Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMedimont Subdivision AZWIL'"IAM G. BF_RG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Flre Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney ~:, HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ~ COUNCIL MEMBERS ' A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA EE C GLENN R. BENTLEY 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, jDAHQ 83642 P & Z COMMISSION Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 TIM HEPPER Motor Vehicle/Driveis License (208) 888-4443 JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND ROBERT D. CORRIE MALCOLM MACCOY Mayes TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH TAE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: December 3. 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/19/96 HEARING DATE: 12/10/96 REQUEST: Request for annexation/zoning to t-L, Light Industrial BY: Properties West Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Franklin Road, West of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MALCOLM MACCOY, P2 JIM SHEARER, P/Z GREG OSLUND, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P2 BOB CORRIE, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDI~:G DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: ,~ .,....~ ~ ~ i . . APPLIATION FOR ANNEXATION APPROVAL & ZONING OR REZONE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FILING INFORMATION I. GENERAL INFORMATION ' MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION to be marketed as STONEBRIDGE BUSINESS PARK (PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION) South of Franklin Road, west of Locust Grove Road (GENERAL LOCATION) Part of NE4 NE4f Section 18, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho {LEGAL DESCRIPTION - ATTACH IF LENGTHY) see attached "Annexation" Legal Description # Properties West Inc. (OWNER(S) OF RECORD) (NAME). 345-7523 (TELEPHONE N0.) 1401 Shoreline Drive Boise Idaho 83702 (ADDRESS) Same (APPLICANT) (NAME) (TELEPHONE N0.) (ADDRESS) J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc., c/o Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. 376-7330 (ENGINEER, SURVEYOR OR PLANNER) (NAME) (TELEPHONE N0.) 250 S Beechwo~d AVPni1P ~ Sni tP 20'j., Rn; eP, TD A'i 7nA (ADDRESS) City of~Meridian (JURISDICTION(S) REQUIRING APPROVAL) L' (TYPE OF SUBDIVISION - RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) +50 26 60 ACRES OF LRND IN CONTIGUOUS ~wNERSHIP. $805.30 (ACCEPTED BY:) (FEE) # 2.3 acres of this parcel is being purchased under an Option Agreement from Gary and Deborah Little. See attached Agreement and Annexation/ Zoning Request Affidavit. • 1~ ~~ • u • B ~ N\ a prvpe~-ztes west .~J~ c~cveLaprr~e»z NARRATIVE FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION, an Industrial Development To Be Marketed As: STONEBRIDGE BUSINESS PARK To: City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council Prepared by: Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. ~~t- J-U-B ENGINEERS RE: Medimont Subdivision J-U-B FILE NO.: 11130-02 DATE: November 12, 1996 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is seeking approval for Medimont Subdivision. The subdivision consists of 18 business lots, plus 5 common lots. '~ ne business lots will range in size from 41,720 squarz feet and 75,990 square feet. The 26.11-acre (gross) property is located south of E. Franklin Road and west of S. Locust Grove Road and is described as a portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Ada County, Idaho. In addition, the parcel is currently situated within Ada County and is contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of Meridian, Idaho. It is currently zoned RT or Rural Transitional. The applicant is also seeking an annexation of the property and zoning of I-L (Light Industrial). . • GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Mr. Jon L. Barnes Properties West, Inc. 1401 Shoreline Drive Boise, 1D 83702 (208) 3-05-7623 Engineer: Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. J-U-6 ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 South Beachwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 837Q9-0944 376-7330 (Voice) 323-9336 (Fax) OWNERSHIP AND SIZE Owners: Properties West, Inc. -Jon L. Barnes, Pres. Gross Plat Area: 26.11 Acres Gross Annex. Area: 26.60 Acres Density: 0.69 Lots per Acre EXISTING ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY RT -Ada County PROPOSED ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY Light Industrial (IL) -City of Meridian SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE The zoning of the surrounding properties is a mixture of City and County Zones. Light Industrial (IL) is identified north of the site. A Commercial General (CG) lies southwest of the site. Ada County zones exist that are RT to the West, South and East. In addition, there are two smaller R1 Zones situated northwest and southeast of this proposed development. There are six single-family homes on acreages adjacent to a portion of the easterly boundary and two single-family (one rental) homes next to the westerly boundary at the north end of the development. Adjacent land uses include light industrial, agricultural, and residential. -2- INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY • The applicant intends to develop an "Upper End" light industrial business park subdivision of 18 buildable lots with 5 common lots. Lots will be constructed and used for light industrial business uses by each lot purchaser. All allowed uses within this development shall be those as specifically permitted or allowed by conditional use as identified within the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance Title XI, Chapter 2, Section 409. In addition, the applicant will further restrict these approved uses by prohibiting the following uses: Asphalt & Concrete Automobile Wrecking Yard & Storage Fuel Yards Junk Yard Mobile Home Manufacturing Railroad Yard & Shops Recycling Plants Solid Waste Transfer Stations These prohibited uses are defined within the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions to be recorded with the final plat. These CCR's have been submitted with the Preliminary Plat/Annexation Request for City review. Also, the developer hereby requests that the City allow this Annexation, Zoning and Preliminary Plat Applications to be approved without a Conditional Use Requirement for each lot and/or use, except as specifically identified within the current City Zoning Ordinance. As a suggestion, the City could entertain using a Development Agreement to restrict the allowed uses as identified above. This Agreement together with the strict enforcement of the CCR's should provide sufficient controls to the development of these parcels as the City may desire. SERVICES Transportation: Franklin Road to the north and Eagle Road / I-84 Interchange 1 mile to the east. Fire Protection: Meridian City and Rural Fire Protection District Water: City of Meridian Municipal Water Wastewater: City of Meridian Sewage Disposal Irrigation: Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District thru a privately-owned pressurized irrigation system School District: Meridian School District -~- STATEMENT OF VARIANCE REQUESTS The applicant is not requesting any variances at this time. STATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT FEATURES Easements and right-of-ways are being provided for and dedicated for sewer, water, irrigation, landscaping and roads. Five common landscaped lots are being planned. Two lots are 35 feet wide and situated adjacent to E. Franklin Road at the entrance to the development. These lots will be landscaped and will include a landscaped water amenity that will double as a stormwater detention facility for the street stormwater run-off. Two additional common lots are being provided along Lots 3 thru 10 of Block 3, which will act as a buffer to those residential homes existing along the eastern border of this proposed subdivision. These lots will be 20 feet wide and will include trees and a low maintenance pasture grass ground cover. A chain link fence will be constructed along the west boundary of this lot to further enhance the buffering to the existing residential uses. The adjoining property owners will be able to use and enjoy the landscape buffer with the fence being located in this manner instead of along the easterly property line of the development. A fifth common lot will be situated within S. Medimont Way at the entry to the development. This lot will be a landscaped median that will blend with the adjoining 35-foot landscaped strips. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS Two neighborhood meetings were held at the home of Frank and Vernadene Pressley to review the scope of the project, discuss the landscape buffer and other concerns that the adjoining neighbors expressed. The first meeting was held October 7, 1996, and the second was held on October 23, 1996. Some of the major items of neighbofiood concern included: How the existing irrigation ditch was going to be handled; what was being planned for the landscaped buffer strip; what type of uses were planned within the development; will an easement be provided for access to the existing power line and the irrigation ditch? Other items discussed included noise, odors, lighting, potential contamination of the groundwater, and general appearance of the proposed uses. As can be seen on the Preliminary Plat and the Conceptual Engineering Plan, we have included a landscape buffer along those lots where the existing homes are located. The 20-foot buffer will also act as a utility and irrigation easement. The ditch will be replaced with an irrigation pipe with individual take-outs for each existing user. -a- The types of uses will be restricted to ones that are more compatible in this general area and will make good neighbors to these concerned property owners. In addition, the project will be controlled by the Developer, Properties West, Inc., during the lot sales and building construction. Also, the CCR's will be in place with policing powers to assist in keeping the development a~high quality business park. It is our opinion that we have adequately addressed the neighborhood concerns. FEES SUBMITTED Subdivision Application 23-lot Subdivision - $300.00 + (23 Lots X $10.00) Mailings (Certified) - $1.42 X 15 N®tices TOTAL SUB. AP. FEES Annexation Application Application Fee- $400.00 + (25.6 Ac. X $15.00) TOTAL ANNEX. AP. FEES TOTAL FEES REQUIRED _ $530.00 = 21.30 _ $551.30 = 784.00 _ $784.00 _ $1,335.30 -s Engineers Surveyors Planners Project: 11130 Date: November 8, 1996 ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN SECTION 18, T.3N., R.lE., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.lE., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South O1°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section and the center line of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.59 acres, more or less. SUBJECT T0: All existing easements and road rights-of-way ^f record or appearing on the abov;-described parcel of land. Prepared by: GAL:lhc Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. f:\projects\11130\legals\annex.doc J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc.. • ANNEXATIOI~I/ZONING REQUEST AFFIDAVIT I, Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little do hereby certify that we are the record owners of a portion of land described as the "Properties West Annexation" in an application for Annexation & Zoning being submitted to the City of IUleridian for consideration. We further state that we hereby officially request annexation of said property into the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho. In addition, we hereby state and certify that the subject property will be posted one week before the public hearing stating that the above-mentioned application with the City of Meridian has been made. Dated this ~a ~ day of November, 1996. By: _ Gay .Little Deborah A. Little STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) ON THIS 1 2~~'day of ' ~~-~iH-~ , 19 96 ,before me, a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little, known to me to be the person(s) whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affrxed my official seal the day and year first above written. My Notary Commission Expires ~- a ~_ ~~ y Notary Bond Expires ~ ~~' ~~ 19_. 1- Notary Public for Idaho Residing at ~~c~ ,Idaho f:lprojects\ 11130\admin\afflittl. doc ANNEXATION/ZONING REQUEST AFFIDAVIT I, Jon L. Barnes; President, and Larry B. Barnes, Secretary, of Properties West, Inc., do hereby certify that we are the record owners of a portion of land described as the "Properties West Annexation" in an application for Annexation & Zoning being submitted to the City of Meridian for consideration. We further state that we hereby officially request annexation of said property into the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho. In addition, we hereby state and certify that the subject property will be posted one week before the public hearing stating that the above-mentioned application with the City of Meridian has been made. Dated this ~ 2 By STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) ON THIS .~~}day of /V ~,~~~~„ j,z,- , 19 9 (,, ,before me, a notary public in and for said State, appeared Jon L. Barnes and Larry B. Barnes, known to me to be the President and Secretary of Properties West, Inc., who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My Notary Commission Expires My Notary Bond Expires ~ °~ ~~ 19_. a ~- Da day of November, 1996. Notary Pu`61ic for Idaho Residing at ~o~-ter.-c~/ Idaho N O~ ~ 1 3- 9 6 WED 1 8° 8 LITTLE p 0~ ~~~ .<: 9 5 i 1932 . 3G r• ~ ,- . APtwMwCompnpy t,ti',tt0 PION'I.I~R TITLE COMPANY 8 0 lS E r 0 of AoAcouNty PIONEER TITLE 8151 W, Rifleman Ave !Boise, Idaho 83704 / (2U8) 377 pptn , RHO kNO pPPFiGy[p BY, ~ e °! ~ 1 RECOkUt tt n* '~lc yEC Esr of " 'WARRANTY DCCD QNDIVIDUAia FOR VALUE REC131YED NORMAN W, BROW1tf AND JANET C. BROWN, IIUSSAND AND WIFE Grantor n , do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey uataCAB,y R. LITTLE At!iD DEBORAH A. MILLS, B02'H UNMARRIED PERSONS the Grantee $ ,whose cum7-t address is: 385 S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 tho fopowing described real property is ADA County, 51:ttc of Idafto, more particulary drscribcd a, follows, to•wit: SLE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" WHICH BY THIS REFERENCE IS INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART 01! TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Bald prcmtses, with thcira~wrtenances unto the said Gra,ttoc sand Gruttte hdrs and assigns forever, And the said Grantor ado hereby wvctsantla and with the said Grantee a ,the Grantor 1a aro the owner s In Ice sitnple of said presntscs; that said ptcmlxs aro free from all cncutnbrlncca, PXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly trade subject and those made, aaffered or done by the Grantee nand subJect to resCrvatlona, restr(cilons, dcdlwtions, easements, tights of way and agtccmcnts, (if any) oC record, and general taxes and assesatncnu, (includes Irrigation and utility asscssmen~ s, (if any) for tha atrrcnt yru, which ate not yet due and payable. and that Gtantot ~ will warrant and defend the same from all Iawful claims whatsoever, STATE OF ~pHp ,County of,~D,e,~_` ~ ss, On this _].:8_.,,_•day of ~,QC.ctab.o,L_, In the year o(~~~~~~`~~~~''' sonally appeared ..~10&wnN _W. gRQWN AN~pN ~y0~ known or identified to me to be flu person ylYltose acknowledged to me that .t:itgy_ezecutcd the samg ~~ ~ a~W ~~ td ~ ~ ~ 7~1 n !~ My me ,.THE .U~IDFRSICYED --• • • _•- , a notary public, pcr- 's~-------•, , s_subsctibcd to the within instrument, and 05./.4.5!9.4._ _-- - - 9 6 T U E 1 1 1 7 L I T T L E `:`~ 3 (off ~ EXHlalr A ~ ' Fde Number: P143677 PARCE:I I BEGINNING AT A POINT QN THE NORTH SIDE OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, 801SE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, ON THE CENTERLINE OF FRANKLIN ROAOw WHICH POINT 1S SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' WEST 480.7 FEET ALONG THE SECTION LINE FROM THt: NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' WEST 183.1 FEET TO A P01NT, THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE 01' EAST 890.1 FEET ALONG THE WEST EDGE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' EAST 231.9 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST 440.6 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' WEST 224.7 FEEL' ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUAATER OF SAID SECTION 18 TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST A DISTANCE OF 440.8 FEET TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. PAR--CEO I1 BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, WHICH 1S SOUTH ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID SECTION 18 AND ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF LOCUST GRAVE ROAD, 1329.2 FEET FROM A BRONZE CAP MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 11 t /2' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF x38,7 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST t 49.0 FEET TO A 5TEEL P{N; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 11 1 /2' EAST 436.3 FEET TO A STEEL PiN; THENCE SOUTH 149.0 FEET ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID SECTION 1a TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN LOCUST GROVE RIGHT-Olr-WAY, END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~x ~~ a~ f~v i~. P 0 Z A P'wnesr Compaigr PIONEER TITLE COMPANY of Aon cota~~ar 8151 W. Rifleman Ave /Boise, Ida6u 83704 / (208) 377-2700&f READAioDAPPROVED BY WARRANTY DEED tcottPOweTe t~ IVADCO , INC . , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 4232 ADAMS BOISE, ID 83714 of County of ADA ,State ofldaho, grantor, hereby CONVEYS or GRANTS and WARRANTS TO P1dGFERTIES WEST, INC. grantee of 1401 SHORELINE DR. , BOISE, ID 83702 for the sum of TEN DOLLARS AND NO/100 DOLLARS, the following described tract(s) of land in ADA County, State of Idaho: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF Location of above dcscribed property r nrrTCT r_vnvF ~. roeuvr TN House No. Street The officers who sign this deed hereby certify that this deed and thetransfer represented thereby was duly authorized under a resolution duly adopted by the board of directors of the grantor at a lawful meeting duly held and attended by a quorum. In witness whereof, the grantor has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers this 13 day of March , A.D. 1996 IVADCO. INC. (CORPORATE NAME) PRESIDENT ~~\ Attes . SECRETARY STATE. OF IDAHO ,County of ADA , ss. On this 13 day of March , in the yeaz of 1996 ,before me DAVID E. SELLS a notary public, per- sonally appcazcd M~1,'~Fr C MCCLURE AND t A DONAt.D , lutown or ide r~otjp t~~j~te person S~vho executed the insuumen[ on behalf of said co anon, and wledged to ttte that ie~Oged the same. ~ ~~ 71'[tl<Qd ~ ~ ~•~ ~ S N Public: ~ -I~dyOtS ~ Residing at: R D y J,•• ~.