Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCrestwood Estates #4• XUBOFTREASUREVALLEY OFFICIALS JACK NIEMANN, Clty Clerk JANICE GASS, Troeeurer BRUCE D. STIIART, Weler Worke SuDI WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Allorney EARL WARD. Wasle Weter Supt. KENNY BOWERS, Flre CNeI RILL OORDON, Pollce Chet GARY SMITH, Clty Enpinaer A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone 588.4433 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCILMEN RONALD R. TOLSMA J. E. BERT MYERS ROBERT GIESLER MAX YERRINGTON C~Mrmm Zonlnp d flAnnlnp JIM JOHNSON January 2, 1991 Mr. Reed Coleman VP/Regional Manager Key Bank of Idaho P.O. Box 2800 Boise, Idaho 83701 re: Letter of Credit Three: Dear Mr. Coleman, The street lights have been installed in Crestwood Estates #4 and #5 Subdivision as required as part of the development. We are herewith returning Letter of Credit Number Three in the amount of $6,000.00 that was in the City of Meridian's favor for the account of T & R Construction, Inc. for those street lights. Sincerely, Cit Cler Cit of ridian, ID. 83642 CENTRAL . • • • DISTRICT ilf HF/~l_TF~ DEPARTMENT s.,~~re nn~ no,w .,n,a..~~ v.~~,r B9-434 Cwmb. huu Gwrcy Utlwr i~SS N. Orr;nntl now.. i0 n3]an riuninq' 3)}571 t EOHroMrwNal ~b.en. 3]5 5730 k m.r. Cauny OM@w 5?^ ~ hl: Rrewr N A10VlMw hbm., 'D n'BO Mr. John Bastida an)um Ada County Recorder 650 Main Street Fw,,,,»,;o„~,,onk»Boise, ID 83702 H• ~ .~~, sv.,n , Utz."'~~~~.~«•a. Re: Crestwood Estates No. 4 Subdivision u) e3r.a; •»'-4Ah Dear Mr. Bastida: -a to~~~w ~>r~.:<Central District Health Department, Environmental Health Division, has P.o lo•u`"reviewed and can a rove the final lat on this subdivision for central u.cao. us P..3finV. PP P ~'""°'water and central sewer facilities. Final approval was given on July 20, 1989. No lot size may be reduced without prior approval of the health authority. Sincerely, /_ ~ ~~ Thomas E. Schma~E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist II cc: Washington Federal Savings & Loan Hubble Engineering Meridian City Building Inspector Ada County Building Dept. HUD Tom Turco, Director of Environmental Health TS:bls PHONE: (20813755211 OPFICIALS JACK NIEMANN, Clly Clerk JANICE GA$$, Treasurer BRUCE D. BTDART, Water Works Supl. WAVNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney EARL WARD, Waste Water SUpt. KENNY BOWERS, Flre CNiel ROY PORTER, Police CKlel GARY SMITR, City Engineer • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone 8884433 GRAM P. KINGSFORD Mayor TD: Mr. John Priester, PE/LS Ada County Engineer Mr. Joe Fackler Bureau of Reclamation FROM: Jack Niemann, City Clerk RE: Crestwood Estates No. 4 Subdivision Plat COUNCILMEN RONALD R. TOLSMA J. E. BEAT MVERS ROBERTGIESLER WALT MORROW Clubmen Zonlnp d Plsnnlnp JIM JONNSON The final plat for this subdivision received approval at the regularly scheduled City Council meeting held on July 5, 1989. Approval is contingent upon approval by Ada County Highway District for streets and the City Engineer for sewer and water improvements. PY COUNCIL JULY ! Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Grant Kingsford at 7:30 P.M.: Members Present: Ron Tolsma, Bert Myers, Bob Giesler, Walt Morrow: Others Present: Gary Smith, Jason Williams, Mel Williams, K. Beumeler, Paul Stutzmian, Bill Gordon, Wayne Crookston: The Motion was made by Tolsma and seconded by Myers to approve the minutes of the previous meeting held June 20, 1989 as written: Item #1: RECOGNITION OF JASON WILLIAMS - SCOUT TROOP N0. 82: Kingsford: Mayor welcomed Jason and presented him with a Certificate of Appreciation for painting the 48 Fire Hydrants. Also, the American Legion is having dignitary night on July 24th, the ball game is at 8:00 and the ceremony is at 7:30 P.M.: Item #2: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT ON CRESTWOOD #4 6 PHASE I FINAL PLAT: Kingsford: Public Hearing is now open. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to testify. There was no response. The Public Hearing was closed. Is there any questions from the Council? Morrow: Have you corresponded with the comments on these sheets, Gary? City En:I talked to Don Hubble today Walt and asked him if he got them and if he understood them and he said there was no problem with them and they were in the process of making the changes. i did receive the sanitary water & sewer plans but have not had time to review them yet. This presents itsself as a good time to according to the preliminary information to connect Franklin Square Subdivision to the interceptor sewer. I talked to Don Hubble and asked him to prepare a proposal of the costs to prepare a plan profile sheet. Kingsford: When you have that water & sewer plan does that take it to their property line as per our Ordinance? City Engineer: No, they are extending it from the east boundary of Crestwood #4 final plat to the east and they are connecting to the south side of Crestwood #1 and then we would pick up on that line and extend it to the south and east of Franklin Square. Tolsma made the Motion and Myers seconded it to approve the Preliminary Plat on Crestwood #4 and phase I final plat with the recommendations of ACRD and City Engineer. Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #3: COVENANTS & RESTRICTIONS ON CRESTWOOD #4: City Attorney: I have a note here, at least one parking space of which shall be a garage, it doesn't speak about a two car garage. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL • • JULY 5, 1989 PAGE #2 Article 3 Section 2, talks about trailer houses, outhouses, garages, they shall not be erected prior to the principal dwelling building therein, it seems to indicate that after you have the principal dwelling constructed you could have those. Kingsford: It would be my feeling that Article 2 Section 7 should be amended, we've had a long standing policy of two car garage minimum. Attorney: Article 3 Section 10, is about fence heights there might be some clarification there because our Ordinance is different. Myers made a motion and Tolsma seconded it to table the Covenants & Restrictions on Crestwood #4 until the City Attorney has had a chance to work with T & R on those items. Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #4: PRE-TERMINATION HEARING: WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: Mayor Kingsford: This is to inform you in writing, if you choose to, you have the-right to a pre-termination hearing at 7:30 p.m., July 5, 1989, before the Mayor and City Council, to appear in person to be judged on facts. and defend the claim made by the City -that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain Counsel. The service will be discontinued on July 12, 1989 unless paid in full: Anyone from the public that would like to protest their water/sewer/trash delinquency. There was no response. They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial Court, Pursuant to-Idaho Code. Even though they appeal the water will be shut off. Is there a motion to approve the turn off list. Tolsma made a motion and Giesler seconded it to approve of the turn off list. Motion Carried: All Yea: Kingsford: The amount of the delinquencies for this month is $8,601.02. Item #5: APPROVE THE BILLS: Tolsma madea~motion and Giesler seconded it to approve the bills. Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #6: AMENDED ORDINANCE #487: Kingsford: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND CHANGING THE ZANE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS LOTS 4,5,6, AND 7, BLOCK 1, AND LOTS 4,5,6, AND 7, BLOCK 2, SETTLERS VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AND VACATING THE ACCESS EASEMENT TWENTY FEET IN WIDTH ALONG THE WESTERN END OF LOTS 3,4,5,6, AND 7 BLOCK 2, AND THE FIF'T'EEN FOOT WIDE WALKWAY EASEMENT ALONG THE NORTH END OF LOT 7, BLOCK 2. SETTLERS VILLAGE SUBDIVISION, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, BUT LEAVING IN TACT THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS THAT RUN CONCURRENT TO THE ACCESS AND WALKWAY EASEMENTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public that .would like Ordinance #487 read in its entirety? The Motion was made by Giesler and seconded by Tolsma that the rules and provisions of 50-902 and all rules and provisions requiring that Ordinances be read on three different days be dispensed with and that Ordinance Number 487 as read be passed. and approved. W y~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro A R R R r• W `RC N r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1r~'jr r W ~ ~G ~i p O~ R Oo N ~ r• rG• R rr rp• O .p r W ~ d ~ ~ T ~ iii••+++ ~ R] bT rpr r r. A ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~'~ ~ ~ a rt ~~ ~ o ~ ~~ ~ K Q N K n 0 `d ~i-- o ~ 1 A d ~ ' `` P ~,- v 1 ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ i ~ a ~~ I ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ i ~~ 1' '~~ ~ a rv ~z~ ~ n .. iii iiiiiiiii ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ 5 °c n °° g m n~ n dd o ~r ~• ~' ~ 00 ~N x LT7[ +f ~ ro ~x ~ ~ ot~~i LT1H Mro MH ~ ~z H rK~ £ K zHoc ''' z r ~ K~ ~ ~ ~ °° y r - ~ a ro m H C n ~ ° ° m c z zw H ~~o A 7 H 7c ° o zx ~ ro o t+f ~o z o H u g ~ ~ a ~ ~ d n ~ ~ r + ~ ~~ H '~ r r x .. ` r n ~ i ,°+ 5 y ~ ~ czi H ~°i z ~ so -` ^ r r• ~ o ¢ o m K r z ~ M o y ~ ~ ~ i v [+7 L" r- ':] O H ~' ~ ~ ~ [~~1 ~ d ~ n ~ q r• ~ ~ W ( 1 W $, o o r p O C c ~ R ~ ~ x H ~ O ~ y ~ ~ ~ O ~ C ~ -a ~• ~ ~ r ~~*~ ~ ffi ~~~ n w ~• K n a~ • n ~g cN~~~o ~ o ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ dS `~ N ~4 v -r rt ~ a rMn C 7 ~t r N ~O W d N rr ~'i A W I~D ~ IH• v ITT ~ Irt+• ~q ~f N• N ~ ~ ~ y Fm, ~i a+ ~ r m :' ~ 9 S ~ ~ rr ~ W R m ~ a ~ K o ~ '~ k ~ H ~ F c ~ v `~ n H ~' ~ F~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~'t W _y 3 O d d H K w ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ o x r • G m o n g r J ~ r r o m ro w r F° ~ r• ~ ~. o. ~ y m ` ° m o n m ~ • o w n~ a n ~• ~ ~ ~- y ~ n n n r~ n o ' r• w rD r~ n p ~ m v r tz n r ~• ~ a' w m o •• m a w r r• r•~ ~ r w m w d w o r m p m C n a n h, c a - n w ~ o n r-i ~ r n E v m a n w w w c r• r fD rt ~ O y 00 ~ N fD M n W w rt r• o rt w w ~ of o m •c r n m 7 r-+ n w I r a a - w n d w m ~ ~ g n ~-'• ~• ~' C rn w w N o w m w rt r f9 r rt 1+. n n ~ o d ~• o c ^ n n rt N N H• b N C w n n n o r I rt rt w w ro to n m r• n w o O C r* m ~ In (D N rt rt • a a w • n rt w~ s :~ ~. _o -F -k~ yr -i.7 .ca -+P+ "~ b -oa ~ " a " ~ ~ o 7 ~~' ' n ~ ~ ,~ r ~ t 6 7 ~ • R O W W 1 -' ~ n O fD ~ c n ~ n °n ~ ° ' ~ 00 ~~~x • ~ H ~ ~C • x :U ° °z c cro y x~ o~~Z~' ~H ~ C ro~ H~k~ ~z E~ ° ~ • k z ~4 HOC y H ~ ~ A ~ y ;TI r t^ N ~ n ~ y F~ H U1 r'' v b a, ro ~ a~Oe ~ m H ~ (] l0 ti G ~ m O O ~ oC Z4 x ~ -. ~m bd H t ~i ~~o ~ d+ o ~ H H~ + H to H t ] z ~ o ~ x ro o t~ ~ H C7 O .ro Arr ~b ~K ~~,n ~ ~ f1 rnm N~ ~R ~~mpp~ ,7 K ~^' ~0?t G ID K °z H x hi N H H d t+] 0 r H z d t9 iC ro ro O x H CfJ r 0 t+7 H x O C H x A N ° r ~' ~ ',O ~ J S 1 2 b ~ ~ 1 ~ [ G= d ! V ~ H ~ N ro x 1D rnr ~ ~ z A "7 H m ~ o ~ z~t ~~ ~ a ~~r j K p ~ ~ ~ t H ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ a ~ ro H ~ ~ ~. o O H H ~ C d ! C O •EM1TRAI, DISTRIC'1 HEALTH DEPARTAIEN"I' ENVIRONh1ENTAL HEALTH DIVISION 1455 North Orchard Boise, Idaho 83706 REVIEW SHEET Return to: Boise Rezone # Eagle _ Conditional llse # _~ ^lcriclivt Preliminary/Eir~al Short Plat Kuna PhQSf ~ Cves~woc~ Cs~. n~n. ~ ACl 1. We have no ohjections to this proposal. 