP EXISTING 6"~ WATER MAIN ~`m INSTALL 6" GATE VALVE, M,1xFL INSTALL 6"x6°~TAPPI i G SADDLE I 9 S.Y. TYPE °°P°° SURFACE REPAIR PER ISPWC. ~~ ~ SSMH 1 n 4 S S.Y. CONCRETE REPAIF? PER ISPWC. ~- - gApLE`~ AVENUE ~d G r z ^~ G - ~ ~~, PR DF Z IN S ~ ~ 6 9 r ~~ o i o 20 4o so o~, o f by a. ~v SCALE: 1 "=20' ~EPatzEO 81' OWNER PROJECT I WATER RAAINLIIdE FLUSHING STATION CIVIL SLtP.VEY COIdSULT~I+TTS, IIJC CI71' OF MERIDIAN InfTO FIVE MILE CREEK AT ! iDO souTN ADKtws wAr 660 E. wATERTOWER LN. STE. 200 SUITE iD1 AAERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 $ADLE`r AVENUE ANG Co.Tt-nr AVENUE ~ MERIDIAN, tD 83P,42 PROJECY: oa035 UEStGNEfi 8Y: CJP pR~ewN ~; CJF (2oa)ee®-x312 (208)898-5504 Fn.E~ SgAq~N~,~ DWG DAYE~ JAN. 2005 SHEET: 7 DF 1 ~ ~ r...~t L L: 1 T 9 ~_ ,~... L ~ ~ 1 ~ I~~V LL . 1® Y~I~ T i 1= L I-I I `DTI T° I l1 ITS 1.00P TRACER WIRE UP VALVE BOX z LOOP TRACER WIRE '~ UP VALVE 80X 1 STANDARD 6"~ CAST IRON N ADJU5TA8LE VALVE BOX W_ Q' H a w 0 6" OR 8" CS00 -~ PvC PIPE PER PLANS Z" SERVICE SADDLE 2" GALVANIZED - 1RON NIPPLE 2" GALvANIZED - IRON 90° BEND 2" SCHEDULE 80 PVC PIPE TO GRAVEL 5'x5'x3"'t5F ' ROCK. WRAP 2" GALVANIZED IfdON I~IIPPLE 2" GATE vALVE WITH STD. 2" OPERATING NUT PIPE D~AI[~ N.T.S. .~~.~'~~ P R OFFS ~I ~~ia pA~ OF ~- ~~ \yr a. e~~i PREPARED BY OWNER PROJECT CIVIL SURVEY CQTdSHJLTANTS, BI1C CITY OF MERIDIAN WEL6 ta0_ t0 BYPASS ARID i oe 5ou'rH nDxws wAr 660 E. WATERTOWER LN. STE. 200 FLUSHING StATtO~-S aT VaRi0U5 SITES sulTEp ,o~ MERIDIAN, IDa~HO 8364.2 DRAIN oETaIL M~RIdIaN, ID 83662 PROJECT: 04033 DESIGNED BY: CJP DRAwt~ gv: C:~ , czDe)eea~-43,2 C2os)s~s-5~ao FRE OErAq_,S.DwC DATE JAW. 2405 SWEET; 7O or i3 r-T..L L . t r 1 .. -. "9 4-5' BEND, FLxFL C' ~~lAl~ ESL . ~ Y-~AS ATE Alt~l ~L[J f t~ STI-~{3 S T l~l S(T'E TYPICAL DISCH~41~G~ T® EXISTING WATEF~Wi~Y ROTATE BEND AS NECESSARY TO DIRECT FLOW TOWARDS CHANNEL BOTTOM EXISTING GROUND 45' BEND, MJxMJ WfMEGA LUG JOINT RESTRAINT (OR EQUAL) TO MAINLINE SEE DRAIN DETAtL SHEET 10 PREPARED BY OWNER PROJECT WELL NO. 10 BYPASS AND i CI~7IL SURVEY C®I~TSLIL'CANTS, INC CITY OF MERIDIAN FLU5HIN(., STATIONS AT VARIOUS SITES ~ ~aa sours ApKIN; wnY 660 E. WATERTOWER LN. STE. 200 plSCrwRGE DETAIL i surrE ~o~ MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 raERlpWV. 10 83642 PI2pJECT: OoD33 DEStGNEO 8Y: CJP pRawrv 8r- ~.~F (zD~}eas-as i 2 (208)895- 5500 FILE: DEfAtLS_DVNG DATE= JAN. 2005 SHEET: 17 DF ': Exhibit D-1. ~acxe 8 7'-0" DI SPOOL, FLxFL -INSTALL 1/2° STAINLESS STEEL SCREEN BETWEEN FLANGES CAST IRON FLAP GATE 12~ MINIMUM TOP OF BANK '- Dt SPOOL THRUST FLxPE (CUT TO BLOCK DISCHARGE DETAIL N.T.S. RIP RAP BOTH SIDES AND BOTTOM OF CHANNEL AT DISCHARGE NDTES: 1. ALL FITTINGS ANp SPOOLS TO BE SAME SIZE PERPPLANSTO BE INSTALLED AT EACH STATION '•e `y~~,p.~G ~ oFE.s s c~ 2. INSTALL A 10' WIDE STRIP OF RIP RAP 9 CENTERED ALONG EXPECTED PATH OF ~ i DISCHARI,E_ STRIP SHALL BE FROM TOP OF ~ BANK TO TOP OF BANK UNLESS 07HERWISE ~ ~~ , Oqa~ INDICATED ON PLANS. Off, 0 F ~~ ~ tir A. e~~ CI iiA LL ~~®I~,~ TIC i I`~ L~J I T°rl 1"' \fi~l lJ ITS l~P(C~L ®(SC(--(o~RGE °T~ ~(ST'tN~ W~TE(~1>~/Al~ 1'--0"x8"0 DI SPOOL, FLxFL ATTACEI SPOOL TO TOP OF WALL w/ 2" WIDE x 1 ~8" THICK STEEL STRAP AND 3/8" CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLTS $"fd ~S BEND, FLxFL INSTALL T,/2" STA-NLESS STEEL SCREEN BETWEEN FLANGES 8"0 CAST IRON FLAP GATE EXISTING GROUND I I I- I III I I-l I CI I~ -1 I ~ I I~I I II~ I !, II I ~ - _ I ~I ~1 I ~ HIGH WATER 8°'0 45 BEND, MJxMJ SOUTHWEST WING WALL OF BRIDGE OVER W/MEGA LUG JOINT FIVE MILE CREEK RESTRAINT (OR E(JUaI) TO WELL I It- I ~ I l I I ~II II._Ii ll !I II RIP RAP BOTTOM OF CHANNEL AT SEE DRAIN DETAIL DISCHARGE SHEET 10 THRUST S"O D1 SPOOL BLOCK FLxPE (CUT TO LENGTH ®iSCHARGE DETAIL N.T.S. • NOTES: i . ALL FITTINGS AND SPOOLS TO 6E SAME SIZE AS PIPING TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH STATION PER PLANS. 's . h,` .`~~~p P R 0 FFS ~ ~, I N f, ~' _ >'~ ~ ,~ 9 r 2. INSTALL A 10° WIDE STRIP DF RIP RAP CENTERED ALONG ExPECTED PATH OF •;, ,~ ~ DfSCHARGE. STRIP SHALL BE FROM TOP OF A T T P ~F p~' 0 ~ B NK O OF BANK O I S UNLESS OTHERWISE B~~ yy IND CA ED ON PLANS. A. , I PREPARED BY OWNER PRDJECT CIVIL SU#2VEY COIVSULTAIdTS IIdC CITY OF MERIDIAN WELL Np. 90 8YPA55 APJfl ' , 900 SOUTH ADxWS WAY 660 E. WATERTOWER LN. STE. 200 FLUSHING STATIONS AT VARIOUS 511 ES ' SUITE lDt MERIDIANl IDAHO $362 DISCHARGE DETAIL k9ERIRWN, ID 83642 (208)888--8312 , C2~~~$g~-~'rJ~o PRDJECT: 04033 DESIGNED 8Y: C,IP DRAWN BY: C.:? FILE: DETAILS.DWG DATE: JAN. 2b63 SHEET: .2 t~>: t. D-i, page • • 5ECURE TO SIDE OF BOX -- / .alHlt•. \ 1 J. WITH 2° WIDE x Ye" THICK STEEL STRAPS ANp ~"PS CONCRETE ANCHOR BOLTS {TYP OF 2). EXISTING GND $"0 x 7'-0" LONG pUCTILE IRON SPOOL, FLxFL 8"(d 90' BEND, FLxMJ TO WELL F SEE DRAIN DETAIL SHEET 10 SEE DRAIN DETAIL SHEET 10 z 2" TAPPING SAO~LE 4'x4' IRRIGATION BOX WITH STEEL COVER CU7 OU7 70 ACCEPT FLOW FROM BYPASS. BYPASS STRUCTURE N.T.S. A TO NlANNOLE ---~ ~~D P R O p~\ ' ~-a~it~ sd' OA_..0~ 1 \yr A, a~~ T r PREPARED 8`f OWNER PROJECT Ct°~i~, SUF;VE1' C®NSTJ'LTANTS, INC CITY OF MERID{AN WELL NO. 10 BYPASS AND t00 SOu7}t aDSCiNS wAY FLUSHING STATIONS AT VARIOUS SITES SUITE 90~ Gb0 E. VdATERTOWER LN. STE. 200 BYPASS STRUCTURE MERIDVW, ID 83642 MERIDIAN, IDAHO $3642 (20888-4397 (208}$~$-PjrjdO PROJECT: 04033 DESIGNED ®Y: CJP DRAWN 9Y: C.'F FILE: OETAiCS_Dl~1G DATE: JAN. 2005 SHEE1:13 OF Exhibit D-1, page 10 I I L-~. ___.._-_.