•O ~~.• My Comtnission Espires: 1 -28-99 • EXHIBff 'A Fie Number: P143697 A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST 1 /4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY AS FOLLOWB: COMMENCING AT A FOUND BRASS CAP AT THE SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7, 8, 17,18 OF TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EST, BOISE MERIDIAN, AT THE CENTER UNE INTERSECTION OF FRANKLIN ROAD ANO LOCUST GROVE ROAD; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTER UNE OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD ANO THE SECTION UNE COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 18, NORTH 89 DEGREES 46'18' EAST 480.70 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTER UNE AND SAID SECTION LINE SOUTH 02 DEGRffS 14'38' EAST 25.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROM AND SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E./L.S. 3260, THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 02 DEGREES 14'38" EAST 162.38 FEET TO A SET 5/B" REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREE 58'43' WEST 494.50 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E/LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 19 DEGREES 08'17' EAST 135.59 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E/LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREES 25'43" WEST 79.34 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260: THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 43'05" WEST 231.74 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E/LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREE 30'10" WEST 441.28 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH Ci1P P.E/LS. 3260 ON THE NORTH 1 /16 UNE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 39'40" WEST 663.66 FEET ALONG THE SAID 1 /16 UNE OF SAID SECTION 18 TO THE NORTHEAST 1 /16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION, FROM WHICH A FOUND 5/8` REBAR BEARS NORTH 00 DEGREE 29'39" EAST 0.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREE 29'39" EAST 1,307.10 FEET ALONG SAID EAST 1 /16 UNE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD AND A SET 5/8"REBAR WITH PLASTIC CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 46'18' EAST 847.60 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. END OF LEGAL DESCRITPION ~rarnst WILLIAM G. BF_RG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney • COUNCIL MEMBERS HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CITY OF MERIDIAN E C GLENN R. BENTLEY 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 P & Z COMMISSION Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 TIM HEPPER Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND ROBERT D. CORRIE MALCOLM MACCOY Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: December 3, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/19/96 HEARING DATE: 12/10/96 REQUEST: Request for annexation/zoning to I-L, Light Industrial BY: Proaerties West Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Franklin Road, West of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MALCOLM MACCOY, P2 JIM SHEARER, P2 GREG OSLUND, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P2 BOB CORRIE, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C -CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C -WALT MORROW, C/C -GLENN BENTLEY, C/C -WATER DEPARTMENT -SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT -POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: • ~~ ~J . ~' ~ ~ N\ a prvper'Ctes west l p~ NARRATIVE FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION, an Industrial Development To Be Marketed As: STONEBRIDGE BUSINESS PARK To: City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council Prepared by: Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. ~~i- J-U-B ENGINEERS RE: Medimont Subdivision J-U-B FILE NO.: 11130-02 DATE: November 12, 1996 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is seeking approval for Medimont Subdivision. The subdivision consists of 18 business lots, plus 5 common lots. The business lots will range in size from 41,720 square feet and 75,990 square feet. The 26.11-acre (gross) property is located south of E. Franklin Road and west of S. Locust Grove Road and is described as a portion of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1 /4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Ada County, Idaho. In addition, the parcel is currently situated within Ada County and is contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of Meridian, Idaho. It is currently zoned RT or Rural Transitional. The applicant is also seeking an annexation of the property and zoning of I-L (Light Industrial). GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Mr. Jon L. Barnes Properties West, Inc. 1401 Shoreline Drive Boise, ID 83702 (208) 345-7523 Engineer: Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 376-7330 (Voice) 323-9336 (Fax) OWNERSHIP AND SIZE Owners: Properties West, Inc. -Jon L. Barnes, Pres. Gross Plat Area: 26.11 Acres Gross Annex. Area: 26.60 Acres Density: 0.69 Lots per Acre EXISTING ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY RT -Ada County PROPOSED ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY Light Industrial (IL) -City of Meridian SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE The zoning of the surrounding properties is a mixture of City and County Zones. Light Industrial (IL) is identified north of the site. A Commercial General (CG) lies southwest of the site. Ada County zones exist that are RT to the West, South and East. In addition, there are two smaller R1 Zones situated northwest and southeast of this proposed development. There are six single-family homes on acreages adjacent to a portion of the easterly boundary and two single-family (one rental) homes next to the westerly boundary at the north end of the development. Adjacent land uses include light industrial, agricultural, and residential. -2- • • INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY The applicant intends to develop an "Upper End" light industrial business park subdivision of 18 buildable lots with 5 common lots. Lots will be constructed and used for light industrial business uses by each lot purchaser. All allowed uses within this development shall be those as specifically permitted or allowed by conditional use as identified within the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance Title XI, Chapter 2, Section 409. In addition, the applicant will further restrict these approved uses by prohibiting the following uses: Asphalt & Concrete Automobile Wrecking Yard & Storage Fuel Yards Junk Yard Mobile Home Manufacturing Railroad Yard & Shops Recycling Plants Solid Waste Transfer Stations These prohibited uses are defined within the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions to be recorded with the final plat. These CCR's have been submitted with the Preliminary Plat/Annexation Request for City review. Also, the developer hereby requests that the City allow this Annexation, Zoning and Preliminary Plat Applications to be approved without a Conditional Use Requirement for each lot and/or use, except as specifically identified within the current City Zoning Ordinance. As a suggestion, the City could entertain using a Development Agreement to restrict the allowed uses as identified above. This Agreement together with the strict enforcement of the CCR's should provide sufficient controls to the development of these parcels as the City may desire. SERVICES Transportation: Franklin Road to the north and Eagle Road / I-84 Interchange 1 mile to the east. Fire Protection: Meridian City and Rural Fire Protection District Water: City of Meridian Municipal Water Wastewater: City of Meridian Sewage Disposal Irrigation: Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District thru a privately-owned pressurized irrigation system School District: Meridian School District -3- • STATEMENT OF VARIANCE REQUESTS The applicant is not requesting any variances at this time. STATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT FEATURES Easements and right-of-ways are being provided for and dedicated for sewer, water, irrigation, landscaping and roads. Five common landscaped lots are being planned. Two lots are 35 feet wide and situated adjacent to E. Franklin Road at the entrance to the development. These lots will be landscaped and will include a landscaped water amenity that will double as a stormwater detention facility for the street stormwater run-off. Two additional common lots are being provided along Lots 3 thru 10 of Block 3, which will act as a buffer to those residential homes existing along the eastern border of this proposed subdivision. These lots will be 20 feet wide and will include trees and a low maintenance pasture grass ground cover. A chain link fence will be constructed along the west boundary of this lot to further enhance the buffering to the existing residential uses. The adjoining property owners will be able to use and enjoy the landscape buffer with the fence being located in this manner instead of along the easterly property line of the development. A fifth common lot will be situated within S. Medimont Way at the entry to the development. This lot will be a landscaped median that will blend with the adjoining 35-foot landscaped strips. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS Two neighborhood meetings were held at the home of Frank and Vernadene Pressley to review the scope of the project, discuss the landscape buffer and other concerns that the adjoining neighbors expressed. The first meeting was held October 7, 1996, and the second was held on October 23, 1996. Some of the major items of neighborhood concern included: How the existing irrigation ditch was going to be handled; what was being planned for the landscaped buffer strip; what type of uses were planned within the development; will an easement be provided for access to the existing power line and the irrigation ditch? Other items discussed included noise, odors, lighting, potential contamination of the groundwater, and general appearance of the proposed uses. As can be seen on the Preliminary Plat and the Conceptual Engineering Plan, we have included a landscape buffer along those lots where the existing homes are located. The 20-foot buffer will also act as a utility and irrigation easement. The ditch will be replaced with an irrigation pipe with individual take-outs for each existing user. _¢ • The types of uses will be restricted to ones that are more compatible in this general area and will make good neighbors to these concerned property owners. In addition, the project will be controlled by the Developer, Properties West, Inc., during the lot sales and building construction. Also, the CCR's will be in place with policing powers to assist in keeping the development a high quality business park. It is our opinion that we have adequately addressed the neighborhood concerns. FEES SUBMITTED Subdivision Application 23-lot Subdivision - $300.00 + (23 Lots X $10.00) Mailings (Certified) - $1.42 X 15 Notices TOTAL SUB. AP. FEES Annexation Application Application Fee- $400.00 + (25.6 Ac. X $15.00) TOTAL ANNEX. AP. FEES TOTAL FEES REQUIRED _ $530.00 = 21.30 _ $551.30 = 784.00 _ $784.00 _ $1,335.30 -5- • ~~-u Engineers Surveyors Planners Project: 11130 Date: November 8, 1996 ANNEXATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN SECTION 18, T.3N., R.1E., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.lE., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 32b0; thence South 01°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line. of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly. boundary of said Section and the center line of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.59 acres, more or less. SUBJECT T0: All existing easements and road rights-of-way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of land. Prepared by: GAL:lhc Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. f:\projects\11130\legals\annex.doc J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. • ANNEXATION/ZONING REQUEST AFFIDAVIT I, Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little do hereby certify that we are the record owners of a portion of land described as the "Properties West Annexation" in an application for Annexation & Zoning being submitted to the City of Meridian for consideration. We further state that we hereby officially request annexation of said property into the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho. In addition, we hereby state and certify that the subject property will be posted one week before the public hearing stating that the above-mentioned application with the City of Meridian has been made. Dated this ~a ~ day of November, 1996. By: Gay .Little Deborah A. Little STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) ON THIS 1~~'day of ` ~Zn~~ , 19 96 ,before me, a notary public in and for said State, personally appeared Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little, known to me to be the person(s) whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My Notary Commission Expires ~- ~`~- ~~ y Notary Bond Expires ~ ~'~' ~ ~ . 19_. ~~ Notary Pub is for Idaho Residing at ~~,~~ ,Idaho f: \pro jects\ 11130\admin\afflittl. doc C C ANNEXATION/ZONING REQUEST AFFIDAVIT I, Jon L. Barnes, President, and Larry B. Barnes, Secretary, of Properties West, Inc., do hereby certify that we are the record owners of a portion of land described as the "Properties West Annexation" in an application for Annexation & Zoning being submitted to the City of Meridian for consideration. We further state that we hereby officially request annexation of said property into the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho. In addition, we hereby state and certify that the subject property will be posted one week before the public hearing stating that the above-mentioned application with the City of Meridian has been made. Dated this ~ 2 day of November, 1996. By: P RTIE ,INC. Jon arnes, President Larry B STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) ON THIS 1 2 ~ day of /~ ~,~~,.,, ~~,- , 19 9 G, ,before me, a notary public in and for said State, appeared Jon L. Barnes and Larry B. Barnes, known to me to be the President and Secretary of Properties West, Inc., who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My Notary Commission Expires ,3 a ~- Od My Notary Bond Expires ~ ° ~ oa Notary P~lic for Idaho 19_ Residing at ~a-r-o~./ ,Idaho N O~ ~ 1 3- 9 6 WED 1 8 5 8 L I T T L E ^~ P - ~~ 3c~-~~ MAC ~ ..,.T ~ • r,. ~ 95i:19323G `4` APfonsnrCompnny BOISE 1J :lr.if:itt) PION~~R TITL>r COMPANY pIONEFR TITLE OP ADA GOUNTr 8151 W, Riflcmnn Ave /Boise, Idaho 83704 / (208) 377~~ R6aD AND AaprapyCO 81! ~ ~' a,Pf9 J RECOItt1t it A? It' !iER gST 0~ ~VVARRANI'Y DCCD pNDtVIDUAL) AOR VALU)r RPC1r1VED NORMAN' W. BROWN AND JANET C. BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE Grantors , do hereby grant, bargniut, sill and convey untoCARY R. LITTLE AND DEBORAH A . MILLS , E02'H UNMARRIED PERSONS the Grantoo s ,whose current address ls; 385 S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 the following described real property ht ppp Cowuy, 5tateoPldaho, morcparticulary descripcd as follows, to•wtt: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" WHICH 8Y THIS RGI'GRENCt TS INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART OF TO F1AVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtcnanccs unto the said Gra,ttce sand Grantee hdrs and a,`slgns forever, And the said Grantor ado hereby covcnvlt to and with the said Gralltl'C s ,the Grantor s azo the owner sin fee simple of said premises; that said premises aro fret front all encurobrv+ces, FaCCEI'T those to which this eonvcyatee is azpressly made subject and those made, suffered or dote by the Grantee sand subJect to reservations, restricdans, dedications, easements, rights of way and ngrcements, (if any) of record, and gencrnl taxes and assessments, (includes Irrigation and utility assessments, (;f a,+y) for the current year, which are not yet due,vtd payable, and that Grantor s will warrant and defend the same tom att iawful elaims whatsoever, Dated: Doeomi~ 18, 1995 STATE OF 1DAHo ,County af,~D,~„~„ ss, On thia _],:8_,,,_,day of~D•oc.amb.o.>`_, In the year sonally appearod -~OR~IeI~l3RQWN,_9ND~N .,,..~,.. •.___,.,~' known or identiilcd to me to be tl+e ~ ~~~ person tt3yltose yy ~,C q acknowtcdgcd to me that ,Xhn~executed the soot s ~ ~ r 1 a'.ti ~ ' ~ c me , TFIE., U,ND.,EIt,,SIG>3En _ 's,,_.._.... _ , a notary public, pcr- ~..~_sub~:ribed to the within instrument, and z. P _ 02 My Co,nriti's11L'~'~xpires: 0,5./,45/9.4___._ N O S- 5- 9 6 T U E 1 1 1 7 L I T T L E *. r • EXHIBIT A • 1~3~~~ Fde Number: P143677 P_ ARCirI l BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, 801SE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, ON THE CENTERLINE OF FRANKLIN ROAD, WHICH POINT IS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' WEST 48p.71=EET ALONG THE SECTION LINE FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' WEST 183,1 FEET TO A POINT, THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE O1' EAST 890.1 FEET ALONG THE WEST EDGE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' EAST 231.9 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST 440.6 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' WEST 224.7 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18 TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH o DEGREE 55' EAST A DISTANCE OF 44os FEET TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING, PAR BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, WHICH IS SOUTH ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID S!