2. _ We recamiend denial. of this proposal. 3. _ Speci Eic knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comrent on this proposa.l.. 4. _ [ve will r~uire more datx3 concerning soil conditions on this proposal before we cvt cexcrnent. 5. We will rey u].re more data concerning the depth of (high seasonal ground watsr)(solid lavz~t) from origiiul grade before we can ccnment concerning individual sewage disposal. h. _ We can approve this proposal for individt><a.1 sewage disposa to be located (2,4) feet alxrve solid lava layers. 7. ~ lip can approve this proposal for: Central sewage _Interim sewage Individual sewage _ Community sewage systc~n and ~yCentral water Individual water _ Canmvrit:y water well. 8. ~ Plans for Central sewage _Cormatnity sewage system Sewage dry lines, and Central water _Comrnmity water must he sulxnitted to and approved by the Regional Health and Welfare Environmental Services Field Office. 9. ~ Street rtmoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 10. - This deix3rtmenC would reccxmiend deferral until high seasonal grotutd water can be determincrl if other considerations indicate approval.. 11. 1f restrocxn facilities are to be instilled then a sewage system NNSI be instilled to mE't't Idaho State Sewage Regulations. 12. _ We will ra~{uire plans be submitted for a plan review for any (food est;hlishment)(beverage establishinent)(swimtiing px>ls or spas)(grocery store). l3. Reviewed by ~~ ~ ~ I~tc NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., on July 5, 1989, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of T & R Construction and Washington Federal Savings and Loan for a preliminary plat of Crestwood Estates No. 4 & Final Plat on Phase I of Crestwood #4, Lots 1 thru 7, Blk. 5 & Lots 10 thru 23 Blk. 4 which is generally located at SW 12th Avenue south of Franklin Road, for approval of approximately 130 lots. Amore particular legal description for the parcel is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Meridian and is available upon request. Public comment will be taken and is welcome. DATED this 13th day of June, 1989. O v~ m~ • IIOP OC OIi . ~ o JL ~ ~' I3 'N '1 ~ p C~ ' "- ~-- ---- ~ - n W e /gyp 0 ~ .` ~ O O 1 %o ® ® ® ~ , /O ~ ® \t i O ~ I ~ i - ~ ® ® R / ® ~~ O ~ ® ~ I . ~ %p / " 0. ® ® ~ ~ ' ~ ' / ® L ® ® 0 ® i ® ~ ' I i ' ~ i ® ~ ~ '© ~ i ® ~ 1 I ~ / ® ® ® i i ® ~ ® ® ~ ~ 1 ~ 8 ®® ® ®1 ~ ~ ~ t-__-_-_ ~ ® ® - ~_ - ~ ~ ® ®I ®I ® I m~m i ~ ® ~L J~ i ~ I ® t / / 8 ' i ® ® a , m -- ;, - ~®/© -- ~ ~ /, .; ® , ®~ ~ ~ ~®~ ® ~® ® ® ,~~ m ~ ® ~ ® ,\ o .® - ® i ® D ~ ® ® ® 8 ~® ® / i ~ ~, ~) l.~ s sl 'M .oo,oao s O ~____ m~ - -- ~I `i v •- i "' `~ ~ I "~ I~ o rn I I .$ 4g e I~ II 1 a ~~~ dpi ae'.e :~ y _ s ~ R 5 83a rl ,. K ~ A ~ ~ g$ ~ 5 ~~ ~~g 0 V ~ ~_ e g ~ B ~~g$~ Wl~i ~- ~ ~ ~ i ~ F ~`si 'OA ~F oaooi " ` < ri 3-A.iLr ~- ~ 01 ` E O ^ I I NhI ry "> s ~ Vyy D^ ^I u R I `V 0 0• s 11 1 I ~ I I Q 3 I I I I wxo~ ~ 1[. N lT~ -j ~ Z ~. F oo'oi a~ N ,I q " ~ "'M1 ~ ~_ ~ Ii ~ ~~ ~ o • .> V `~ l L1 ~ ~ i •$p092 ~ _aa u Z € 0] Z ~ ~,p OL'LB ~ O W ~ O ~ ;l, 3 ,OO,lLO 'N ~ a ~ ¢ ~ ~ ~ a ~ w ~ Z J C Z¢ f W U (~ N h 2 a ctf z~ Q m $ a c YY ~ ° C~ W ~ t ~ ¢ (C Fem.. W ~ 2• ~ ~ n U ,oa•s~ 'M ,OO,SLBB 'S • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ F; ~7 3, ~ a~• #~ ~ ~ ff~ Y® i~, Rn gig ~~ ~~ ya Q i~ ~y 3~ a' a~ ~'' 9~ $a a8 ~~ ~° s~. . , ~ " s ~~ ' $ d~ nE n~'. ~~~;~ ~c ~\ ~'rj \~ r<,~ ® aS ~ ~ S g9 6~k i~ Yd SS ® ® ~ ~ en 3f "s:. i. a~ . M ao.~ia s ~' ~= v a a ~¢ W Y,g ~ .. n .w.i~ 8 / /3. d'^ ® ~ ~~n n / m~ d ,~ e'ez~ .oo,~ `x. Seo~ \\, O Z 2 Z ~ a " 3 a / F ^ o { to m W h ar w ~ a 4 y , O 6 oN pp ~C] O ~ ^ Z m~ m 3 ~~ v a ry i no o0 on z ~ .W I ° i r~ v ' 1 o I I I ~ ~ r ~ ~ V <~ ~ m ~ ( or LLo ~ vi .oTO g ' .e as m~ 0 I ~ m o ~ a 5 a = r. N$ m n m~ 3 = . / / l, iex. ~e~ ' ,BC96s ~ .. avoa loaan s O .P W om m mN „Z ® ® S 8 /f .[b pew .may ` Lr S 1/ 3 W~eT h/v Q^ ® ~ '°O eo 2r, Po~ ~~ N WT<~ b Y3 " T O ® V` °f' J ti a. "O~'c<~ h~ O 'W.ff~~eTB T s p/y~/ r s .~' v ~ ~ ®/ °' 'Of av o 8g '/A ~,. M1y't '$. ® ~ ~. n ~. 0 ® ~ ~;~ I 0 /y. N ~~ fir ' g; n ~~ v. ~ .oz-cnz (3 ,oc,oaa s1 .1S'L58i 3 .Sf.00.0 'S ,Se'9l ('M .Of.00.0 'N) 'M ,5£,00.0 'N f~\ e~°~~: ns~~~ aF~€8 €O€£. a°~o t~~mZq FB-jk 0~'^£6` ~~°~~ ~s~sE )! ~~ ~ a°~ ~ ~~ ~$ ~ ~ °a . ~f ~~ ~ ~€ ~~~ ~ ~n~ ~ 3a~ ~ ~ YE~ 33 f~c o ~ E o ~~a o m ~ a ~F~ ~ n "$$ ~ ~€~ a G C C C r~$ N 3 & ~ g a S ~~~~~ ®®®® 9 o~ ~ oe~Z ?~ ~.~~i I I I I I~ I I •I~~I ~.I~.I~I`,I,~~I ~ ro~~ ~ ~ ~~,~~~~~~~ ~,~~~ ~~~~~ rr Sgt rr O H 't ro G flW+ Na N n C7 O 3 ~ K~ ~ O pwy '~ n ~ r'' ;H 7 7 a~j ~ rt ~ ~ 'O c K n W N Oc N N r(0'f] rHf ~, W ~O x ~ a' ? ~ ~ K ~ ~ L rs O • l] ~S a ~' O ~ ~ F+• ~b a' O ~ K K~ ~ m o n x~ k~ d a n n a~ d a~ r°* °~ n (~ W N w w R K w W ~. H 4 w fn ~ rat O ~ a ~ r't ~ a, a Y ~ ~ ~ 3 W ro z m ~ ~ ro ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ y ~~ ro ~ a ~ a ~c~ O m o a ~ '~ ~ H ~ ~ o '~ n ~ ° [Hay ° ~ a K £ rwr t~] H y ~ "G ~ O H H 7~Wa ':J H ~ '.d H K ~~ m ~ ~. I~,I ~ h~L I .,~.