__1..3" GAP _~ TOP OF BOX=(2602.73 12^ J 2" ta, SDR PVC PIPE SLOPE=-6.72 INVERT BOX=2598.73 INVERT 12"=2598.73 - STANDARD 4'x4' IRRIGATION BOX sECTIaN A_A 90° BEND 4 MESH, 15 GA_ STAINLESS STEEL SCREEN i/4" STEEL PLATE RING 8"~ SPOOL, FLxPE LENGTH AS REQ°D. DRILL FOUR 5/$"p} HOLES AT FLANGE INLET p~T,gIL END OF SPDOL. 12"0 SDR 3~ PVC -.~ • • February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-N REQUEST Approve Comments Letter to ACHD regarding Five Year Work Program AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: r / 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 Mertdlan. • ~.~ll,~ V L IV1~:.Y'1111 o11 ii February 6, 2007 ~"-~~v ~'lerk ~~c~ John Franden Commission President Ada County Highway District 3775 Adams Street Garden City, ID 83714 RE: Draft 2008 - 2012 Five Year Work Program Dear Commissioner Franden, The City of Meridian appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft 2008 - 2012 Five Year Work Program. Compiling the list of projects is an enormous undertaking, and the City commends the ACHD Commission and staff on the work that went into preparing the draft. The City also recognizes the continued benefit of a county-wide transportation planning entity as the traveling public rarely stays within municipal boundaries. In order to adequately plan for the future of the region it is imperative that all cities continue their support for and participation with ACHD as the road- building agency in Ada County. The City also recognizes the considerable challenge to ACHD's ability to meet citizens' needs that is created by the funding reality within which it functions. Plainly put, there is not enough money available for the Highway District to build and maintain roads for the growing population of Ada County. The City supports ACHD in exploring creative solutions to remedy this funding shortfall, and will continue working with ACRD to identify new revenue sources and partnership opportunities. Understanding the monetary constraints ACHD faces in preparing this year's work program, the City appreciates that the Downtown Split Corridor Phases 1 and 2 are on track for construction in 2009 and 2012 respectively. Similarly, the City appreciates ACHD keeping the intersection of Ustick and Linder Roads on track to begin construction in 2008. As these are Meridian's top roadway and intersection priorities, it is good to see that in spite of the many unforeseeable challenges surrounding this year's program, ACHD takes city recommendations into account when prioritizing projects, and that the document reflects the cities requests. Thank you for moving these projects forward on schedule. Page 1 of 3 • The City submits the following project-specific comments for consideration in finalizing the Five Year Work Program: Franklin, Ten Mile to Linder: This segment was programmed for construction in 2010 in the 2006 - 2010 FYWP. In the 2007 - 2011 FYWP it fell back to 2011. It remains programmed in Draft A for 2011. However, the segment falls back to PD in Draft B. This roadway project is a high priority for both ACHD and the City of Meridian (number three for both). In anticipation of the Interchange in 2009 (estimated completion in 2010 or 2011), and with increasing development pressure in the area, the City requests that you please keep this project on track for construction in 2011 as long as doing so does not delay other area projects (i.e. Ten Mile, Franklin to Cherry). Pine/Linder Intersection: In 2005 the City agreed to postpone the widening of Linder Road from Franklin to Ustick in order to expedite the construction of Phase 1 of the Split Corridor so long as the intersections of Ustick/Linder and Pine/Linder remain on track for constntction in 2008 (please see the attached memo dated October 28, 2005). The intersection of Pine and Linder was programmed for construction in 2008 in the 2007 - 2011 FYWP. In Draft A it slips to 2009. In the most recent draft it falls back even further to 2010. It is the third priority intersection according to ACHD's criteria, and the third intersection request from the City of Meridian. Because of its proximity to the high school, this intersection desperately needs improvements. Per discussions in 2005 the City strongly requests keeping this intersection on track for construction in 2008. Star/McMillan Intersection: This project remains OF from last year's FYWP to the updated draft. It is not an identified priority for the City, and it ranks 31 of intersections that do not meet warrants by ACHD. The City recognizes that this intersection will need improvements in the future, but it does not seem like a pressing need considering the other intersection projects that are delayed (McMillan/Locust Grove -ACHD priority number 9, City priority number 7 - delayed from 2010 to 2012; Ustick/Meridian -City priority number 2 -delayed from 2010 to PD; etc.). The City recommends that ACHD spend these dollars on a project of more immediate importance in Meridian. Ustick/Meridian Intersection: Project is the number two priority intersection of the City. The temporary signal that ACHD recently installed is an excellent first step, but the absence of turn lanes at the intersection greatly impedes the flow of traffic during peak hours. The City understands that turn lanes will be added this spring as an additional interim improvement, but full improvements will still be needed. 