`CTION i8 AND ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF LOCUST GRAVE ROAD, 1329.2 FEET FROM A BRONZE CAP MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNEA OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 11 1/2' WESTALONG THE SOUTH SIDE Os~ THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF 438,7 FEET TO A STEEL P1N; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST 149.0 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 11 1 /2' EAST 436.3 FEET TO A STEEL. PiN; THENCE SOUTH 149.0 FEET ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID SECTION 18 TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPT THAT PORTION THERr=4F LY1NG WITHIN LOCUST GROVE RIGHT-OF-WAY, ENO OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~x ~i a P _ 02 ~~ ~~w-t 1' ~+ - .n A Pioneer Company PIONEER TITLE COMPANY OF ADA COUNTY 8151 W. Rifleman Ave /Boise, Idaho 83704 / (208) 377-2700&f READ AND APPROVED BY WARRANTY DEED (CORPORATE FORM) IVADCO , INC . , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 4232 ADAMS BOISE, ID 83714 of County of ADA ,State of Idaho, grantor, hereby CONVEYS or GRANTS and WARRANTS TO PROPERTIES WEST, INC. grantee of 1401 SHORELINE DR. , BOISE, ID 83702 for the sum of TEN DOLLARS AND NO/100 DOLLARS, the following described tract(s) of land in ADA County, State of Idaho: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF Location of above described property ~ ^^~Tem ronvc t cveut(t Th House No. Street The officers who sign this deed hereby certify that this deed and the transfer represented thereby was duly authorized under a resolution duly adopted by the boazd of directors of the grantor at a lawful meeting duly held and attended by a quorum. In witness whereof, the grantor has caused its corporate name and sea! to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers this 13 day of March , A.D. 1996 IVADCO INC. (CORPORATE NAME) By. -~ L~~~ PRESIDENT ~~\ Attes . SECRETARY STATE OF IDAHO ,County of ADA , ss. On this 13 day of March , in the year of 1996 , before me DAVID E. SELLS a notary public, pcr- sonally appeared ~iZ~ C MCC RE known or id ogp ~~jte person S_,who executed the instrument on behalf of said co azion, and wledged to me that feed the same. '11Snd ~' ~ ~•~ ~ ! N Public: • `t~byO~ g Residing at: ERID 0 '~ ,~'•~_ -.•,~ ~• My Commission Expires: 1 -28-99 EXFiIBIT'A' Fie Number. P143697 A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A FOUND BRASS CAP AT THE SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7, 8, 17, 18 OF TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EST, BOISE MERIDIAN, AT THE CENTER LINE INTERSECTION OF FRANKLIN ROAD AND LOCUST GROVE ROAD; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD AND THE SECTION LINE COMMON TO SECTIONS 17 AND 18, NORTH 89 DEGREES 46'18" EAST 480.70 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTER LINE AND SAID SECTION LINE SOUTH 02 DEGREES 14'38' EAST 25.02 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD AND SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E./L.S. 3260, THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 02 DEGREES 14'38" EAST 162.38 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREE 58'43" WEST 494.50 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 19 DEGREES 08'17" EAST 135.59 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREES 25'43" WEST 79.34 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 43'05" WEST 231.74 FEET TO A SET 5/8' REBAR WITH CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREE 30'10" WEST 441.28 FEET TO A SET 5/8" REBAR WITH Ci+P P.E./LS. 3260 ON THE NORTH 1/16 LINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 39'40" WEST 663.66 FEET ALONG THE SAID 1 /16 LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 TO THE NORTHEAST 1/16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION, FROM WHICH A FOUND 5/8" REBAR BEARS NORTH 00 DEGREE 29'39" EAST 0.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREE 29'39" EAST 1,307.10 FEET ALONG SAID EAST 1/16 LINE TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD AND A SET 5/8"REBAR WITH PLASTIC CAP P.E./LS. 3260; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 46'18" EAST 847.60 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID FRANKLIN ROAD TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. END OF LEGAL DESCRITPION ~HIiIAL ~_ N 2 m z ~ m ~ (n c r r m D ~ -~ Cn -I r_ ~ cn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~j m ~ C - rn ~ ~ O ° v m ` X ~ m m ~ = ~ cn _ rn m ~ r ~ r v o ~ m z D z ~ ~ ~ z c ~ ~ ~ O D ~ O m ~ ~ ~ c i~ O ~ m D ~ ~ ~ D z Z rn aOo ~ ~° ~ ~ A „ ` y O c D p O m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n m ~ -I m y Z D Z ~ ~ T. m n = ~ m ~ ~- ~ m ~ -I Z m ~ m r ~ z c~ z v ~ - m cn - m c~ ~ D -i ~ ~ r ~ -i ~I - m ~ D z V ~ < O C ~ ~ m sp ~ c W C -~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sp ~ ~ D ~ m ai ~ = O z ~ D z D m m ~ Z ~ ~ m p ~? D x r' m D ~ m z Q° ~ ~ O a° ~ D z ` ~ O z ~ ~ ` O ~ ~ o ~ O ~ z m ~ r p m c m 3 ~ ~ m z ~ ~ m z ~ cmn m m ~ '_ v ~ ~' m D ~ v W ~ ~ m _ s~ ~ p L r (D ~ tR O ~ ~ o ~ ? ccn m o ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ c n ' ~ 3 ~, w ~ ~ ~ ~p OD CO ~ O W ~ O (~ ~ O N ~ -~ ~I W OD Ui W W CT N CJl U1 N ~ U1 ~ O U1 ~ .A ~l O O O ~ W O ~ ~ ~ 0 O O -+, ~ •- ~D a o ~ m m ~' m ~' ~ ~' N ~' m °D ~ m o ~ fD y •• X w r O -n ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ r 0 n r 0 n r 0 C~ r 0 C~ r 0 C~ m ~ 0 D C -n ~ x 0 tmi~ to o v- v~ ~ ~ J Z ~ Z T. Z T. rr- y Z 7~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 -~i C ~ C -~I ~ y Z ~ p ~ ~ ~ O m ~ z z n z O 0 0 0 0 z ~ z _ ~ ~ ~ v m ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ v D < m -~°~ v « « < ~ O m m m m m ~. m ~ v W c z m W O ~ m ~ m ~ m W O ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ m W O ~ m ~ O n ~ m v_ v_ v_ m v v v v g v v m v_ m N 7C ~ D z D z D z - ~ D z D z D z D z D z D z D z - ~ D z - ~ -I D 0 ~ - v - v - v 0 ~ - v - v - v - v - v - v - v 0 ~ - v 0 ~ ~ r" 0 ~ 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 ~ 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 0 0 w 0 ~ N N N N N N N N N N N ~ -i :U -i ~ --I :O ~ A -i ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ -i ~ ~ ~ ~ :O ~ T r T r N 2 Z G7 O lD Z N r R ~~ A PtonNt Company ~ ~ VH F rt 0 BIONEER TITLE Ct7MPANY 8 01 S E - U ~~ eoumv PIONEER T1ti.Q 8151 W-. RiQenwn Avs ! 8oias, Idslat 8370d I (208) 377.Qi710o ~ ,,P~ ACAD AND ADPpp~yE~ ~~~ ~- • RECOkOe~t n7 ~+f, aEC E310it WARRANTY DEER aNDtvtDUAta FOR VALUE RECENED~ NORM iJ. BROWN AND JANET C. BROWN, HUSBAND AND uIF6 Gt~artlor • . do hereby Brant, lsar8ain, Fell and epnvry untoCARY R. LI?TLI: AND DEBORAH A. MILLS, BOTH UNMARRIED lERSONs tha Grantee a .whose eumest address b: 38S S . LOCUST GROVE ROAD, M8RIDIAN. ID 836+2 rho followin8 described rest property ih ADA County, State of Idaho, tt-ore partieutsry described ss (otlows, to-wit: S8i ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" it1iIC11 BY SHiti REIt'8R611Ct I9 INCORPORA21tD H£REiN AND MADE A BART Ot TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the. said pretttiaas, witA theft trppttetatsaor;a ttttto tha said Graniea seal Gtaettar hairs and ani8tts forever. And the aaid Graata der llcrerbr aovcnant to and widt the said Granters s , the Grantor s ere thtr ownot s Ia fee sitnpk of said preatiaa; Bur acid prctnisaa rtes fbos ttvm at1 snatmbnneea. BXC81?T tltoa to which this convsytthcs !s eatprasly made aubjoa and those tnads~ soRt:red a dohs by tha Gt~st-tes sand stt>tjat to etxefvstions, rasuiuiotts, dedications, e~eatt~ts, tislns of nay and a8rtxtaestt. (if any) of record, and yenctat asea and ss:rsatncnta. (ittcludea irri8ation nerd utiliq litany) Aer the amcat year. wbieh are na yee eve nerd payabN, and that Grams s wi11 warrant std de~att the sadh~ jlowMl dsima wbatsocvot. * ~~,.. Daterdr Dee ~~- ir••. l4~ NORMAIi J C . bRO~--~ - -..~•- STATE OF ~AHe .County of i-t~A ~___ , s:. On this . auui., 1 g• day of _.>Zncomlkoz__.1n rho year o .~•,~,,~~, b~ .yk. ~!r..,,; venally appeared ~lOnlsaN y a4et~tt~t .N .• ~. known or identiAed to the to be the person yNitose ~.C ~a aekaowledacd to me there shele,_tuteeuterd the ''t ~ ~ i ts~ ~ ~ .•' My ma . Tll3.,.1-itDFA81G131:a.____ ~__-- .__ , a Weary public. pet. 5 . ~aubscribM to the within insteuttxm, and FIe Number: P14367T RCEL! BEGINNING AT A POINT QIr1 tHE NORTH SIDE OF SECTION t& TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGES 1 EAR: 801SE MERIDIAN, ADA COt1N'E'Y, IDAH©, ON THE CENTERLINE OF FRANKLIN ROAD. WHICH POINT 1~-~ SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' Wi=ST 4>E~ 7 FEET ALONG THE SECTION LINE FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNEA OF SAID SECTION 1 a; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 18' WEST 183.1 FEET TO A POINT, THE NORTHWEST CORNER Qtr THIS EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18: THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE Ot' EAST 890.1 FEET ALONG THE WEST EDGE OF THE EAST HALF OR THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, THE REAL POINT OP' BEGINNINCBF THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' EAST 231.9 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE SS' EAST 440.8 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 12' WEST 224.7 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EAST HALF NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18 TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREE 53' EAST A DISTANCE OF 440.6 FEET TO THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. PAR I BEGINNING AT THE 30UTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTHEAST QUARTER d'° SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, WHICH I~`~;~ SOUTH ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID SECTION t8 ANO ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF LOCUST '~ ` - GROVE ROAD, 1329.2 FEET FROM A BRONZE CAP MARKING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAIQ ~ ~ ~~ SECTION 18; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 1 t 1 /2' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH SLOE OF THE NORTHEAST OUARTEf= - _ ,. NORTHEAST DUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18 A DISTANCE OF 438.7 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 0 DEGREE 55' EAST 149.0 FEET TO A STEEL PIN; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREE$1 t 1/2' EAST 436.3 FEET TO A STEEL PiN' .NCE SOUTH ta9.0 FEET ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAID-SECTION t 8 TO THE REAL POINT O! BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN LOCUST GROVE RIGHT-OF-WAY... END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION _ s~ w k.< ~ ~,t ix' ~ ~ ~~... e • ADDENDUM TO REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT This Addendum is attached to and forms a part of that certain Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement and Receipt for Earnest Money dated November 12, 1996, between GARY R. LITTLE and DEBORAH A. LITTLE, husband and wife, as Seller, and PROPERTIES WEST, INC., as Buyer. Seller and Buyer further agree as follows: The conditions stated in Item 5 of the Agreement may not be waived without the consent of both Seller and Buyer. 2. Closing must occur not later than May 1, 1997, unless the closing date is extended with the consent of both Seller and Buyer. In the event the City of Meridian denies the approvals referred to in Item 5 of the Agreement, prior to said final closing date, and Buyer ceases to actively prosecute the applications (including permitted appeals), this agreement may be terminated by either party by written notice to the other party and to the closing agency. Seller: Buyer: ~JU~ • November 15, 1996 Mr: Will Berg, City Clerk City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mr. Berg: RE: PROPERTIES WEST ANNEXATION20NING PROPERTIES WEST, INC. -Applicant FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION 208-376-7330 FAX: 208-323-9336 Enclosed for your review and processing are the necessary documents as established by the City of Meridian Ordinances for an Annexation/Zoning Application t ~+e~. As stipulated by said ordinance, please find enclosed the following: ANNEXATION APPLICATION ITEMS - A copy of a Warranty Deed showing title of a portion of the property vested in Properties West, lnc.; a copy of a Warranty Deed showing title of a portion of the property vested in Gary and Deborah Little; and a copy of a purchase agreement between Properties West, Inc., and Gary and Deborah Little. A notarized request for the annexation and zoning amendment from the titled owners -Properties West, Inc., and Gary and Deborah Little. A written legal description of the subject property showing the total site as measured to the center of Franklin Road identified as the "Annexation" Legal. 4. One copy of a map at a scale of 1 " = 100' of the property to be annexed (Preliminary Plat of the proposed Medimont Subdivision). 5. 30 copies of the Application for Annexation and Zoning to an I-L (Light Industrial) zone. 6. 30 copies of a Vicinity Map, 11 " x 17" 7. A Property Owners List within 300 feet of the subject property. 8. A check in the amount of $1,335.30 from Properties West, Inc., for the Annexation and Preliminary Plat application fees. 9. A written narrative prepared by Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S., of J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc.; describing the annexation request and the proposed development. J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 is ~~~~ • ~~-uJ Mr. Will Berg Engineers Surveyors Planners November 15, 1996 11 Page 2 P ELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION ITEMS - ~t10~ !/'`CI~Pd I/~ fih'~ ~~~~~C~T~vn• 30 copies of the Request for Subdivision Approval, Preliminary Plat Application for edimont Subdivision. 2. 30 cope of Preliminary Plat, 22" x 34", at a scale of 1 " = 100' (includes Vicinity Map). 3. 30 copies of a reduce reliminary Plat, 8-1/2"x 11 ". 4. 4 copies of the Conceptual Engi ring Plan, 22" x 34", at a scale of 1 " = 100'. 5. One copy of a written legal description o roposed subdivision property identified as the Medimont Subdivision. 6. One copy of a Rough Draft of the proposed Declaration o venants, Conditions and Restrictions dated November 12, 1996. Please review the enclosed information and schedule a Public Hearing for the next available Planning & Zoning Meeting. If you require additional information, please call. Sincerely, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gary A~ E./L.S. Project Manager GAL:Ihc Enclosures cc: Jon Barnes, Properties West, Inc. f:\projects\11130\admin\cityltr 1. doc 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 Planning and Zoning Commission 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 7:00 p.m., on December 10, 1996, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of Properties West tnc., for annexation and zoning of approximately 26.60 of land located in part of the NE 114, NE 1/4, Section 18, T.3N, R.1 E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located South of Franklin Road, East of Locust Grove Road. The Application requests a zone of Light Industrial, I-L. A more particular legal description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the Application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. Dated this 20th day of November, 1996. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI C RK PMK • iu Na 3 = ~ i L QL ~ • ~ ~ ^OOC • ~ t t ~ t t ~ 7 M G KMr61 !L ~ • 1 2 i ~~ ~ ~~'ia~~ o~x,~~IIAP !~ • r 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 Zoning 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 March 4, 1997, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of Properties West Inc., for annexation and zoning of approximately 26.60 of land located in part of the NE 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 18, T.3N, R.1E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located South of Franklin Road, West of Locust Grove Road. The Application requests a zone of Light Industrial, I-L. Further, applicant requests Preliminary Plat approval of the parcel of land above described for 18 buildable Light Industrial lots for Medimont Subdivision (to be marketed as Stonebridge). Amore particular legal description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the Application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. Dated this 14th day of February, 1997. ~~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI CL K Publish February 14th and 21st, 1997 l ~J~~ Engineers Surveyors Planners Project: 11130 Date: November 8, 1996 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR I~DII~ONT SUBDIVISION A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN SECTION 18, T.3N., R.lE., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencingg at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.lE., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 25.02 feet to a point on the Southerly right-of-way of said Franklin Road and a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 02°14'38" East 162.38 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 499.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South O1°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,307.10 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the South right-of-way of said Franklin Road and a set 5/8" rebar with plastic cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence North 89°46'18" East 847.60 feet along said Southerly right-of-way of said Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.11 acres, more or less. SUBJECT T0: All existing easements and road rights-of-way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of land. Prepared by: J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 32so GAL:lhc Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. f:\projects\11130\legals\bndry.doc vm 'rvlar~w ~~ i an-ea-~ mu wy 'y ~ •a 'r 'an 'v- ~w v~ tr +~ ~' M OKL-Kt-Mi ~7MM/ lA AYYM~l7Y~ - • nM-MaM alwi 'NIM N I\ yro~. ` Ilur. wi .wlv~ nsr~ ^eowuaas. ,.,~.~ ..~""'~ ,~'. ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ a \` '~M 'Si177NIflNi f-MI' w aunwvw ~ 0a 'uolw~larl~ twoiMOSr '°°' -~-~ II~ R .1+ f ^ I 1 1 I ~~ 1 • ._. ,00'R[I 7 .[1.1000 M arnr fnore 1srg0'1 s i I ~3 • ~ !~ ~ i ll. i ~~~ , •I :~~ ~ ass ~~~~~ ~Q ~~~~~ Q ~ a ,~ _~ , '~j~ ! ~ ~ k h 'i~ ~ i'# ~_~~'~ ~j~ f ~ ~ 1f j~~ ~ij is 1~ 1 1, i s ~ ~~~ ~ ~~I . ~~~ #t~1 ~ ~ ~ i !' ~ i~ ~ ~ a ... o ~r ~~~ j~# :~yl~~ i~~t ~a ~~ ~~ ~ ;:~! ~~i II Z' * : • 1 II it ~~ ~: ~~ .