~ e~•~ ~ ~ ax~~~~o ~ ~ O N u m ~ n ~ a M t'• fl. ro r H C H H H [~] ro x H p ~ H trJ CI] x C7H fn ~z~ o y H ~ H H tr] H t+ K °z~~4 H • ° z ar ~ ~~~ ~ IC H U1 ~ r ~ ~' ro ~ rHr r ~z~o H ~ 4 C1 ~o G OO a z 4 ~ N C1Q"17 H ~ f7 O .a LTJ H Af CA H [i7 H O H ~zH ~o O x ao o ~ ~ 0 p b N~ z b ~ o r ~ ~ n N y ~ ~ 1 S ~ d ~ ~ x ~ O C ~qpp C ,~~p C ~ C l1 DC H ~p r V~ H ~~ y ~ z H H 7 G o m a N n ro H nn f+ n W H tH+7 K Lz"1 'p H H L~TJ z FC n ~ r W O ~ ~ • '~ Z H C m H ~ [ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ MOC [*! ~ ~ K d H fA O ry n ~ y t -~ y b n ~ ~ ( p O, H C ~ P7 y ~~ OH t•~ H~ W N W t•i H ~ . n ~ a rr n H z ~ ro W ~ (n H to ~ e~ ~' ~? °: •• o o ~p O ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H k H S~ d CO N R OFFICIALS JACK NIEMANN, Clty Clerk JANICE GASS. Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. W AYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney EARL WARD. Waste Water Supt. KENNY BOWERS. Firs Cniel BILL GORDON, Police Citllef GARY SMITH. City Engineer HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone 888433 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor July 10, 1991 Mr. Jerry Iverson 6025 Randolph Drive Boise, Idaho 83709 re: Crestwood Property: Dear Mr. Iverson, COUNCILMEN RONALD R. TOLSMA J. E. BERT MYERS ROBERT GIESLER MA%YERRINGTON Caatrmen Zoning a Planning JIM JOHNSON In response to your letter dated t9ay 31, 1991 on the above property, I asked the Mayor, City Council Members and the Manbers of the Planning & Zoning Ca:mission for camients on this issue. It was their concensus that as both Mr. Buckner and Washington Federal Savings & Loan were aware of the R. V. Parking Lot being designated on the Preliminary Plat that was previously approved before the purchase of the property, that the R.V. Parking and Tennis Court Area still required to be constructed. They did not seen to have any objections to the relocation of the lot as long as the current residents of Crestwood Estates #3, #4 and #5 are in agreement. One other itan, under the City of Meridian Zoning & Development Ordinance 11-9-604-F, the Prel~m;nary plat beccn3es null and void if the applicant fails to submit final develo~7t plans within one year of the Council approval of the Preliminary Plat. In the event that the developtent is made in successive contiguous segments, such secynents, if submitted within successive intervals of one year, maybe considered for final approval without resutmission for preliminary plat approval. The last Final Plat for Phase #5 was approved by the Council on February 20, 1990, therefore, under the Ordinance the status of the Preliminary Plat is null and void. If the developer requested an extension on the Preliminary Plat it may or may not be granted by the Council. If you elected to file a new Preliminary Plat, which would require Public Hearings before both the Planning and Zoning Coinnission and the City Council with all the residents within three hundred feet being notified of the hearing, the Commission and the Councillrould require the original R.V. Parking and Tennis Courts as the present preh m;naYy plat shaWS and as were represented to be included on the plat. / City Clams- & Zoning Acfiiinistrator C ty of idian, ID. pc: Mayor & Council, P & Z M~nbers Attorney, File HUB OFTREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS JACK NIEMANN, City Clerk JANICE GASS. Treasurer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supl. WAVNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney EARL WARD. Waste Water Supt. KENNY BOWERS, Fire Chief BILL GORDON, Police Chief GARY SMITH, Clty Engineer A Good Place [o Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone 888-4433 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor July 10, 1991 NIr. Jerry Iverson 6025 Randolph Drive Boise, Idaho 83709 re: Crestwood Property: Dear NIr. Iverson, COUNCILMEN RONALO R. TOLSMA J. E. BERT MVERS ROBERT GIESLER MAX YERRINGTON Chairmen ZOning 8 Planning JIM JOHNSON In response to your letter dated May 31, 1991 on the above property, I asked the Mayor, City Council M~nbers and the Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission for calments on this issue. It was their consensus that as both Mr. Buckner and Washington Federal Savings and Loan were aware of the R.V. Parking Lot being designated on the Preliminary Plat that was previously approved before the purchase of the property, that the R.V. Parking and Tennis Court Area still aeeEled~2 i~~.~¢./ to be constructed. They did not seem to have any objection to the relocation of the lot as long as the current residents of Crestwood Estates #3, #4 and #5 are in agreanent. One other item, under the City of Meridian Zoning & Development Ordinance 11-9-604-F, the Preliminary. Plat becanes nul and void if the applicant fai]S to subTnit final development plans within one year of the Council approval of the Preliminary Plat. In the event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments, such segment if sulmitted within successive intervals of one year, may .~ c considered for final approval without resulmi.ssion for preliminary plat approval. The last final plat for phase #5 was approved by the Council on February 20, 1990, therefore, under the Ordinance the status of the Preliminary Plat is null and void. If the developer requested an extension on the Preliminary Plat it may or may not be granted by the Council. If you elected to file a new Prel;m;nary Plat which would require Public Hearings before both the Planning and Zoning Cacmission and the City Council with all the residents within three hundred feet being notified of the hearing, could require the orginal R.V. Parking and Tennis Courts as the present preliminary plat showsan d a 5 w6 r G fLPf GS an'~rq~ ~. fie. t.