1) It is not included in ACHD's intersection prioritization; please include for comparison purposes; 2) Please keep improvements on track for 2010 rather than delaying to PD. Ten Mile/Amity Intersection: This project is not identified as a priority by the City. It ranks 13 of intersections that warrant improvements according to ACHD's criteria. Draft A suggests keeping the project on track for construction in 2011. Draft B shifts construction forward to 2010. This is another intersection that will no doubt need improvements in the future, but the Page 2 of 3 ~ ~ City questions advancing it in the process rather than other intersections in Meridian that are delayed (most notably Ustick/Meridian or McMillan/I.ocust Grove). In addition, as the intersection is identified for a roundabout and the Roundabout Design Guidelines and Siting Criteria are still in draft form and are not yet adopted, it is reasonable to keep this project on schedule. The City recommends shifting these funds to a more immediate need in Meridian and keeping this project on track for 2011. Again, the City of Meridian understands the challenges surrounding this year's Five Year Work Program, and greatly appreciates ACHD's attempts to keep the City's highest priorities on track. The City will continue working with ACRD to identify new revenue sources and partnership opportunities. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Tammy de Weerd Mayor cc. City Council Don Kostelec Scott Lininger Page 3 of 3 Memo To: Ada County Highway District (ACRD) Community Planning Association (Compass) Idaho Transportation Department (tTD) C~ Mayor Tammy de Weerd From: Steve Siddoway, Transportation Coordinator ~~14;~7 ~l ~~S~i'g~.l~. Dat« October 28, 2005 Re: Priorities for the Five Year Work Program (FYWP) and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Attached is a prioritized list of transportation projects in the City of Meridian. The list was approved by motion at the City Council meeting on October 25, 2005. The list includes the priority number for the project, the project name, a description of the project, and the priority numbers from past years. I offer the following observations on key issues and points of discussion surrounding the final priority list: ^ The priority list includes a mix of 1'I'D projects, ACRD road projects, and intersection projects. ^ Ten Mile interchange is and continues to be the City's number one priority transportation project. The roads in the Ten Mile area were prioritized by the Mayor and Council even higher than the original recommendation in recognition of the critical need to get the local road system ready for the interchange, which is now programmed for 2008. ^ Locust Grove Overpass and Locust Grove Road extension are not on the list because we were instructed by ACRD that projects scheduled for 2006 construction area "given" and will be constructed. Therefore, they do not need to be prioritized with the other future projects. ^ The top future ITD projects in Meridian in priority order include: 1. Ten Mile Interchange i ~ 2. Meridian Road Interchange Rebuild 3. Chinden Road widening 4. Eagle Road Corridor Improvements 5. SH-16 Extension @ McDermott 6. Linder Overpass ^ The top five future ACHD road projects in priority order are as follows. These are the projects we wish to receive Agency Support points in ACHD's prioritization process for the FYWP. 1. Downtown Split Corridor 2. Ten Mile Road, Overland to Ustick 3. Franklin Road, Linder to Ten Mile 4. Linder/LTstick Intersection 5. Linder/Pine Intersection ^ The North Meridian roads are heavily congested. During peak commute times vehicles will often back up for a full mile. Intersection improvements are needed to change the existing four-way stops to signalized intersections. We would prefer to have several intersection improvements over a mile of road widening. We still want the road widening projects in North Meridian, and the projects are reflected in the priority list. However, we acknowledge that intersection improvements would provide the most immediate capacity improvements. So, this year the Transportation Task Force prioritized each of the North Meridian intersections independently with the various road projects. The top North Meridian Intersection projects are: 1. Linder/Ustick 2. Meridian/Ustick 3. Meridian/McMillan 4. Linder/McMillan 5. Locust Grove/McMillan 6. Ten