~~ :~~ ;1 ~1 M M ~ . ~ . i i ~ 'S EI ,' 1 1 ~ a• I 1 11 ~~ I J ~ ~, ~~ ~ 1 a • ~: ~~ ~~ d~ L ~~ 8 4 __~ f r--- II 4I F ~ F ~~ ~~I~~R~I ~j•i, PXaTea'r ~ ~'+~+~ ~ 7~ ~~/t s k~~~~~ ~~~~ V~a~~F ~FF~1 Lx~4 ~ ~. s t. ,~ . ~fr~.r~f- "t't. tsza u uo~v' ~. f~C, b+~h v .. t~ i 1 _ .i ,J J ~: i _ _. ~ - f~~ ~~~ 41 1 i 1 ~) I DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT . - _• _ - . _ _ ,, , ~ - THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~~ay of ~ , 1997, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of daho, part of the first part, hereinafter called the "CITY", and Properties West. Inc., and J & A Enterprises, parties of the second part, hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER", whose addresses are 1401 Shoreline Drive. Boise Idaho 83702 and 1020 W Main Street Suite 305 Boise Idaho 83707, respectively. WITNESSETH: VfJI~REAS, DEVELOPER is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of a certain tract of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A" (Property), which is attached hereto and by this' reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the State of Idaho legislature, in 1991, passed Idaho Code, 67-6511A, Development Agreements, which provides that cities may enter into development agreements with developers upon rezoning and annexation of land; and WHEREAS, the CITY has passed two development agreement ordinances, one when land is rezoned, 11-2-416 L, and one when land is annexed, when it is also rezoned, 11-2-417 D; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER submitted and the CITY has approved annexation and zoning to Light Industrial (I-L) of the Property to allow a limited use light industrial project on said Property and has submitted a subdivision plat for said Property; which was recommended for approval with conditions of the Meridian City Council; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has made representations at the public hearings before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and the Meridian City Council as to how the Property would be developed and what improvements would be made; and WHEREAS, the CITY has authority to place conditions and restrictions upon annexation or rezoning of property; and WHEREAS, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law required that the DEVELOPER enter into a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the CITY, in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, annexed the Property subject to de-annexation if the DEVELOPER did not enter into a Development Agreement. 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 1 • • NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: DEVELOPER agrees, and hereby binds his, its or their heirs, successors and assigns to this agreement, as a condition of the annexation of the Property, as follows: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and the terms of this agreement cannot be altered, changed or modified without the express written consent of the CITY. 2. That DEVELOPER, in accordance with its representations before the CITY, shall, on the land described in Exhibit "A": a. Develop and construct a light industrial subdivision restricted as identified in the CITY's Zoning Ordinance, with the exception that the following uses are not allowed: - Asphalt and concrete operation - Automobile wrecking yard and storage - Fuel yards - Junk yards - Mobile home manufacturing - Recycling plants - Solid waste transfer stations - Planned Unit Development -General planned residential b. Submit to the CITY applications for site plan review and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any building(s) or improvements on the property, intended for industrial or other uses. c. Submit an application for conditional use, and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any building(s) or improvements by DEVELOPER or use by DEVELOPER of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Block 2 of the Property. Said conditional use permit application shall contain fully detailed landscape and building plans, including elevations. d. Submit a final subdivision plat application of the Property to the CITY to be approved by the CITY and recorded in the Ada County Recorder's office prior to any development. 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 2 • • That DEVELOPER will file with the City Engineer a complete set of Improvement Plans ("Improvement Plans") showing all internal streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, utilities, required transitional paving in Franklin Road, pressurized irrigation facilities, pumping stations, tiling and piping of irrigation ditches, fire hydrants, sewer and water lines and appurtenances (including extensions along the exterior boundary of Property), common area landscaping, drainage, street and other similar signage, barricades, and other such improvements contemplated within the development, which Improvement Plans, and all improvements shown thereon, shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Said Improvement Plans shall be and are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference, and are referred to herein as the Subdivision Improvements. It is agreed that the improvements to be constructed and installed by successor owners for individual building lots within the boundaries of the Property (hereafter "On-Site Improvements") shall be subject to approval by the CITY in the normal course of the CITY's issuance of conditional use and building permits for the construction of a building on such separate lot, with the CITY's remedy for the failure to construct or install such On-Site Improvements being as provided in the Ordinances of the CITY or the denial of a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to the building constructed on said lot. The failure of the owner of a lot within the property to construct or install the On-Site Improvements on said lot shall not affect or interfere with the issuance of a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to any other lot within the property, provided the owner thereof is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the approvals granted for that lot by the CITY and/or the plans approved by the CITY for the building constructed thereon, provided that the owner of the lot is not the DEVELOPER named herein. 4. That DEVELOPER will, at his or their own expense, construct and install all Subdivision Improvements, as well as any and all other improvements as reviewed and approved by the CITY. 5. That DEVELOPER will construct and install all Subdivision Improvements in strict accordance with a filed and approved plat and Improvement Plans, and the City Standard Engineering Drawings and Standard Engineering Specifications current and in effect at the time the construction of said improvements is accomplished. 6. That DEVELOPER will provide the City Engineer with at least fifteen (15) days advance written notification of when and what improvements he intends to complete and the time schedule therefor; and agrees to make such modifications and/or construct any temporary facilities necessitated by such phased construction work as shall be required and approved by the City Engineer. 7. That DEVELOPER will have "corrected" original drawings of the Improvement Plans prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and will provide the CITY with said Plans or a duplicate mylar copy of said Plans. The Improvement Plans of the 8/ 15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 3 proposed improvements shall be "corrected" to show the actual constructed location (both horizontally and vertically) of the various streets, water and sewer lines, all utility lines, piped irrigation ditches, and pressurized irrigation lines and their individual building service lines, sidewalk, cwb and gutter alignment and grades, etc. The "con: ected" Improvement Plans shall include a "Certification" thereon, signed by the Registered Professional Engineer in charge of the work, that said Plans of the various improvements are true and correct. 8. That DEVELOPER shall, immediately upon the completion of any such constructed portion, portions, or the entirety of said development, notify the Ciry Engineer and request his inspection and written acceptance of such completed improvements or portion thereof. 9. That DEVELOPER agrees, upon a Finding by the City Council, duly entered in the official minutes of the proceedings of the City Council, that a portion, or portions, or the entirety of said improvements need to be completed in the interest of the health, welfare and/or safety of the inhabitants of the CITY, the DEVELOPER will, within a reasonable time as determined by the CITY, construct said needed improvements, or, if he does not so construct within a reasonable time after written notification of such Council action, and the CITY thereafter determines to construct, and does construct such improvement, the DEVELOPER will pay to the CITY the actual costs paid or incurred by the CITY for such improvements so constructed by the CITY, plus inrterest thereon at an annual interest rate equal to the prime interest rate of First Security Bank of Idaho l~us five percent (5.0%) until paid, said payment to be made in such manner and under such terms as the CITY shall order after conference with the DEVELOPER. Provided, however, the Ciry Council shall not make the Finding set forth in this paragraph except at a regular or special meeting of the City Council, duly held, and unless the DEVELOPER has been notified in writing of the time and place of such meeting at least three (3) days prior thereto and has been given an opportunity to be presern in person or by counsel, and to be heard on the merit of the proposed Finding. 10. That DEVELOPER agrees that upon its having received written notification from the City Engineer, that any of the requirements herein specified have not been complied with within any phase of the Subdivision Improvements, that the CITY shall have the right to withhold the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy within the Property and/or shall have the right to withhold the providing of culinary water service to any parcel within the Property until such time as all requirements specified herein have been complied with; provided, however, the DEVELOPER shall have the right to appear before the City Council at any regular meeting after any Certificate of Occupancy or any water service shall have been withheld for reasons set forth in this paragraph, and shall have the right to be heard as to why such Certificate of Occupancy should be issued or water service allowed. The Council shall then decide whether said Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued or water service to said parcel allowed, and its decision shall be final, except that the rights of the parties are 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 4 • • preserved at law and equity, including, but not limited to, the right of appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction. 11. That DEVELOPER agrees that as security for the construction by the DEVELOPER of the Subdivision Improvements, the CITY shall require from the DEVELOPER irrevocable letter(s) of credit, cash deposit(s), certified check(s), or negotiable bond(s) as allowed under Section 11-9-606 C of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and the CITY shall have the right to withhold a building permit with respect to any lot within the Property until the same is provided by the DEVELOPER Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to, sewer, water, curb, gutter and sidewalks, irrigation and drainage piping, pressurized irrigation system, landscaping and berming, and fencing. 12. That DEVELOPER agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued until all improvements as listed on Exhibit "B" are completed, unless the CITY and the DEVELOPER have entered into an addendum agreement stated when the improvements will be completed in a phased development; in any event, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the CITY. 13. That DEVELOPER agrees, in recognition of the unique and peculiaz circumstances relative to this development, to the special conditions set forth in Exlu~it "B" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and agrees to construct a perimeter fence around building construction azeas to contain debris prior to any construction, except where roadways and streets for access aze located and except where the CITY has agreed in writing that such fencing is not necessary. 14. That DEVELOPER agrees that those portions of the water main or sanitary sewer lines, as identified in the Improvement Plans, requiring increased line size or capacity because of future service needs originating from properties not owned by DEVELOPER and located within the vicinity of the subject development, will be constructed by the DEVELOPER. In recognition of the cost savings which can be accomplished by construction of such excess capacity and/or improvements concurrently with the facilities to be constructed for DEVELOPER'S purposes, and the impracticality or impossibility of constructing such excess capacity and/or improvements separately or at a later time, DEVELOPER agrees to design and construct such facilities subject to the CITY's entering into a late comers agreement to reimburse DEVELOPER for any such excess capacity. DEVELOPER agrees to obtain three independent bona fide bids for the performance of such work from qualified and responsible contractors and shall deliver copies of such bids to the CITY prior to the commencement of such work. Such bids shall be solicited and itemized in a manner which allows clear and specific identification of that portion of the construction work representing excess capacity. The CITY'S obligation to enter into a late comers agreement to help DEVELOPER to pay for such costs shall be limited 8/ 15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 5 ~ ~ to the lowest of such bids irrespective of whether the lowest bidder is in fact selected by DEVELOPER to perform the work. 15. That DEVELOPER agrees that any notice required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or deposited in the United States mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY of Meridian: City Engineer City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 with copy to: Wayne G. Crookston, Jr. Fitzgerald, Crookston & Fitzgerald P. O. Box 427 Meridian, ID 83680 DEVELOPER: Properties West, Inc. c/o Jon L. Barnes 1401 Shoreline Drive P. O. Box 2797 Boise ID 83701 J & A Enterprises c/o James L. Bovd 1020 W. Main Street. Suite 305 P. O. Box 8105 Boise, ID 83707 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof. The parties may at any time hereafter modify or amend this Agreement by a subsequent written agreement executed by the parties. This Agreement shall not, however, be changed orally, nor shall it be deemed modified in any way by the act of any of the parties hereto. Nothing herein is intended, nor shall it be construed, as obligating a party to agree to any modification to this Agreement. 16. That DEVELOPER agrees to pay all recording fees necessary to record this Agreement with the Ada County Recorder's office. 17. All covenants and conditions set forth herein shall be appurtenant to and run with the land and shall be binding upon DEVELOPER's heirs, successors or assigns. 18. This Agreement shall become valid and binding only upon its approval by the City Council and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 6 19. That DEVELOPER agrees to abide by all ordinances of the CITY of Meridian and the property shall be subject to de-annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Development Agreement, and the Ordinances of the CITY of Meridian. DATED the date, month and year first appearing. DEVELOPER: TIES WEST `\`~,`,`,ljl~lf 11111/111!///, // C~ ,~~ ~fip Z ~1 A ; S~L ,~~ •~~i~,,~~9~T 1St ~ ~~`~~~` By i Jon L. a s. President J &'z~EN,TERPRISES Y J .Boyd f By ~-~e Amiletto J. Boyd CITY OF MERIDIAN By R .Come, Mayor By William G. Berg, Jr., City Cle 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 7 • A STATE OF IDAHO ) County of Ada ) ss. On this day of ~ 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Jon L. Barnes, known, or proved to me, to be the President of Properties West, Inc., who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of such corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year-in'this certificate first above written. G ~. ~ .' ~ . ?.~ .~ ,,.'~ ' ~ ~' ~ , Not lic for Idaho `~ ~ Ada ~ o ' = ~ Z ~, t 1 ~ `.,~ . Residing at: .'Sc; -~~ ~'(S`~'AL) - My Commission Expires: Z///~ S qi . w ,• _ f - ~~ `~ v t r~ 1 \ STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this o~~day of ~t~ ~+.s~. 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeal James L. Bovd and Amiletto J. Bovd, known, or proved to me, to be the partners of J & A Enterprises, an Idaho general partnership, who executed the foregoing instrument,: and acknowledged to me that they executed the same on behalf of such partnership. `IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereurno set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. ~ L'~,~/,~,I ' ~ ` __ ._ Notary Public for Idaho j Residing at: U F ~~Arf~o ~.. (~SEAL)'~ My Commission Expires: ~ ~-oUG~ ..... , ,.c;,~~ . ,. , 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 8 STATE OF IDAHO ) County of Ada ss. On this o27~~day of ~~ ccs~` 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared OBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian that executed this instrument and the persons who executed the said instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that said City of Meridian 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. _ /I ~~.~ GE L. C••, ~ ~9TAR ~. s ~ ~ g• i (SEAL) ' -~ : '° U ~ `~~ ~ ~ JwY ~iblic for Id~~agqho at: i~le~i~ iQ~l nission Expires: 08' d~- 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 9 Updated Draft, 2-20-9- EXHIBIT `A' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. LEGAL DESCRIPTION A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 01°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section and the center line of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.59 acres, more or less. SUBJECT TO: All existing easements and road rights-of--way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of land. -7- ~ ~ EXHIBIT "B" TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, Inc. AND J & A ENTERPRISES DEVELOPER shall develop the property described in Exhibit "A" (Property) as a Light Industrial Development pursuant to § 11-9-607 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 2. DEVELOPER acknowledges and agrees that it will be required to submit to the CITY an application for Conditional Use Permit pursuant to §11-2-418 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, and obtain the CITY's approval thereof; prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any buildings or improvements on Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 2, of the Property, as well as for those uses specifically required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit as outlined in the CITY's Zoning and Development Ordinance on the remaining lots. DEVELOPER agrees to comply with all staff and agency requirements. 