~C~4~ .l eh 7~"<!c Pl~~ Sincerely, ~~t COMm135iin one{ ~6r-t n.L. l Jack Niemann City Clerk City of Meridian, ID. 83642 June 7, 1991 Mr. Jack Niemann City of Meridian Re: Crestwood Estates Sub / Iverson letter This appears to be a developer and land owner problem that could best be solved by pressure put on by the homeowners and not by the City of Meridian. What is our legal responsibility here? It would seem a lawsuit i~'not unlikely between the parties involved and can we avoid getting mixed up in it? Many subdivisions have their own "RV" parking areas, but these are placed there by the developers and are not required or advocated by regulatory bodies or even addressed by zoning ordinances. It is surely much more common for no such parking facility to exist at all. Promises of parking areas, tennis courts, parks and other such amenities by the developer are something he should have to live with when confronted by concerned homeowners as they have made these promises to attract buyers and any developer than follows in his footsteps has only a moral obigation to full the promises, probably not a legal one. This is where the approved plat comes in, I guess. In this case with the facility being planned for the use of all of the members of the entire sub as it developer, I assume it was too small to begin with and can see the reason for the "screening proposal and the Hubble Engineering plan looks to make the best use of the area. Yes, it might be inadequate to serve everyone, but is that our problem? Most subdivisions have no such facility at all. I can't agree with everything in Mr. Iverson's letter,such as his statement that "RV parking should only be located in a responsible commercial facility, ". I also don't know what he means by "risks and costs" to homeowners of having such an area. My response is that if there is a way to stay out of this mess we should. Takes a legal opinion as to whether or not we can do that. Best Regards, ~,~.~'~ ~ m Johnson ) C ~ ~ ,`'~4 Chairman P & Z '~ l ~ i ~~~ Meridian VVV ~',', : [ ~ ,j~ ~~~. ~~ '' JUNE 5, 1991: MAYOR COUNCIL MEP9BERS P & Z Mf2'1BERS ATTACHED IS A LETTER F'f20M JERRY IVER.SON REGARDING THE RV PARKING IN CRES7WOOD ESTATES SUBDIVISION: PLEASE ADVISE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS SO I CAN ANSWER MR. IVER.SONS LETPER: THANKS, JACK NIII~7ANN CITY CLERK & ZONING ADM. May 31, 1991 Jack Niemann City of Meridian Meridian, Idaho Dear Mr. Niemann: Bill Buckner has recently decided to pursue final approval and platting of a portion of the property he recently purchased in Meridian. When he purchased the property, he was shown a copy of the preliminary plat which included a site for a proposed RV parking facility or recreational lot. Mr. Buckner was aware of the unsightly existing RV facility now being used by the homeowners in Crestwood Estates 1 and 2. Knowing that amenities of this type were usually at the discretion of the developer who uses these facilities to attract customers to his subdivision, he reasoned that the facility could be altered or deleted from a final plat. After purchasing the property, he became aware of the current controversy created by the promises and omissions of the previous developer and owners. Vde have since been endeavoring to cooperate with the previous developer and homeowners in Crestwood Estates 3,4 and 5 to reach a reasonable solution. Mr. Buckner's concern is to insure that an RV parking lot does not destroy the esthetics of the subdivision and force the residents of his area to be subject to the liability and ugliness of such a facility. I'm sure the members of the Meridian City Council need only view the present parking area to have concerns about locating their own home next to such a site. We have .proposed a site plan that screens the RV area by placing three building lots in front with a fenced drive back to the area. Combined with fencing and landscaping the effects of the area could be mitigated. The parcel, as proposed, offers 61 spaces ranging. in size from 10'x20' to 12'x30'. A standard parking space being 9'x20'. This represents a good mix of spaces for 37g of the lots in all existing and proposed phases of the subdivision area. A facility of this size in conjunction with a parking committee assigning spaces based on size requirements should more than adequately meet any demand. We are adamantly opposed to any further expansion of the designated RV area. We have received a letter from the attorney representing Crestwood Estates #3 indicating that they would accept such a proposal if it is for their use only. Such demands could rapidly create an impasse in negotiations for providing the facility for any joint use. We are also concerned about the precedent established by the Council requiring a facility that may not be in the best interests of the existing and future home- owners in the subdision. A homeowner's association will not be able to properly police the site and assure the City, the irrigation district and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation that the site will not be used by irresponsible people performing vehicle maintenance and dumping toxic oils, cooling fluids or other chemicals or wastes on or near it. RV parking should only be located in a responsible commercial facility. The insurance and liability for such a site is an undue burden upon the majority of homeowners who will not use the facility but must absorb the risks and costs of it. If the City of Meridian desires to impose the site as a restriction on the development, the homeowners in Crestwood Estates 3,4 and 5 would still have to have a 2/3rds