Mile/Ustick ^ Other important intersection improvements are not included in the list, because the task force was directed not to worry about trying to include all priority intersections already in the FYWP. Such important intersections that we want to keep moving forward include Franklin/Ten Mile (part of the Ten Mile Road project) and Eagle/Victory. ^ The City agrees to postpone the Linder Road widening project in order to promote the construction of the Split Corridor along Main and Meridian Roads: However, we ask that the widening project only_be_ _deferred if the critical; intersection improvements at Linder/Pine and Linder/Ustick are prioritized and constructed separately and ahead of the road widening project. We also ask that finder widenin be re noritized back into t __ _ _ __ g p ' he FYWP schedule short~thereafte~l 'and not be delayed more than a year or two. ^ The Split Corridor is our top priority project for ACHD road improvements (Ten Mile interchange is an ITD project). The City and ACRD have formed a partnership over the past year to find a solution for the Main Street/Meridian Road corridor. We hope to see the critical improvements to the Waltman/Main/Meridian/Central intersection with phase one in or around 2008 and hope to see the second phase in the FYWP soon thereafter, perhaps by 2011. ^ A general observation is that priority went to those projects that increased capacity in highly congested corridors over those projects for beautification or other benefit. Similarly, projects in the heart of the community scored higher than those at the edge. ^ We know that the priority list includes more projects than can be included in the next FYWP. The City has so many HIGH priority transportation needs that we note a desire for all projects to be in the top five. However, since that is not possible, we recommend the order listed in the attached list. On a scale of 1 to 10 all of the listed projects would rank between 8 and 10. They are all important to the City. If there are any questions please let me know. Sharon Smith Page 1 of 1 From: Matthew Ellsworth Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 1:30 PM To: Sharon Smith Subject: FW: Agenda Sharon, I don't know if Tara is in today, but I was wondering if it is too late to get a space filler on the consent agenda for Tuesday night. There is a letter that has to go to ACHD regarding the Five Year Work Program, and I'm waiting for some clarification from them before I finalize it. Is there any way that you could include it on the agenda, and I will get the letter to you on Monday? Thanks, Matt Ellsworth Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 202 Meridian, ID 83642 208.884.5533 From: Matthew Ellsworth Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 9:30 AM To: Tara Green Subject: Agenda Tara, Is it too late to have a spot saved on the consent agenda for approval of a letter of comments to ACRD regarding the Five Year Work Program? I am waiting on feedback from ACRD about a couple of questions before I finalize the letter, so I can get it to you (hopefully) by Monday. Is this at all a possibility? Thanks, Matt Ellsworth Associate City Planner Meridian Planning Department 660 E. Watertower, Suite 202 Meridian, ID 83642 208.884.5533 2/16/2007 February 16, 2007 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 6-O REQUEST Award Bids and Approve Contract Mower Bid for Parks Department to Campbell Tractor Company for $40,785.00: AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Emailed: COMMENTS See Memos /Documents from Purchasing ~" Date: Phone: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Ctty of Meridian. Sharon Smith Page 1 of 1 From: Keith Watts Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 3:10 PM To: Will Berg; Sharon Smith Cc: Doug Strong Subject: Industrial Mower Attachments: Council Memo for Request of Award -Industrial Mower.doc; Bid Results -Industrial Mower - PKS-07-001.x1s Will, attached is an agenda item for the mower. I am still working on getting a clean copy of the AIA Agreement for the Water Department. Thanks, Keith Watts Purchasing Agent City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Ph. 208-888-4433 x207 Fax: 208-887-4813 2/16/2007 emo ~~~ To: Will Berg, City Clerk ~E~ ~ ~ ~~~~ From: Keith Watts, Purchasing Agent City of IVleridian 'City Clerk ®ffiee CC: Doug Strong, Parks Director Date: 2/15/07 Re: February 20 City Council Meeting Agenda Items The Purchasing Department respectfully requests that the following item be placed on the February 20 City Council Consent Agenda for Council's consideration. Industrial Mower. The Parks Department issued Bid #PKS-07-001 Industrial Mower , prepared by the Purchasing Agent with spec cations drafted by Parks Department personnel, to 3 vendors on 2-1-2007. Three (3) bids responses were received by the 2-142007 deadline. After Parks Department review, the apearant low bidder (RMT Equipment) did not meet the minimum specifications and the Parks Department recommended awarding to the 2'~ low bidder (Campbell Tractor Co.). Recommended Council Action: Approve Award of Bid #PKS-07-001 Industrial Mower to Campbell Tractor Co. in the amount of $40,785.00 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to release a purchase order for the equipment. Thank you for your consideration. • Page 1 ~"' J W L _, V p a~ 0 } ~~ F U .