4. DEVELOPER covenants and agrees that, in connection with the development of the Property as may be approved by the CITY, DEVELOPER shall, at its cost and expense, do and perform the following: a. Berming, and LandscaQin~z -Franklin Road. Construct a landscape strip within the Property along the full length of the Property adjacent to the north right-of--way line of Franklin Road ("Franklin Road Landscaping"), except for driveway accesses. The Franklin Road Landscaping shall be a minimum of thirty-five feet (35') in width beyond required ACRD right-of--way, including any necessary bike lanes. The Franklin Road Landscaping will be landscaped and sprinkler irrigated, by means of pressurized irrigation, in accordance with landscape plans to be submitted by DEVELOPER and approved by the CITY. b. Sidewalk -Franklin Road. At the time of the construction of the improvements upon the Property, construct afive-foot (5') concrete sidewalk and match paving in the public right-of--way of Franklin Road along the full length of the Property adjacent to the north boundary of the Property ("Franklin Road Sidewalk"). The Franklin Road Sidewalk shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications of the ACHD in effect at the time of construction. If construction of this sidewalk is specifically prohibited at this time, DEVELOPER shall furnish a letter from Ada County Highway District outlining reasons for same, along with evidence of appropriate sureties for future construction of the sidewalk. EXHIBIT "B" 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 1 of 5 • • c. Dedication/Sale of Additional Right-of--way -Franklin Road. Dedicate or sell land adjacent to the existing north right-of--way line of Franklin Road required to meet ACHI)'s requirement for aforty-five-foot (45') right-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road, including any necessary bike lanes. d. Planting Strip -Eastern Boundary. Provide a permanent, 20-foot-wide, landscaped planting strip along the east boundary of the Medimont Subdivision as shown on the approved plat and as represented in public hearings, as approved by the CITY, and allow no encroachment of this strip. The strip will be planted with six- to eight-foot high Scotch pines at fifteen (1 S) feet on center prior to obtaining building permits and perpetually maintained to provide a screen for adjacent residential properties.. e. Planting Strip -Western Boundary. Provide a permanent, 20-foot-wide, landscaped easement along all other residential uses adjacent to the Property, and allow no encroachment of this strip. f. Subdivision Plat(s). DEVELOPER shall timely prepare, submit, and obtain the required approval by the CITY of a subdivision plat for the Property, said plat to be in conformity with the requirements of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and State Code. g. Plan Approvals. Timely submit and obtain, as part of the regular building permit acquisition process, the required Certificate of Zoning Compliance and approval by the CITY of all drainage and grading plans, building plans, lighting plans, landscaping plans, parking and other plans relating to the development of each buildable lot within the Property. h. Compliance with ACRD Conditions of Approval. In the development of the Property, comply with the terms and conditions of the ACRD Staff Report, or as may be required by ACFID in approving Conditional Use Applications to be filed by DEVELOPER. In cases where ACHI)'s and the CITY's conditions of approval conflict, the conditions which are more restrictive shall take precedence. i. Canals. Ditches and Waterwavs. Tile all canals, ditches and other waterways and submit evidence of appropriate approvals from the irrigation district and/or downstream water users. j. Water and Sewer Service. Connect all water and sewer facilities within the Property to the municipal water and sewer service of the City of Meridian. All water and sewer facilities constructed or installed by DEVELOPER on the Property shall be in accordance with plans and specifications therefor which shall be first approved by the CITY. k. Landscaping -General. Construct and install all landscaped areas, as shown on plans to be submitted and approved by the CITY, with grass and sprinkler irrigation system, EXHIBIT "B" 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 2 of 5 except as otherwise expressly noted on said approved plans. All landscaping shall comply with the CITY's landscape requirements, particularly City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D. Each building site shall be landscaped twenty (20) feet inside the property boundary behind the sidewalk line along any street. Each building lot shall, as a minimum, install a seven (7) foot wide landscaped strip along all interior side lot lines between the front property line, behind the sidewalk, and the front line of the building. Entry drives and visual triangle requirements are exceptions to this requirement. The remainder of any required setback may be used for automobile parking or for a different kind of landscape treatment. The twenty (20) foot landscaped area along any street shall have a berm with an approximate rise of three (3) feet. Landscaping shall also be required on each building lot in all front areas that are not otherwise used for automobile pazking. In addition to the required landscaping of required setback azeas, any unpaved areas lying within adjacent street rights-of--way shall be landscaped and maintained to the finished sidewalk by the owner or occupant of the property. 1. Paving -General. All parking areas and driving lanes required for a specific lot must be paved prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. For lots undeveloped at time of initial building construction, unpaved areas shall have anall-weather surface or temporary fencing, at the option of DEVELOPER. m. Paymern of Impact Fees. Pay, in accordance with an ordinance of the CITY in effect at the time of the application by DEVELOPER for a building permit, impact fees, transfer fees (if applicable), development fees, or similar fees or assessments which may be imposed upon, or by reason of, the development of the Property, based on the uses to be developed on the Property. DEVELOPER acknowledges that at the date of this Agreement, the CITY does not have in force and effect an ordinance requiring the payment of such fees, but has under consideration such an ordinance. DEVELOPER waives the right, if any, to object to the imposition of such fees on the grounds that the Property was annexed and zoned prior to the adoption of such an ordinance. n. Li tin .All lighting will be designed in accordance with Meridian Ordinance Section 2-414.D.3 and approved by the Meridian City Engineer. No glare or illumination of adjacent properties, as deten~nined by the CITY, will be permitted, including impacts to Franklin Road. o. Si a e. All signage within the Property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Sign Code and the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall receive design approval of the Planning & Zoning Department. A-frame signs shall not be permitted. Sign permits must be obtained from the Building Department for all signage. p. Special Setback Requirements. As represented at public hearings, minimum side yard building setbacks shall be five (5) feet per story from the property line. The minimum EXHIBIT "B" 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 3 of 5 i rear yazd setback shall be twenty (20) feet from the property line. Lots 3 through 10, Block 2, shall have a minimum rear yard setback of forty (40) feet. All other setbacks shall be as required in the Zoning and Development Ordinance. q. Planters. Walls and Signs. Planters, walls and sign elements not exceeding three (3) feet in height may be permitted in the front setback areas with the written approval of the CITY and DEVELOPER, subject to requirements of applicable governmental agencies. Storage. Service. Maintenance and Loading Areas. Storage, service, maintenance and loading areas must be constructed, maintained, and used in accordance with the following conditions. (1) Unless approved in writing by the DEVELOPER and CITY, no materials, supplies, or equipment, including trucks or other motor vehicles, shall be stored upon a site except inside a closed building or behind a visual barrier screen of a wall or fence so as not to be visible from any streets or neighboring residential areas. Such visual screens shall be constructed of materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent buildings if visible from street frontage and shall be designed and placed to complement the building design. Storage areas shall be located upon the rear portions of the site, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee and the CITY. No storage azeas may extend into a setback fronting a street. (2) Loading dock areas shall be set back, recessed, or screened so as not to be visible from adjacent residential lots, and in no event shall a loading dock be closer than seventy-five (75) feet from a property line fronting upon a street unless otherwise approved in writing by the CITY and DEVELOPER. s. Maximum Lot Coverage. The building footprint shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the building lot. Noise Abatement. Activities conducted in rear yards adjacent to residences shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., or at any time which would unreasonably disturb or interfere with the peace, comfort and repose of owners or possessors of real property. All lots within the Property shall comply with the provisions of City Ordinance No. 649 (Public Disturbance Noises). u. Dust Abatement. Lot owners shall perform at least yearly dust abatement on storage yards, unless said yazds aze paved. Upon ten (10) days notice to the property owner, more frequent dust abatement may be required by the CITY. Failure to comply will result in a violation of this Development Agreement. EXHIBIT "B" 8/15/97 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 4 of 5 • • 5. Maintenance of Improvements. All improvements referenced in this agreement shall be perpetually maintained by the DEVELOPER and/or their successors, heirs and assigns in a neat, aesthetically pleasing and workmanlike manner. EXHIBIT "B" 8/15197 MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Page 5 of 5 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. APPLICATION FOR ANNESATION AND ZONING. A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF TSE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY. IDAHO SOUTH OF FRANKLIN ROAD. WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on January 14, 1997 at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, a representative of the Applicant, Gary Lee, hereinafter referred to as the "Representative," appearing in person, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The notice of public hearing on the application for annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for January 14, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the January 14, 1997, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. ~ ~ 2. The property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein. The property is approximately 26.6 acres in size. 3 The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT, Rural Transitional, and is used as agricultural pasture land; the Applicant requests the property be zoned I-L, Light Industrial. 4. The Applicant intends to develop an upper end light industrial business park subdivision of 18 building lots and five common lots. The use of the lots will be specifically permitted uses under the I-L, Light Industrial,. zone as set forth in the present Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "Zoning Ordinance," or otherwise restricted by the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) which the Applicant plans to present. The Applicant stated ..~~~ the uses it will not allow on the .property, and are thus restricted uses and which are restrictions to be imposed by the Applicant pursuant to the CC&Rs, are Asphalt & Concrete, Automobile Wrecking Yard & Storage, Fuel Yards, Junk Yard, Mobile Home Manufacturing, Railroad Yards & Shops, Recycling Plants, and Solid Waste Transfer Stations. The forgoing permitted uses are permitted uses, but will not be allowed on or at the property pursuant to the CC&Rs to be recorded with the final plat of the property. 5. In the application and at the hearing, the Representative requests that the conditional use process not be a condition of annexation. Applicant requested that the uses which are permitted FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. uses in the I-L, Light Industrial zone pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance be permitted uses at the property without the necessity of securing conditional use permits; uses which are allowed by conditional use permit in the I-L, Light Industrial zone pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance would still require the necessity of securing a conditional use permit for such use pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant will consider entering into a development agreement with the City of Meridian to restrict the permitted uses of the property. The Applicant has one use planned for the property, and will have a controlled environment as to the development of the property. 6. The property is south of Franklin Road and approximately 500 feet west of Locust Grove Road. The surrounding properties are of mixed use: to the north are light industrial businesses; to the northwest a subdivision presently being marketed as industrial; across Franklin Road is a pumice block business which is industrial; to the north and northeast is the Doug Tamura property being zoned commercial general and light industrial; to the west, south and east of the property is not in the City and is zoned RT by Ada County; also there is property zoned R1 by Ada County, which is at the northwest corner and southeast corner of the property. 7. There currently exists six single family homes along the easterly boundary of the property situated on acreages ranging in size from one to three acres. There exists two single family homes on the westerly boundary, one of which is a rental mobile home which belongs to the owner of the parcel. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES Ti~EST, INC. 8. Mr. Jon L. Barnes, of Properties West, Inc. is the Applicant. Properties West, Inc. owns a portion of the property. Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little own the other portion of the property. Gary R. Little and. Deborah A. Little consented to the application and have requested and consented to the annexation of the portion of the property they own. The application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 9. Ada County Highway District (ACRD) may submit comments and they shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. 10. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, submitted comments which comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The comments included: that the legal description for annexation included in the application appears to conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158, and the requirements of the Idaho State Tax Commission; that any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in the- project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605 M.; that the ditches to be piped are to be shown on the Preliminary Plat; that the plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department; that no variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing the project; that any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517; that wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation; that the Applicant determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil .scientist with the street development plans; that the Applicant submit a master street drainage plan approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district; the Applicant coordinate fire hydrant placement with Meridian's Water Works Superintendent; that the Applicant revise the Preliminary Plat map to include land use and existing zoning of the land adjacent to the proposed development; that the pressurized irrigation system within the development needs to be designed along the rear of the-lots to avoid conflicts with utilities; that any proposal for a supplementary connection from the City's water system to the pressurized irrigation system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely due to the size of the area to be watered; that 250-watt, high-pressure sodiune street lights will be required at locations designated by the Meridian Public Works Department after Idaho Power Company completes their design for the service of this development; that all street lights shall be installed at subdivider's expense; that the Applicant add a street name to the stub street going to the west boundary of the property, and provide a 50 feet radius temporary turnaround at the west end of the property; that the temporary turnaround at the west end of the property may require some building restriction status for Lot 1, Block 4 and/or Lot 8, Block 1, depending on an acceptable FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. t • turnaround design; that John Priester, the Ada County Surveyor, has recently indicated that it is not desirable to show these temporary turnarounds on the plats, because it is then a dedicated public right-of-way that must later be vacated; that Mr. Priester stated the best solution to this problem is to record an instrument, either prior or after plat recordation, providing an easement for this purpose, and that the document would have a provision that the easement would automatically be rescinded when the streets are able to go through; that the Applicant has indicated in his preliminary plat Note No. 9 that "improvements along E. Franklin Road (future) will be Road Trusted and constructed by Ada County Highway District at a later date;" that the Applicant is to install afive-foot-wide detached sidewalk along the Franklin Road frontage at this time ahead of the Ada County Highway District reconstruction; that a 20 feet wide planting strips are required to be placed adjacent to all residential properties in accordance with. City Ordinance Section 11-9-605 G.; that a planting strip needs to be added on the westerly boundary of the property; that the planting strip shall not be a part of the normal street right-of-way or utility easements; that any contractor's yards proposed must be located a minimum distance of 300 feet from any residence, except for an owner's residence, have a screening fence erected around areas utilized for storage of equipment, with the areas limited to storage, maintenance and processing incidental to contracting work; that lighting shall be designed so as not to cause glare or impact adjacent residential properties, as determined by the City of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • Meridian; that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that all uses within this Mixed/Planned Use Development Area shall be developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use process which will be particularly important if the proposed zoning is approved because of the possibility of. adverse impacts on adjacent residential properties; and that the potential for incompatible uses is great. if the I-L, Light Industrial, zoning is approved without stringent development guidelines being imposed. 