vote of its members in order to annex a pro- portional undivided interest to the property, and the previous developers involved would have to reach agreement with us for the costs of developing and providing the parcel for them. Mr. Buckner believes that the best solution would be for the previous developer to obtain a properly zoned off site parcel for the RV parking area. This would place the facility away from the 10 mile ditch and put the parking in an area more suitable for it. The homeowners in the existing subdivisions can then decide if they want to absorb the expenses and liability for the site. Our engineering firm, Hubble Engineering, and Mr. Buckner are looking for direction on this issue. We would like to file a final plat similar to the site submitted with this letter. We would appreciate input from yourself, the City Council and the city's legal counsel on this matter. Sincerely yours, F Willi Buckner J rr verson _-60 Randolph Dr. Boise, Idaho 83709 377-5149 ~ ~~w y ~~~~ ^ l~ N ~ ,, \1 ~ ^ \~ ~ ~ ~ Q x `~c~ O u O 0 O ~/ ,~ W ~ w C y C ~ (~ z c~ 2 h ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ c ~ ~7 ~ ~ ~ z c~ ~ ~d r z z / / ~ I ~ / ~ ~/ / O / / / O / / V ~ 'I _~ < < ~D ~ ! 1 _=~ ~ ~ i_ ~ 1 1 ~ IIIIIIIIII ~ ~ !~ ' ! j~~ ~ ~- ~ I I S 1 4 ~- • ~~ ,_-« LAWYERS W ANTHONY DARK p~RK PATRICK D COSTELLO F MICHAELBURHETT E1l 0 SERG1O A. GUTIERREZ . C~ST & BURKETT William J. Buckner c/o Jerry Iverson Investors Realty, Inc. 6025 Randolph Dr. Boise, ID 83709 KEY FINANCIAL CENTER 102W IDAHO P.O.0O%Sd1 • BOISE.IDAHO 93101 • 12091 Ja5~]900 FAX 2091 JaS]e9c CALDWELL OFFICE. • 11TH 8BWINE • PO. BOX tJ29 CALOWELL.IDAHO 93605 12091 A59~001] FAX 12001 a59~0090 May 22, 1991 Re: R.V. Parking Lot/Crestwood Estates No. 3 Dear Mr. Buckner: I am the attorney for the Crestwood Estates Homeowners' Association. My clients are presently involved in negotiations with T & R Construction concerning the my clients' demand that T & R provide the owners of homes in Crestwood Estates Subdivision No. 3 with an R.V. parking lot and tennis courts. It is my understanding that you purchased from Washington Federal Savings & Loan the remaining property in the Crestwood Estates Subdivision and it is your intention to develop and market for sale that property. Your representative, Jerry Iverson, advised my clients and me at a recent meeting that you are prepared to provide a limited amount of R.V, parking, which would be available to the Crestwood Estates Homeowners' Association, but that they would have to share it with the homeowners in Crestwood Estates Subdivisions 4 and 5 and with the potential owners in the "new phase" of Crestwood Estates. My clients have reviewed this proposal and find it to be unacceptable. They are unwilling to share such a limited amount of R.V. parking with the other homeowners. It is their feeling that the space which you have allotted for this purpose would be adequate for only the homeowners in Crestwood Estates Subdivision No. 3. If you would be willing to dedicate this space for the exclusive use of my clients, they believe that it may be a viable proposal. I should add, however, that they are continuing their negotiations with T & R Construction for the construction of tennis courts, as well. If the R.V. parking lot situation can be satisfactorily resolved, that would be significant progress. Would this be something you would consider favorably? William J. Buckner May 22, 1991 Page 2 WAP:jac I will await your reply. Very truly ours, ~~ W. ON AR cc: Larry Ridenour, Pres. Crestwood Estates Homeowners P_ssoc. ~ ~ May 25, 1991 w. Anthony Park Park Costello & Burkett P.O. Box 547 Boise, Idaho 83701 Dear Mr. Park: I received your letter of May 22, 1991 and forwarded to Mr. Buckner. Bill and I also conversed on the phone and came to a disturbing conclusion that we could rapidly reach an impasse on negotiations if all the parties don'T. respect each others concerns. Mr. Buckner's main objective is to develop, at his risk, a subdivision that will allow him to make a return on his investment commensurate with the risks involved and will serve as a source of pride to him and be a model for his future developments in our area. The unsightly character of the existing RV parking facility in the area raised concerns about the preliminary plat design, where this facility was merely included to placate the demands now being made. A RV parking site could very well be a sales asset to a subdivision. However, nobody wants to live next to an eyesore. For this reason, any RV center in or near the designated location must be screened from view. We felt that fronting lots on the street would allow the facility to only adversely affect the 5 or 6 lots backing up to it and with proper fencing and landscaping it would be acceptable. The City of Meridian may very well turn down our request for the additional lots in front of the RV center. If they do, we are nat prepared to further jeopardize sales in our part of the area with an atrocious facility of that size or scope. Instead, I see our only option as developing the piece as an asset to our area. Perhaps a baseball diamond would be appropriate. Mr. Buckner sees himself as the innocent party in this disagreement. We intend to develop the property according to the Meridian City subdivision and zoning ordinances. We do not believe that either the City or private homeowners in Crestwood Estates Subdivision #3 have to right of condemnation or eminent domain over Mr. Buckner's fee simple title to the property. Furthermore, subdivision amenities