~ O M N ti O O N W ~_ F- W Q D W D OC N 0 Z 0 0 0 vs Y a D m • ° ° ° o o o ao ~ci o N ti ~ r- O f~ ~ ~ ~ b 9 n O 0 co V o ° ° o o 00 .= o N ~ 'd r- N 1~ ~ ~ ~ O t m v 0 c c~ o 0 U U O ~ ~ ~ ~ F- ~ •~ ~ ~ o w W H ~ ~ 1 U 3 s Y .G a m c d a O 2 O W ~. a~ Q • ! February 16, 2007 Department Reports MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Police Department ITEM NO. 7-A-~ REQUEST Discussion of Department Re-organization: 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: Matertals presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Mertdlan. COMMENTS Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ w ~ aU ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,A W O ~ t~ ~~ 0 t ~ _ ~~ ` ^ a ~ V J ~~ a Z O /~ ~j Q N `® a ' V / ~// li O p ~ ! rrrr ~' rrr N O C ~ [~3 _c'(~ Cny ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j U U O C Q U `o o Z c m LLI n C a ~ N o N ~ U O U ~o ~~ m W ~.~ a y ~o -, o ~ ~ a E ~ ~ o E J > o ~ N '-' E o m U c ~ U a ~ o c ~; •°.. c E ~ d '> E U ~ U ,~ `~ U o ~ 7 m E am ~-~ v, ~, m -o Y ~~ ~~ ~~ ~U 4 ~m ~? mW Z~ m ~l~ ~ ~y ~~ ~~ ~~ y~ U' ~ ~m ~ U ~~ wm ~s LL a~ ~~ ~O ~~ ~o F- ~ ~ i- w ~ ~ ~ `~ N ~~ ~ ~ Cd ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ N U 1~ 0 L (0 U o E ~ c ~ W Q U . ~ N ~ J ~ ~ U ~ ~ o U ~ ~/i O ~ > u~ u, o .~ ~ r C > i ~ M s® ~ ~ + ~ ~ ~ y ~ Q ~a ~ c ~ ~~•~ a~ U > U Q ;- - a /~ , ` V ~` ~ Q ~ Z _ 9„ : ~ ~; _ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ 4- L L~ N ~ U N ~ Z •! ~ " a am ............. ~ v >-~o~ ~ ii ~" N ' ?U~ ++ ~ N(n'~~ (A O ~~`~ Q ~r ?~ a . ~ ~ U `y 'e N ~ - O to N '~i V1 N U ~ t6 ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ t~6 ~ (A ~ ~ ~ a N U H ~.,., ~ m U ~ w R ~ ~ ~ N (d ~~~ ~ d ~ ~ H W ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~"' O •~ r 0 ti 0 l'~ Q .~ V a ~ z _ O ~ ~~ .. Z ~ a .~ c~ .~- o a ~,,, _~~ ~~ U ~ v ~ °m r~ u a a a'; T r -~ ~~ ~m ~~ ~o ~~ ~ 0 ~ o ~ U U o ~ c •- ~ W Q U . ~ N a ~ ~ :'= J ~ ~ ~ L O ~ U E ~ U ~ .~ N . N ~ o ~, N ~ c m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > Qc~~ ~~~a. ~>_~~ U ~ '~ • U O • ~, ti... ~ a > ~ ~ CR:~~ C7~H 0 L ~, N Q, ~c~ic~o ~~ ~ ~U ~ ~.c c a~ ~ p o 11 a to v ~ ~ D ,r ~ ~ (6 ~ ~ ~ A N ~O' ~ N v° ~°~ o~ w~ • • February 16, 2007 FP 07-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Solitude Development, LLC ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Final Plat approval of 121 single-family residential building lots & 12 common lots on 34.74 acres in an R-8 zone for Solitude Subdivision No. 2 -SEC of McMillan Road and Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See AtMched Staff Report 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 AiFached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. N February 16, 2007 FP 07-003 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT RMR Consulting, Inc ITEM NO. 10 REQUEST Final Plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 7 common lots on 12.00 acres in an R-8 zone for Shepherd Creek Subdivision -West side of Meridian Road, approximately 1 /2 mile south of Overland Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: 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. w •• •• BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C February 20, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF RMR CONSULTING, INC., FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF 55 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOTS AND 7 COMMON LOT5 ON 12.00 ACRES IN AN R-8 ZONE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MERIDIAN ROAD, APPROXIMATELY %Z MILE SOUTH OF OVERLAND ROAD IN THE NE 1/a, SE 1/a OF SECTION 24, T. 3N., R.1W. CASE NO. FP-07-003 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval pursuant to Unified Development Code 11-6B-3 on February 20, 2007, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner for the Planning Department, and Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator for the Public Works Department, dated: Hearing Date: February 20, 2007, 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 SHEPHERD CREEK SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE NE ''/a, SE '/a OF SECTION 24, T., 3N., R. 1 W., BOISE ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR SHEPHERD CREEK SUBDIVISION / (FP-07-003) Page 1 of 4 •. MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 2007, HANDWRITTEN DATE: 12/06/06, SHEET 1 OF 2, STANLEY CONSULTANTS, INC.", SHEPHERD'S CREEK, LLC,Developer, is ConditionallyApproved subject to those conditions of Staff comments asset 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: February 20, 2007, 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 RMR Consulting, 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 of the Council taken at their February 20, 2007 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 discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality; that engineers and architects should ORDER OF CONDTTIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR SHEPHERD CREEK SUBDIVISION / (FP-07-003) Page 2 of 4 !