11. The Meridian Police and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 12. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. These comments included: that there is only oae way in and out of the complex; that as long as all codes, number of hydrant requirements, and water supply requirements are met, the Meridian Fire Department will not have a problem. 13. The Central District Health Department submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. These comments included: that after written approval from the appropriate entities are submitted, it can approve this proposal for central sewage; that plans for central sewage and central water must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality; that it recommends that the first one half inch of storm water be pretreated through a grassy Swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES iiEST, INC. • to groundwater and surface water quality; and that the engineers and architects involved with the design of the project should obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and design a storm water management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. 14. The Representative stated that the proposed improvements that the Applicant is identifying are the roads, water, waste water collection facilities, storm drain facilities and pressurized irrigation. The Representative further stated that in addition to the foregoing improvements there will be a landscaped common lot along Franklin Road, 35 feet in width, a landscaped entry island into the project and there will be a landscaped buffer strip along the easterly boundary 20 feet wide. 15. The Representative stated that the building which the Applicant envisions constructing is intended to be of light industrial use that would lend to a small business operation that somewhat needs a store front and also a requirement of a storage area in the rear. 16. The Representative stated that the Applicant had a couple neighborhood meetings with the adjoining property owners, and invitations were sent to the property owners within 300 feet of the property; that the Applicant had an occasion to meet with a couple of the property owners on a one on one basis and reviewed some of the concerns they had previously expressed. The Representative stated that they discussed the irrigation system that is an existing ditch that will be piped. The ditch, in its state today, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • has caused leakage problems and contributed to flooding of basements to the east side of the property. By piping the ditch, they can alleviate some of that problem. 17. The Representative, on behalf of the Applicant, responded by letter dated January 13, 1997, to the submitted comments of Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator. Said response of the Representative are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. With regard to the Applicant's request that the conditional use process not be a condition of annexation, the Representative stated that this development will not be a mixed use development, but a single use development. The particular uses have been identified, and they will identify controls. The Representative stated that the conditional use permit requirement will place the developer at a disadvantage. when competing with the developer across from the property; there exists industrial uses within the City of Meridian which do not require conditional use processes; and consistent with a statement in the comprehensive plan, they are attempting to develop business atmosphere and to create jobs, increase economic base and other things which the City is desiring. 19. In response to a question of Commissioner MacCoy concerning control over building construction, the type and color of the material used, the Representative stated that there will be an architectural control committee established, and they have FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • identified building material to be used and the types of products to be used in the development. The construction will need the approval of the architectural control committee, including landscape plans, site plan and building materials. The intent is to try to have the same feel throughout the project as created in the entrance. They will keep full control of everything until the last lot is sold. 20. Jim Boyd stated to the Commission that he is in the commercial real estate business and has specialized in industrial real estate for 19 years in the Boise area. Mr. Boyd stated that he believes the project the Applicant is proposing goes well beyond the developments seen in the past with the exception of the one like Central Valley. The restrictive covenants used by residential developments are good for this type of project. The restrictive covenants make the project viable not only during the selling phase, but viable and workable into the future.. The architectural control committee cannot be dictatorial because of different products coming into the market; however, it provides for consistency in the project. Mr. Boyd believes there is a need for this type of project; it offers a nice affordable environment for small businesses. 21. Mr . Boyd stated that he would like to see the conditional use process not be a condition of the project. The conditional use process puts the development at a disadvantage. 22. There was testimony at the hearing objecting to the application which was principally as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • a. Jim Witherell testified that .the difference between this project and other properties is that the project immediately adjoins housing. When the City of Meridian adopted its Comprehensive Plan it adopted some very good standards which include the following: the adjoining property owners cannot lose property value, cannot lose water, cannot suffer damage, and cannot incur health risks. For this reason, light industrial is in segregated areas; areas in which there are no housing. The property has R1 housing on both sides. His house is with 12 feet of the property line. The house on the west side is within one foot of the property line. Mr. Witherell desires the conditional use process to be a condition of the approval of the application. As adjacent property owners, they look at landscaping from the rear, whereas the landscaping is designed from the front. From the rear, the landscaping is a chain link fence and a couple of trees. Based upon definition or logic, the application has to be denied because no amount of landscaping and conditional use restrictions can quiet industrial noise, dim industrial lighting or prohibit health or safety risks to residential areas. The proposed covenants, conditions and restrictions do not provide protection because they do not provide standards, only statements. In response to questions from Chairman Johnson and Commissioner Borup, Mr Witherell stated that he does not object to development of the property, but objects to the proposed zoning and use. b. Ann Witherell testified that if the property is developed as light industrial there will be constant noise. She testified the noise created by traffic and vehicles based upon statistics, and based upon the statistics concerning noise, the proposed industrial park creates a health risk and property values will decline. In response to Commissioner Oslund's question, Ann Witherell stated that the statistics are compiled by the Federal Bureau of Transportation. c. Ted Hanson stated that he had several questions which were not addressed. These questions included whether permission from the Corps of Engineers for a filtration system adjacent to Franklin Road and whether the usage of the property would be 24 hours a day which would increase the noise level at night. d. Robert R. Smith testified that during the development of the property, they will be adversely affected by dust, noise and pollutants during construction. They will need a buffer because his and other neighboring properties adjoin the property. Their FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES iiEST, INC. backyards adjoin the property and they spend a lot of time in their backyards. 22. The Representative testified in response to Mr. Hanson's testimony, Mr. Smith's testimony and the Witherell's testimony as follows. Irrigation from the property has historically run north. The water drains into a drainage that crosses Franklin Road, and then through a natural drainage into the Five Mile Creek on the north side of Franklin Road. The policies. of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, the City of Meridian, and Ada County Highway District in the design of storm water facilities are to permit the existing amount of discharge to continue after development. However, Ada County Highway District, the City and Corp of Engineers have guidelines for the quality of the discharge water. The rates of flow will be in accordance with the current regulations and codes. The approval of the Corp of Engineers comes in the final design phase of the first final plat along with other issues. With regard to Mr. Smith testimony, there exist requirements imposed upon them; dust will be minimized through the availability and use of water trucks; trash fences will be constructed to contain building materials which may be blown from the property. It does not matter if construction occurs on the property, there will be such a phase of the development of the property. With regard to the Witherell's testimony, they are concerned about the health and well being of the neighbors. They will make every effort to prepare the designs and seek the approval of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • ~ regulatory agencies having control over the project. There exist agencies to control the use of the lots after construction. They do not intend to build anything in the project that is not in accordance with currently adopted regulations and standards. 23. In response to questions of Commissioner MacCoy, the Representative stated that he has read nothing in the covenants, conditions and restrictions concerning the restriction of noise, but such could be added if the City so desired. 24. There was comment and discussion between the Commission, the Representative concerning the proposed plat and design for the development of the property. 25. The Representative further testified that there are other areas in which light industrial borders residential areas. One of these areas is a stretch along Emerald Street between Five Mile and Maple ,Grove, and there is no buffer strips at all . These areas have managed to make the uses compatible, and it seems to work just fine. 26. Mr. Smith testified in response to the Representative's comments concerning the bordering of light industrial and residential. Mr. Smith's testimony included that he is retired from Idaho Power. That while working for Idaho Power, he ~~kt worked to restore a power outage at Sears computer industry, because of the noise. There is a conflict because of the uses of the respective areas during different hours of a day. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • ~ 27. George and Mary Ann States submitted a letter concerning this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 28. Monte C. McClure submitted a letter concerning this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 29. Archie T. and Ernistine Roberson, -James N. and Ann C. Witherell, Gene and Vernadene Press~.ey, and Robert R. and Jeri Smith, submitted a letter objecting to this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 30. There were no other comments by the public regarding this application. 31. The property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 32. The. property requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in the Meridian Area of Impact. 33. The property can presently be physically serviced with City sewer and water. 34. The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Economic Development Goal Statement. 1. Policies 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 1.8 The City of Meridian intends to establish a Design Review Ordinance which will foster compatible land use and design within the development, and with contiguous developments; and encourage innovations in building techniques, so that the growing demands of the community are met, while at the same time providing for the efficient use of such lands. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at pages 18 - 19. 35. The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, INDUSTRIAL POLICIES. 3.1 Industrial development within the urban service planning area should receive the highest priority. 3.3 Access to industrial areas from collector and local streets will be discouraged. 3.4 Industrial uses adjacent to residential areas should not create noise, odor, air pollution, and visual pollution greater than levels normally associated with surrounding residential activities. 3.5 Industrial development should be encouraged to locate adjacent to existing industrial uses. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 3.6 Industrial areas should be located within proximity to major utility, transportation and services facilities. 3.7 Industrial uses which require the storage or the production of explosive or hazardous materials should not be located near residential areas, and should conform to disposal, spill and storage measures as outlined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 3.8 Industrial uses which require the storage or production of explosive or toxic materials should be excluded from any area which has a potential of flooding from natural runoff or canal breakage. 3.9 Industrial uses should be located where discharge water can be properly treated or pre-treated to eliminate adverse impacts upon the City sewer treatment facility and irrigated lands that receive industrial runoff water. 3.10 Industrial .uses should be located where adequate water supply and water pressure are available for fire protection. 3.11 Zoning and development within each of the Industrial Review Areas should be analyzed to ascertain if there are potential problems or conflicts which would hinder the development of these areas by private industrial and business interests. 3.12 All industrial proposals that pertain to the Industrial Review Areas shall be reviewed and monitored by the City Council or designated commissions or committees, so that approved uses are compatible with surrounding planned uses and preserve the integrity of the review areas. Eastern-Eagle Road Liqht Industrial Review Area. 3.13 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and promote the development of an overpass at the intersection of Locust Grove Road and I-84 by the Idaho .Department of Transportation 3.14 The character, site improvements and type of light industrial developments should be harmonized with the residential uses in this area. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 3.15 The City of Meridian shall encourage the development of a Technological park and compatible light industrial uses within the proximity of the Idaho Foreign Trade Zone. 3.16U Land uses within the Eastern Light Industrial Review area must be clean, quiet, and free of hazardous or objectionable elements. 3.17U It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and promote light industrial development in the Eastern Light Industrial Review Area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 24 - 25. 36. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under TRANSPORTATION, Franklin Road, East of Meridian Road, and Eagle Road, North of Overland Road, are designated as Principal Arterials. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 43. 37. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under COMMUNITY DESIGN, Entryway Corridor, Franklin Road (Bast and West entrances)' and Eagle Road (North and South entrances) are designated gateway arterials. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 72. The COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN provides the following statements under COMMUNITY DESIGN relative to entrance corridors: Entrance Corridors (coal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically-pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. 4. Policies 4.1U Jointly plan entryway corridors to Meridian with Nampa and Boise. 4.2U Support ACRD corridor development standards for the entryways to the City. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. f • development and encourage clustered, landscaped business or residential development on entrance corridors. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks .for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 73. 