are at the discretion of the developer and not a requirement of the zoning ordinance. This letter is not to be construed as a disinterest in assisting your clients or T&R Construction in solving the dispute. However, we are concerned that the cost to Mr. Buckner in subdivision value and the loss of building lots would be so high, that we would have to recover these costs from T&R Construction. we do not know the financial condition of this firm and would be concerned that a bankruptcy of this company is not in the best interests of your clients. I would estimate that our loss of building lots and the cost of a properly constructed tennis court is in excess of $60,000. Since the land in dispute was originally designed for the entire subdivision area, I see the only feasible way to raise these funds would require Mr. Buckner's cooperation with the development. Under this scenario, the amount of RV parking area would still have to be contained within the proposed site, as presented to you at the meeting on May 21, with the balance maintained as some type of attractive park like facility for use of all the homeowners. You may want to remind your clients that they only represent a small portion of the proposed 161 lots in the total development area. Any development considera- tions that we agree to must conform with the wishes of all 66 homeowners in Crestwood 3,4 and 5 plus the majority 95 lots in our area. Given these problems, concerning the RV parking facility, I am beginning to think that the solution to the problem may lie in going off site for the facility. Either T&R could purchase adequate light industrial/storage ground in the area or perhaps we could obtain a larger piece to share. This would be conditioned upon Mr. Buckner being able to develop the original RVP lot in the manner he desires. This plan may also allow our proposed RV site to be used for a recreational facility or park with a pro-rata contribution from T&R Construction. The older Crestwood Estates 1 and 2 may also be interested in participating in an off site RV parking area. Please discuss with your clients and let me if they want to pursue any viable alternatives. I would be willing to attempt to find or negotiate for an off site parcel that could be purchased by T8R for them or by T&R and Mr. Buckner. It appears to me that what T&R is doing is, essentially, locating an off site parcel by attempting to acquire an interest in Mr. Buckner's property. Establishing the facility elsewhere may be the only alternative. Very truly yours, Jerry Iverson .._ .......... / \ / Q ., ~, ,, ~ - ~ ' Y ~ ( •' i ~ / ' .... ~~ / ~ / / ';~ ..1 ~ r . 1 ;~ ~, •' , $ ~ ` / S J ~~'~'. / 1 ~•_ t' ~;~ / _ ~. r 1 I ,V i _N.- "rte 7 ~~ ~w~ ~_ AMBROSE, FITZGERALD 6L CROOKSTON ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS 1530 WEST STATE - P. O. BOX 127 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 GRANT L. AMBROSE p915.1968) JOHN O. FITZOERALD, P A. THIS FIRM INCLUDES PRVIESSIONAL CORFOMTONS WAYNE U. CROOKSTON.JR., P. A. WILLIAM J. SCHWA RTZ July 8, 1991 Jack Niemann City Clerk Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: CRESTWOOD ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT R.V. PARKING LOT & TENNIS COURT Dear Jack: TELEPHONE 888-H61 AREA CODE 208 You have inquired as to the legal status of the preliminary plat of Crestwood Estates #'s 4, 5, and 6, particularly regarding the recreational vehicle parking and the tennis court. I have reviewed the preliminary plat and the R.V. parking lot is included thereon, and was included thereon at the time of approval of the preliminary plat by the City Council on July 5, 1989. To date the final plats of phases 4 and 5 of Crestwood Estates have been approved, with the last final plat for phase 5 being approved on February 20, 1990, by the City Council. It is my understanding that the present developer of the subdivision proposes to either delete the R.U. parking lot and tennis court, or reduce the R.V. parking lot in size. It is my further understanding that there are owners in Crestwood Estates numbers 4 and 5 who are complaining of the loss or diminution of the R.V. parking lot and the loss of the tennis court. I have researched this matter, particularly in our own subdivision ordinance, and in several treatises on the matter. Regarding our own ordinances the following sections should be consulted: to-wit: 11-9-604 F., APPROVAL. 1., which states as follows: " Council approval of the preliminary development plan shall become null and void if the applicant fails to submit the final development plan within one year of Council approval of the preliminary development plan". 11-9-604 F., APPROVAL. 3., which states as follows: "In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive contiguous segments and in orderly and reasonable manner and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments if submitted within successive intervals of one year, may be considered for final approval without resubmission for preliminary plat approval". 9-606 A., RESPONSIBILITY FOR PLANS, which reads as follows: "It shall be the responsibility of the subdivider of every proposed subdivision to have prepared by a registered engineer a complete set of construction plans, including profiles, cross sections, structural and special details specifications, and other supporting data for all required public streets, utilities, and other facilities. Such construction plans shall be based on conceptual plans which have been approved with the preliminary plat and shall be prepared in conjunction with the final plat. Construction plans are subject to approval by the responsible public agencies. All construction plans shall be prepared in accordance with the respective public agencies standards or specifications". 