~~ ! • 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: 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 SHEPHERD CREEK SUBDIVISION / (FP-07-003) 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, 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 ~'~~~ Y U~f~~ , 2007. By: ~ ~ ~~,~~i~~i,~tri,,, Tammy e d ,.~`,~ '~> Mayor, i f Meridian ;. Attest: ~,~~~°~°~ ~, ~=~~ ~ '~ ~~ William G. Berg, Jr., C ler~ '' ~' Copy served upon Applicant, the o~~)epartment, Public Works Department, and City Attorney. °°°0°°~~i ~ a i o i u i oa~d~`'F~~ By: ~f (Gt,~l ~7~7.~ `~~ Dated: d J- ~~~~ ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR SHEPHERD CREEK SUBDIVISION / (FP-07-003) Page 4 of 4 .. ~• 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: February Z0, 2007 Transmittal Date: February 15, 2007 Mayor and City Council Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner 208-884-5533 Michael Cole, Development Services Coordinator 208-898-5500 Shepherd Creek Subdivision Final Plat Y~'ll C Request for Final Plat Approval of Shepherd Creek Subdivision Consisting of 55 Single-Family Residential Building Lots and 7 Common Lots on 12.00 Acres in an R-8 Zone by RMR Consulting, Inc. (File# FP-07-003). submittal and offer the following comments and conditions of the applicant. ie considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION The applicant, RMR Consulting, Inc., has applied for final plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 7 common lots on 12.00 acres of land for Shepherd Creek Subdivision. The current zoning designation for the proposed subdivision is R-8 (Medium-Density Residential). The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 4.58 dwelling units per acre and the net density is 5.96 dwelling units per acre. Shepherd Creek Subdivision is located on the west side of Meridian Road, approximately %2 mile south of Overland Road in the SE 1/4 of T. 3N., R.1 W., Section 24. This property has not been previously platted. The City Council approved the preliminary plat for Shepherd Creek Subdivision on November 8, 2006 and the submitted final plat substantially complies with the approved preliminary plat. Staff recommends approval of Shepherd Creek Subdivision with the comments and conditions stated in this report. SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved annexation (AZ-00-018), preliminary plat (PP-06- 040), and development agreement (Inst. No. 107001570.). 2. The applicant has indicated that Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) will own and operate the required pressurized irrigation system in this development. Therefore a fax from NMID indicating plan approval, pressure irrigation system ownership and approved license agreement shall be submitted prior to scheduling of apre-construction meeting. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If a single-point connection to the potable water system 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. i ~. , _ , ~" - - - _ µ,~ ~~ 4 ~ ~ ~r,ar--tc~ V, ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~;~ , £~ ~: Exhibit "A" FP-07-003 Shepherd Creek Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 1 ~~ ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 4. All fencing installed on the site must be in compliance with UDC 11-3A-6 and 11-3A-7. Temporary construction fencing to contain debris shall be installed at the subdivision boundary where permanent fencing does not exist. Perimeter fencing shall be installed prior to release of building permits for this subdivision. 5. The applicant is proposing sewer service via extension of mains that flow to the Bear Creek Lift Station. This lift station is not currently eligible for further connections. The applicant may not sewer this property until such time as the Black Cat Trunk extension makes it possible for this development to sewer without the Bear Creek Lift Station. Therefore no building permits will be accepted on this site until such time as the sewer from this development bypasses the Bear Creek Lift Station. This condition may be rescinded by the City Engineer if new information arises from ongoing modeling exercise or other subsequent sources that proves there is capacity within the lift station. 6. The applicant shall be responsible to construct the Black Cat Trunk through this property. Coordinate main size, routing, and depths with the Public Works Department. 7. The applicant shall revise the off-site gravity irrigation construction plans to ensure that the City of Meridian has an adequate corridor to install the Black Cat Trunk through the "Church Site". 8. Revise the graphically depicted sewer easement on Lot 8, to read private sewer service easement. Add a note that refers to this easement. The note should dedicate the sewer easement to parcel # 88186120850. The applicant shall be responsible to construct the sewer and 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. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three-feet. If there is less than three feet from top of pipe to sub-grade then upgraded pipe materials shall be used per City of Meridian Standard Specifications. The contractor selected to install the water and sewer mains must be in possession of a current, valid Public Works Contracting License. 10. 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. 11. 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. 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 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. 12. Prior to occupancy of the first structure of this development, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department from the Meridian Fire Department approving the secondary emergency access to Meridian Road. 13. The applicant shall dedicate additional Public Utilities, Drainage and Irrigation Easements along interior lot lines where the pressurized irrigation system is being installed. There needs to be 5- Exhibit "A" FP-07-003 Shepherd Creek Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 2 ~~ •~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT feet past the centerline of pipe to comply with Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District requirements. 14. Special setbacks need to be graphically depicted on the face of the plat to comply with The Department of Environmental Qualities Best Management Practice of 20-feet of separation between a seepage bed and building foundation. 15. Graphically depict extra Public Utilities, Drainage and Irrigation easement along the right-of--way where the sidewalk is not located entirely within the right-of--way. The extra easement needs to be wide enough to ensure 10-feet of easement past the edge of sidewalk. 16. The last call in the Certificate of Owner's prior to the Real Point of Beginning does not match what is graphically labeled on the plat. The applicant shall ensure that the two descriptions are both accurate and congruent. 17. 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. 18. The proposed 6-foot parkways adjacent to W. Bear Track Drive and S. Alaska Way shall be constructed per UDC 11-3A-17E. 19. Revise or add the following plat notes on the face of the plat prepared by Stanley Consultants, and dated 12/06/06: (6.) Correct the spelling of "tie" to "time". (10.) Revise to read "...except Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 14, Block 2; Lot 1, 7, and 16 ..." (*.) Add note, "Bottom elevation of structural of footings shall be set a minimum of 12 inches above the highest established normal ground water elevation." (*.) Add note, "Individual lot owners are responsible for maintenance of any irrigation/drainage pipe or ditch crossing their lot unless maintenance responsibilities are assumed by an irrigation/drainage entity." (*.) Add note, "This plat is subject to a development agreement recorded as Instrument Number 107001570 of Ada County Records." 20. The landscape plan, prepared by Jensen Belts and dated 12/4/06, shall be revised as follows: a. Revise plan to accurately depict the block numbers. b. Include the fencing details on the face of the plan (i.e. construction materials, & picture/sketch). c. Label the fencing adjacent to Lots 1 and 16, Block 3 and Lot 1, Block 4. d. Include the tot lot details on the face of the plan. e. Include planting and installation details on the face of the plan. f. Depict three ornamental trees and one conifer on Lot 1, Block 4 as shown on the approved preliminary plat landscape plan. g. Revise the calculations table to accurately depict the required changes. Submit three copies of the revised landscape plan to the Planning Department prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer. 21. All areas approved as open space shall be free of wet ponds or other such nuisances. All stonnwater 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 Exhibit "A" FP-07-003 Shepherd Creek Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 3 i• •i CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 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. 22. Staff's failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or conditions of the preliminary plat does not relieve the Applicant of responsibility for compliance. STANDARD CONDITIONS Per UDC 11-3A-6 all irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, that intersect, cross or lie within the area being subdivided shall be covered. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department prior to plan approval. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, alternate plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 2. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be installed and activated, sewer system shall have passed air-testing and video inspection, 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. 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. 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. Exhibit "A" FP-07-003 Shepherd Creek Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 4 •~ •~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS STAFF REPORT 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 fmal plat within two years of the approval of the preliminary plat per UDC 11-6B-7A. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive phases in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted within successive intervals of eighteen months, maybe considered for fmal approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval per UDC 11-6B-7B. STAFF ItECONIMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the final plat for Shepherd Creek Subdivision (FP-07-003) with the above stated conditions. Exhibit "A" FP-07-003 Shepherd Creek Subdivision FP.doc PAGE 5 Kristy Vigil From: Matthew Schultz [schultzdevelopment@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 4:09 PM To: Kristy Vigil Subject: Shepherd Creek Final Plat Hi Kristy, Page 1 of 1 Unfortunatley, I have a last second hearing in Kuna on Tuesday night for an issue I would rather not go on, but I really need to be there. This a-mail is to confirm that I agree with the Staff Report on the Shepherd Creek Final Plat and as such, I will not be required to be there. Thank you! Matt Schultz RMR Consulting, Inc. 2127 S. Alaska Way Meridian, ID 83642 (20$) 880-1695 Cell (208} 893-5325 Fax schultzdevelopment@yahoo.com Don't get soaked. Take a quick_peak at the forecast with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut. Exhibit "B" 2/20/2007 Mar OS 07 03:13p Marg~ne 208-8~~88 p.i February 25, 2007 City Clerk's Office City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Deaz Reader, In reference to applicaxion PP 07-005 of Stanley Construction for Preliminary Plat approval (planning and Zaning Commission meeting March 1 S, 2007) the following comments are offered. I first saw Stanley Constructions' plat map in December, 2006. The proposed homes would be directly behind my property. Y would like to ask that some consideration be given to limiting the Gran Subdivision homes to 1.5 stories tall (similar to some of the townhouses on Wintertree) to maintain. a sense of privacy in our back yazds. If this is not possible, another solution might be to maintain the smallest setback allowed from the access on the east side of the properly. This would leave larger back yards and prevent the second floor of the homes from baking directly down into our back yards. Sincerely, G Margie Lame 1538 N. Wintertree Ave. Meridian, ID 83642 Mar OS 07 03:13p Margne 208-888 p.2 February 25, 2007 City Clerk's Office City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83542 Dear Reader, In reference to application PP 07-004 of Moose Creek Construction for Preliminary Plat approval (Planning and Zoning Commission meeting March 1 S, 2007) the following comments are offered. I last saw Moose Creeks' plat map in January, 2007. There appeared to be no plans to create a paved sidewalk on the west side of Sumrnertree Ave where a gravel walk-way naw exists. A paved sidewalk should be installed in the interest of public safety and to maintain a standard appearance to Meridian neighborhoods. Currently, adults and school children are forced to walk in the street to and from bus stops and to access Cherry Lane on foot. Additionally, the January plat showed access to homes off Summertree and Jones Creek Lane via a 20 ft wide "emergency accesslcainmon drive" which will be barricaded to prevent through traffic. This must be legal, but it seems to be barely adequate for long term use. Access off Chevy Lane or Jones Creek with a full size street would be a better solution and offer less confusion to emergency vehicles. Sincerely, ~~~ ~ ~~~ Margie Land 1538 N. Winterbree Ave. Meridian, ID $3642 • • February 16, 2007 MI 07-001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Lynn Brown ITEM NO. 11 REQUEST Continued Public Hearing From February 13, 2007 -Miscellaneous appli- cation to Modify the existing DA to allow all C-N permitted uses on lots 5, 6, 7 & 8, Block 25 of Cedar Springs Sub. No. 6 for Cedar Springs Professional Ctr - 710, 730, 750 & 7901 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 Minutes See Attached Staff Report Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Ma#erials presented at public meeflngs shall become properly of the Clay of Meridian. February 16, 2007 RZ 06-013 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 20, 2007 APPLICANT Paradigm Real Estate Holding ITEM NO. 12 REQUEST Public Hearing -- Request for a Rezone of .43 acres from an R-8 to O T zone for Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene Property at 39 W. Pine Avenue: AGENCY 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 COUNIY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: See Minutes from P ~ Z Comm See Attached Recommendation OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at pubNc meetings shag become property of the City of Meridian.