9-606 C., GUARANTEE OF COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS, which states as follows in part: " The owner of the property being subdivided shall grant to the City a lien to secure the placement and construction and completion of all improvements required under 9-506 B or any other requirements made by the Council prior to final plat. The lien shall be granted by the owner of the property and shall be filed with the administrator prior to the cities approval of the final plat. If the owner and or developer do not complete the required public improvements, the City may do so and foreclose its lien given by the owner.... ". 9-606 D., PENALTY IN CASE OF FAILURE TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT: "In the event a subdivider and or owner shall, in any case, fail to complete the public improvements required as a condition of the final plat in the time period required it shall be the responsibility of the Council to proceed to have such work completed, either by foreclosing its lien or in the event financial guarantees have been required to pursue the remedies provided by those financial guarantees. Under these sections it is the preliminary plat which forms the basis of subdivision development, and the final plat must be prepared in conformance with the preliminary plat. Since the preliminary plat shows the R.V. parking lot, and I assume the tennis court area, and such were included on the preliminary plat at the time the City Council approved it on July 5, 1989, the only way the plat could be amended would be to go back through the hearing process for plat approval. Also under Section 11-9-604 F, since it is also my understanding that the subdivider has not requested extension of time, that technically the preliminary plat approval has expired. If it has expired the developer would have to go through the platting process again to have a new plat or to have the void preliminary plat reapproved. This, of course, would necessitate the public hearings and notice to property owners required under the platting process. The treatise that I have located regarding this matter is The Law of Zonin and Plannin which deals more particularly with tTie right ~ suFdiv~ertaining to actions by the City, and in that regard does state that if a developer has preliminary plat approval and has expended funds in construction and placement of public utilities and improvements that even though final plat approval has not been obtained he is likely to be able to enforce approval of the final plat, if it is in accordance with the preliminary plat. It would appear to be commensurate with the idea that the City, and the existing owners in the finally platted portion of the property, could enforce the improvements approved in the preliminary plat against the developer, particularly if the plat was represented to have those improvements as part of the total development. It is my understanding that the original subdivider, T & R Construction, has sold the property and there is a new developer involved. It is also my understanding that the new developer, prior to or at the time he purchased the property from T & R Construction, had reviewed and was aware of the preliminary plat, and that it had been approved. It would appear that based upon our ordinances and the research that I have done, it is my opinion, on a preliminary basis, that either the City could enforce the preliminary plat and waive the lapse of the plat due to time, or it could require the developer to replat the property going through the platting process once again, which would require notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the area being preliminary platted. At this time the property owners who have purchased lots in Crestwood Estates numbers 4 and 5 could appear and put forth their argument that the R.V. parking lot and tennis court should be included, and at a size initially represented in the existing preliminary plat. Also it would appear that the property owners in Crestwood Estates numbers 4 and 5 would have a cause of action of their own to enforce the developer to construct the improvements in phase b as were represented to purchasers of lots in phases 4 and 5. While I believe that it is certainly more of a matter between the property owners of lots in Crestwood Estate numbers 4 and 5 and the existing developer, I feel that it is appropriate to require developers, and their successors, to improve the properties they develop as represented to the City, and probably as represented to lot purchasers. This opinion is supported by Sections 9-606 A and C. Therefore, the actual status of the preliminary plat is that it is null and void. However, I believe that upon request an extension of time could be granted, as the Council has done in the past upon a showing of good cause by the developer. I believe this should be noticed, however, to the owners within 300 feet due to the controversy. If the developer simply decided to file anew preliminary plat the Council could require the original R.V. parking and tennis court as those were represented to the Council to be included improvements, and the original preliminary plat was approved on that basis. If you have any additional questions in this regard, please let me know. Very truly yours, WAY G. CROOKSTON, JR. WGC:msg