38. The property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map at page 4 of the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN as Commercial. 39. The requested zoning of Light Industrial ( I-L) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 14. as follows: (I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light Industrial District is to provide for light industrial development and opportunities for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; to encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale establishments which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke or glare and that are operated entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited for industrial development because of location, topography, existing facilities and relationship to other land uses. This district must also be in such proximity to insure connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are not permitted, and strip development is prohibited. 40. Proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. ~ ~ CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicants' property. 2. The City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-222 and Section •11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. The Planning and Zoning commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Idaho Code Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it may take judicial notice. 4. All notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. 5. The Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. The land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present city limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. The annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES iiEST, INC. • • 8. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. See Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d. 1075 (1983). 9. The development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements;. Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways; and 11-9-606 14., which requires pressurized irrigation. 10 . The Applicants stated that it .intends to develop an upper end light industrial business park subdivision of 18 building lots and five common lots. Any uses would have to comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 11. The City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, and has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan. Thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the use. It is concluded that upon annexation, as conditions of annexation, the City may impose restrictions that are not otherwise contained in the current Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances. 12. It is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it (I-L) Light Industrial, but once the property was zoned (I-L) Light Industrial, the Applicants could place many different uses on the property without additional approval from the City FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • ~ other than building permits, which limits the control that the City should, have over the development and the uses of the property due to the mandates of the Comprehensive Plan. 13. It is concluded, as a condition of annexation and zoning, that any use or development of the property shall only be allowed under the conditional use process. 14. As the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN provides under LAND USE, Eastern-Eagle Road Light Industrial Review Area, in 3.14 and 3.16U, at page 25, the character, site improvements and type of light industrial developments should be harmonized with the residential uses in the area; that land uses in the Eastern Light Industrial Review area must be clean, quiet, and free of hazardous or objectionable elements; and that because the City should have control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it is therefore concluded that development of the property shall be under the conditional use permit process. 15. It is concluded that the property should be annexed and zoned (I-L) Light Industrial, but only capable of being developed under the conditional use permit process. 16. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (I-L) Light Industrial, the Applicants shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: a. Inclusion into the development the requirements of 11-9-605; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. b. Payment by the Applicants, or if required, any successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City; c. Addressing the property access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses and traffic study; d. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined. by the City; e. Appropriate berming and landscaping; f. Submission and approval of any required plats; g. Submission and approval of individual building, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans of the property; h. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the surrounding residential development and other development; i. Establishing the 35 foot landscaped setback mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same; j. Addressing the comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer and Planning and Zoning Administrator; k. The sewer and water requirements; 1. Traffic plans and access into and out of any development; and m. Any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing. 17. Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance provides in part as follows: If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. e ~ adoption of the ordinance annexing. and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. It is concluded, however, that it is more appropriate for a development agreement to be entered into when plans for development of the property are determined, and therefore as a condition of annexation a development agreement must be entered into prior to development of the property or issuance of final plat approval. 18. It is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian, and it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned on meeting the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and if they are not met the land may be de-annexed. 19. The requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Administrator, Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental agencies shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. 20. All ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de-annexation.. 21. Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 22. The Applicants will be required to connect the property to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • ~ 23. The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Development Ordinance and the development agreement, and it shall only be developed under the conditional use process. 24. These conditions shall run .with the land and bind the Applicants and their successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives. 25. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of the property as (I-L) Light Industrial would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 26. If these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall not be annexed or if already annexed, it shall be de-annexed. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of the City ^°----~' of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED COMMISSIONER OSLUND VOTED COMMISSIONER MACCOY VOTED CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ~i~~4~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City Council for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that the Applicants or their successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement, and that the property only be developed under the conditional use process; that if the Applicants are not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and are not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. MOTION: 2 ../!-q~ APPROVED DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25. MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: December 10,1996 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 14 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION20NING TO I-L AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: ~~~ ~~ ~~ "REVIEWED" SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS Post-It® Fax Note 7671 Date ~ `_ Y . y~ pa°ges~ ~% To ('~ ~ ~ ~-.~ From - ~, ~ ~ ~~ , M1 ~~ Co./Dept. ~-ti, ~~ J Co. -~ ~- Phone # Phone # Fax # _~ r J ~ ~-~ ~_ J ~, Fax # OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ** TX CONF I RMAT~ REPORT ** AS OF DEC 06 '9~~37 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TOiFROM 24 12106 13 34 208 323 9336 MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC--S 02'48" 007 203 OK MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 20NING COMMISSION MEETING: Dacembe~ 10,1996 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 14 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING: REOUEST FOR ANNEXATION20NING TO 1-L AGEN CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: COMMENTS "REVIEWED" SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS Post-It® Fax Note 7671 DBfe ; G_ .9~ ~8~ ~ From Phone # Phone # Fdx # ~ J i _( ~ FAM q All MatotiaLs presented at public meeting shall become property oT the City of Meridian. r • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, ,1996 Page 24 Crookston: I just had a question, are there any I assume that there are not, but I have to ask, are there any canals around your property, ditches things like that? Reed: No Crookston: You don't have a swimming pool on your lot? Reed: No I don't Crookston: Those things have come up before. Reed: I am sure they have. Crookston: Thank you Johnson: Any other questions? Thank you, this is a public hearing is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission at this time? Any further comments? I will close the public hearing at this time. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this project. Oslund: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY PROPERTIES WEST INC.: Johnson: We have addressed item 14 by announcement at the first of the meeting, does anyone have any questions regarding item 14 from the audience? I have nothing further on my agenda. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjourn. Oslund: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting, all those in favor? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 25 Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:13 P. M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: J ATTEST: LLIAM G. BERG, JR., >>`~N~~t ~~ ~! ~l N~~~~ w````t~ '~ ~ '',//''i ~~ ~ ~~ .` ~ p '~~ FO ERIi $EAL '~ '~ ~ ,. • ~ ~~,~1 ~~ CHAIRMAN MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: January 14.1987 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 2 REQUEST: ANNEXATION/ZONING TO I-L FOR MEDIMONT SUBDMSION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: I ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" 1 ~, CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS t1/U CITY BUILDING DEPT: ~ ~/ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: v a ~ MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: V~ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Cleric JANICE L. LASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Wor1~IBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 Motor V~eic/Drivets Lioease (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor .AI1Nr:11 MF ~ocgS WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M. ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman TIM HEPPER JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: December 3. 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/19/96 HEARING DATE: 12/10/96 REQUEST: Request for annexation/zonina to I-L Light Industrial BY: Proaerties West Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Franklin Road, West of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MALCOLM MACCOY, P2 JIM SHEARER, P2 GREG OSLUND, P/2 KEITH BORUP, P2 BOB CORRIE, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM 81 FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PREUM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM ~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES YOUR CONCISE ~'~' ~. CITY OF l~E~gT1IA~P _ WILLIN#~1 G. BERG, JR., City Clerk ' JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Plaee to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4333 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public WorksBuildinsDeQattment (208) 887-2211 Motor Velricle/Driv~ Luense (208) 888-4443 ROBER!"D: CORRIE ~~ CO N -I h!EMB aS tlVALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M. ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman TIM HEPPER JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR C011+lA~ENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: 1M'rll Berg, City Clerk by: December 3. 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/19/96 HEARING DATE: 12/10/96 REQUEST: Request for annexation/zoning to 1-L Light Industrial BY: Properties West Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Franklin Road West of Locust Grove Road POLICE DEPARTMENT JIM JOHNSON, P2 MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MALCOLM MACCOY, P2 MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM A FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P2 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT -GREG OSLUND, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION KEITH BORUP, P2 CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH -BOB CORRIE, MAYOR NAMPA II~RIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT -RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT -CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) -GLENN BENTLEY, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT CITY FILES ~/ ~ / ~ y OTHEF c f FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: N Q V 2 1 1996 ~i`~"Y OF dIERIDIAI`~° CENTRAL CE •• DISTRICT `~'~1'HEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # ~~IEI'i~ j~r~ Retittr~f`to: DEC `:ITY ~l~ Conditional Use # Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ,9a~~~-x,.~-i-~o.+o ~fl ~v~,~~- ~~ a ~~-s-; - ~~~r .1N~l~~~ ,2TieS LF/~,Sj .,ZNC. ^ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ^ high seasonal ground water ^ solid lava from original grade ^ 6. We can Approve this Proposal for individual sewage disposal to be located above solid lava layers: ^ 2 feet ^ 4 feet ^ 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. 8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage ~ central water ^ individual sewage ^ individual water 9. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: ~ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines ~ central water 10. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ^ I I. Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ^ Waste Disposal ^ Injection Well rules. ^ Groundwater Protection ^ 12. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ 13. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 14. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store IS. S'i©,e.Na~'~rT~7t MitNA-6~c.yE~ /" co.~ttr~cNU~1--77~r~s o~T~.~&E Date: ~°Z/ d' /~ .'4'7'7~-Cf~-D • Reviewed By: LORD 10/91 ~~, n.. ii9s Review Sheet DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR~ENT Environmental Health Division 19CW Boise ^ Eagle ~~R~arden city Meridian - ^ Kuna ^ Acz .. CENTRAL • • •• DISTRICT ~' H EALTH . ~,~ . Q08)375,~T11 • F . . DEPARTMENT ~ • 707 N. a7MS1(tO~G Pl- ' ~ ~ ~'~ 7b pr+evntt and droat dteoae and ditabillty: to promote iualrlly l~estyks; and oo pi+otat ~ the Health aM quaiigt of our aa6vawmt STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMN~NDATIONS We recommend that the first one half inch of stormwater be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: ,1) GUIDELINES FOR TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF STORMWATER RUN OFF. Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, Southwest Idaho Regional Office, September 1995. 2) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 1992. 3) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAIl~TAGE MANAGEMENT. Servi ng Valley, E1ma+G 8oix, and Ada coundcs ,~,~ao• Ado / IoM Caunly pM~ WIC lor• • 1lotlaon Derts 1 06 A a~.coueran SZO E 1~ SMN K atta.ca•w~ ~~E~ 9 P.O. lost IM ~ ~ ~ IW K Ntneroitp Pl o d 0 loeo Mou~ain Ilon+o. D. 0 S 1 ~' ' Ptt pyti.~lOr loN. Q 8101 bwio Floolt 727•)ID9 . . 57705 PIL 77N7SS 1701) PA 51)~O] ~~ t~torn~. O. 57eu Ptt 567A1ZS j fCrNp Plofr~ 721•» 721 Aletidon. ~• - 1 r.y...r.,.r.,... ,e~_~.rn ljkd2 PR EE!}eSTS WILLIAM G. BF_RG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., Clty Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 P & Z COMMISSION Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman Public WorksBuilding Deps~sptt (208) 887 ~ ~ (-~ ~~"/ (~ f i-,l TIM HEPPER Motor Vehicle/Dtivers Lionise ~'LO8) 888-4~~1 L`.'~ 1; / ~ ~i ~J JIM SHEARER ~e GREG OSLUND ROBERT D. (JORRIE N O V 2 ~ W 96 MALCOLM MACCOY Maya NAMPA ~ MERlCi-AN TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ONIDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridiain F~lannin~ ~ Zoninr~ Oommission, please submit your comments and recommendation to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: December 3. 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11/19/96 HEARING DATE: 12/10/96 REQUEST: Request for annexation/zoning to F-L Light Industrial BY: Properties West Inc. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Franklin Road West of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MALCOLM MACCOY,P2 JIM SHEARER, P/Z GREG OSLUND, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P2 BOB CORRIE, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH ~AMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM ~ FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECI.AMATION(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: _Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no commPnr on the above referenced auplication CITY PLANNER ~n~ e,~Y 'R; 11 I~onenn~ Accr Water SunPrinrPn~Pnt NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT NOY 2 91996 HUB OF TREASiIRE VALLEY ~ GOUNGIL MEMBERS A Good Place tfJ Live WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R.TOLSMA CITY OF MERIDIAN C GLENN R. BENTLEYEE CriY OF MF.RiD1AA1 • November 18, 1996 George and Mary Ann States 1175 E. Franklin Rd. Meridian, Idaho 83642 The Honorable Jim Johnson, Chairman Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 ~ ~~t;El-VEEU DEC - 4 1996 C~tY OF 1~tD1A~i RE: Chain link fence screening for our home adjacent to Medimont Subdivision (marketed as Stonebridge Business Center). Dear Chairman Johnson: We own the home on Franklin Road west of and adjoining the proposed Stonebridge Business Center (platted as Medimont Subdivision). We had a meeting with Mr. Jon Harnes, the developer/applicant, to discuss the subdivision and the proposed concrete tilt-up building to be built on Lot 3. Mr. Barnes has agreed to install a 6' chainlink fence with gray vinyl slatting to buffer our home. He has agreed to do this for the length of lot 3. This fence buffer with the vinyl slatting is satisfactory to us. We understand that Mr. Barnes will provide a 10' landscape strip on the east side of the fence when he develops Lot .3. Since a y, :x~i~1) George nd Mary Ann States • r TO THE CHAIRMAN,AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONERS CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF STONE BRIDGE BUSINESS PARK November 24, 1996 Sirs, RECEIVED DEC ~ 9 X996 qTY OF MF.RIDUH We are Directly Affected Parties of the foresail, sharing common boundary with the development on the east. For brevity in public testimony, we ask this letter to be entered into the record as if read in full before the Commission, We oppose any development of I-L, L-0, or I as inconsistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. We request the application be denied. The Commission will recognize this property as previously being before them as: a PUD trailerpark, dba Aspen Grove; an R- i 5 high density manufactured home development, dba Preston's Aspen Grove, and; a C-G (including light industrial) business park, dba Franklin Grove Commercial Development. We testify on two points: the inadequacy and spurious statements of the application and, far more significant, that Light Industry is wholly incompatable with the surrounding properties, and the neighborhood in mineral. The merits of the application: 1. The developer states he has met with the DirectlyAffected Parties, and implies we concur with his intent. 1,1 This is incorrect. Two of the Dir~tly Affected Parties have sold their land for this development and they may be subject to r~ress by the c~veloper if this land is not annexed. In context, they are business partners with the developer and their interest, therefore, does not reflect the view of the neighborhood. These have yet to express support or opposition to the development. t .2 There have been meetings with the developer as describes. However, not all of the Directly Affected Parties attended. Neither were the meetings held in good faith by the developer. Inter alia, the developer offered only a six foot transition at the first meeting, a 10 foot transition at the second, and requested the Affected Parties assume responsibility for the landscape maintenance. These are all below the requirments of the Comprehensive Plan which the developer knew, or ought to have known. Therefore, these meetings did not result in agreement in anv manner. Rather they resulted in an impasse, with threatened, legal class action against the developer, the City, and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. This hardly is the concord implied in the application, or any preapplication conferences as may have occurred between the city and developer. 1.3 The ~veloper proposes to build a new irrigation system for the Directly Affect Parties (as must any developer to be licensed by the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District), However all the points raised below, he refused to discuss, referring to them as a `gold brick'. • 2. The developer cites utility easements on his property, but these will be incorporated into his landscape transition. This is a violation of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan wherein landscape bufferring may not include easements. 2.1 it should also be clarified that there are three general utility easements involved: Idaho Power, US West Direct, and TCI cable all sharing a set of poles only accessible from the developer's property. Being general, preemptionary easements, width is nat specified but could be as much as 40 feet in order to turn a vehicle around (the easements deadend at a canal lateral). This greatly imp~ts the feasibility of the project; if this application is to proceed, he should obtain specific, preempted easement descriptions from the utilities. 2.2 There is an existing, fixed easement for irrigation, either per se of the Nampa- Meridian Irrigation District, or as licensee access of the waterusers in Eminent Domain (access has existed for ditch maintainence exceeding 25 years). As the developer proposes to put in a new system (two feet wide), without taking out the old (three feet wide), this extends the width of easement two ~ditional feet: this shifts the ditch maintenance easement to seven feet from the property line. This is important as the utility easements are for heavy vehicles, which, if driven on the new irri~tion system, will crush the pipe. Consequently, whatever utility easements are discovered, they must begin eight feet from the property line. The developer's intent is to collect stormwater from the roadways, and channel them into the irrigation system, thence into Five Mile Creek. This is a violation of the federal Clean Water Act, which requires containment and cleaning of the water prior to discharge into the Creek. Containment, however, will leach chemicals into the sole source potable water -our watertable, protected in quality by a patented water right. 3. The developer cites neighborhood compatabilty based on the Meridian Business Park, in proximity, the Hon property a half mile away, west of Stratford. Tl~refore, he seeks Unconditional Use for I-L zoning. This, as came up in the meetings with the neighbors, is to avoid any restriction on sales. However, this overlooks the blatant fact that these properties were zoned for industrial years before the Comprehensive Plan was in place. Moreover, these citations ignore the Locust Grove Center, IMMEDIATELY ACROSS FRANKLIN ROAD from this development, which is I-L bufferred by C-G. Moreover, none of the development cited in the application adjoin residences of any type. Therefore, prevailing non-residential development in this area should be C-G, not I-L. The larger issue, however. is whether and type of industrial zoningis compatable with this neighborhood. We believe it is not, and would open the city and Comprehensive Plan to extensive litigation, c~mages, and punitive damages as follows: DESCRIPTION OF DIRECTLY AFFECTED PARTIES With common boundary with the ~velopment on the east, there are six, single family residences. These are all R-1 properties, located on an acre or more; these range from a 1,000 sq ft resi~nce on an acre to a 3,000 ~ ft house on three acres. All residences are located at the back of the acreage, one within 20 feet of the property line. All residences are on wells for domestic water; all except one residence hold adjudicated domestic water right. Within this Township and Range are water right holders along both sides of South Locust Grove Road, Franklin Road to the west, and including the Meridian Cemetery. Therefore, 2 • • we assert the watertable is directly beneath the property to be developed. Water rights range from 30 to 95 feet, although the watertable level is approximately 20 feet. To the west, also adjoining the development, are two residences on acr~ge zoned R-1. These properties are among these aforesaid, holding water rights. All residential properties are on septic systems. The highest and best use of the property in question, obviously,ls the existing use, R-1; R-21s moot. For any other land use than R-1, or transitional R-2, because of the proximity of the homes to the proposed development, and the high value of the homes involv~l, the standard of care incumbent upon the Meridian ComRrehensive Plan is exteme. So found in law, we assert legal right to, and are prepared to estop and litigate for, the standard of protection by the Meridian Comprehensive Plan to current nd f r residents, as follows: RETENTION OF PROPERTY VALUE The Plan r~uires an 'adequate' transition, to buffer residential from non-residential land use. in part this requirement is to sustain, and ideally, enhance, the residential land value. Conditions include landscaping, distances, and solid fencing. Said landscaping is for the benefit of the public and Directly Affected Parties, not the developer. Bufferring excludes any easements, thereby bufferring width begins beyond easements. Minimum bufferring is 20 feet where the development abuts single family residences of any type or value. The standard of uate bufferring, in this instance, is protection of the maximum property value involved, the value of a 3,000 sq ft residence on three acres. Therefore, the 20 foot minimum certainly does not spoly. We believe, and would seek as being within lec,~l r~son, a six foot, masonry fence, within a bufferred landscape not less than 35 feet width, excluding easements. This bufferring is prceident, as well as r~sonable, by: (1), the sprees area of three rows of evergreen trees in st~gered pattern and; (2). this is the usual and customary width of the public transition at the street for the benefit of the public, as required by the Comprehensive Plan. The Directly Affected Parties are entitled to no less than the general public in this instance. As the standard, it applies to all transition, both on the east and west sides. RIGHT OF QUIET ENJOYMENT This Right is president as R-1, or at minimum R-2. Quiet Enjoyment protects the level of light, sound, personal or property hazard, dust and vector trespasses as applies to any resident by his neighbor. We assert legal right of quiet enjoyment at, and will action for, current R-1 /R-2, and claim trespass will occur if light, sound, hazard, dust and vermin would exceed the levels which would emote from R-1 residences. 3 • • We assert that every right of quiet enjoyment is violated by light, or any other, industry and except for friable dust, cannot be remedied without law suit. Therefore, Light Industry is wholly incompatabte for this property. Light Industry in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is regulated by Title XI, Ch 2, Sec 409. This prohibits only certain industries, which are typically heavy industry. Otherwise, it permits a huge range of potential industries including wood and metal working, storm and warehousing, mastics and chemicals. The Nature of I-L, L-0, or I involve heavy truck traffic, truck fleet parking and maintenance usually at the rear of the ~Rerty, constant movement of forklifts with their backup-alarms, manufacturing noise, 24 -hour operation, high intensity lighting, solid waste and material storage at the rear of the pro er ,gravel and sterilized parking area thereby creating road dust, and toxins depending upon the nature of the industry. The rear of the industrial property, by the size and shape of the property involved, can only be that adjoining the Directly Affect Parties. Intrusive Sound and Noise Pollution: Manufacturing, intensive truck traffic, truck fleet warm- ups, outside ping and telephone alarms, are allowed in any industrial zoning. There is no means to mitigate this type of sound except with a 10 foot high, flutes sound-wall , as was legally requirai of the Idaho Transportation Department on the Eagle Bypass -which involved homes several hundred feet from the road: the noise level from the bypass would exceed the 65 decibels, less than or comparable to levels generated by an industrial park limit. Even then, Eminant Domain, not for-profit development, enabled the trespass. Should this application proceed as I-L, the Directly Affect Parties request a variance for masonry bufferring in excess of the eight foot limit specified in the Comprehensive Plan. However, no amount of screening could limit noise in industrial development to levels that would have been generated by R-1 or R-2 residential. Intrusive Lighting: similarly, where this area presently has no intrusive lighting, nor would it occur within R-1 or R-2 residential, intense lighting is required by industry for night security and, often, 24 hour operations. Morcever, this lighting must be erected high on the poles for floodlighting. No amount of bufferring could screen the type of lighting required by industry. Intrusive Smell: Similarly, where this area presently has no intrusive odors, nor would they be anticipated with R-1 or R-2 residential, industry must, at a minimum, generate extensive exhaust fumes -from production to fleets warm-up and semi-truck deliveries. No amount of screening could limit intrusive odors or fumes. Intrusive Dust: Due to sterilized gravel fleet parking and outiside work area, industry will create dust whereas residential would not. This is legal nuisance, but is also a potential, probable health hazard. Dust is an allergen, particulary for chronic asthma (of which at least two Directly Affected Parties, and unknown future parties, suffer}. Dust can be mitigated by paving all fleet parking and outside work areas. Intrusive Toxins: In edition, several industries allowed by Sec 409, supra, use mastics which are hyper-allergens (such as cyanoacrylics, petrolum distillates, and acetones) which are are 4 • • vented to the outside. There is potential health risks to all Directly Affected Parties as here, as everywhere in Meridian, the prevailing winds are from the northwest in winter, and southwest in summer, by close proximity and possible 24 hour exposure. Even where mastics are not involved, many individuals are sensitive to fertilizer, and other particulates which would be allowed by Sec 409. No amount of screening can trap allergens, nor can the Comprehensive Plan reasonably foresee that no present or future Directly Affected Party will not be sensitive to same. Intrusive Hazard: As with the general hazards such as mastics and Petro-chemicals, light industry also presents dan~r of explosion, conflagration, and toxic spills. This hazard is well recognized, and the Division of Environmental Quality has advised the City of Boise requires industrial developers to have an Operating Plan -which includes a response plan for disasters such as fire and spilla~. With or without such a plan in Meridian, the Directly Affects Parties would be the only households in the area to be sited directly next to known risk of fire, toxic smoke, and chemical spills. This puts our risk of personal and property damage far in excess of risks of adjoining R- 1 or R-2. Given this risk, it can be anticipated our homeowners insurance wilt incr~se, with no compensation by the developer for this cyst, or personal risk. No amount of screening can protect from the known risk of environmental catastrophy on these households. V~tor Control: Light industry customarily stores trash and inventory at the rear of their properties. This includes dumpsters, materials to be recycled (such assign material), inventory (such as building material) and, in the case of farm supply, animal feed. Such storage attracts vermin: rodents in some cases, flies in most cases, and wasps and yellow jackets in all cases. It further entices stray dogs and cats and, particularly in this area, skunks and racoons. These levels would undoubtedly exceed the present or R-2 residential norm. No amount of screening or fencing can discourage incroachment vermin. Water Right Intrusion; Due to the use of sterilized gravel fleet parking and outside work area common to light industry, water spoilage is a customary by-product: contaminants from the sterilant per se, washing of vehicles, roof runoff, dripped oil and antifreeze, and spilled chemicals. Being non-organic, these chemicals do not leach out of the soil. Ordinarily, industry does not involve water issues. in this instance, however, the intend~i develoment is directly over potable water, where quantity and quality are assured to the waterusers by domestic water right. This affects the Directly Affected Parties, as well as any other water right holder in this township and range. Consequently, industry of any type is incompatable with this area due to foreseeable discharge of contaminants into a protected, sole water source. A storm water drainage system would moderate, (with totally paved fleet storage and outside work areas), but not eliminate, water quality risk. However, it is legally foreseeable that this property must affect water u ntit , as it is the largest and highest piece of ground on the, watertable. Drawdown is inevitable, as has occurred elsewhere, from cessation of irrigation and 5 • • loss of rain and snowmelt by paving. Therefore, total paving reduces one water problem, but escalates the other. Remedy is simple and obvious: any development, industrial or otherwise, can negate potential litigation by providing city water and (because of chlorination) sewer to the affected properties. With water and sewer immediately available at the intersection of South Locust Grove and Franklin, it is an easy remedy for the developer to bring these utilities up South Locust Grove (and to the affected parties at his expense) and cover the range involved. Given our reasoning and rights, there is absolutely no reason for I-L to be located joining any residential for health and safety reasons, and Quiet Enjoyment. There is also absolutely no reason, in this particular instance, that I-L should be located next to low density, single family residences, for these, property value and water right r~sons. Any of these conditions are 1ltiguous. We request this application be denied and that this area's designation in the Comprehensive Plan, as Mixed Use, be amended to preclude any industrial development. So deposed, the Affected Parties making joint submission: We are Archie T, and Ernestine M. Roberson, property owners of 185 South Locust Grove Road. We are James N. and Ann C. Witherel 1, property owners of 215 South Locust Grove Road. We are Gene and Vernadene Pressley, property owners of 255 South Locust Grove Road. We are Robert R. and Jeri Smith, property owners of 355 South Locust Grove Road. The aforesaid we believe to be the true representation of fact, and our opinion in this matter: ,/' ,, - 1 ~ -> . ; _ , 6 Idaho Power Com .~ , ,~ ~~•• BQO~ J~ ~ r ~ ~ PAY '~ ,~, - ~. A~f. ~' •~ POWER LINE EASEMENT ~ his wif Grantor( e, of..._.._~._..__.._..:.. :._.~,,,_..._..._.._.---County, State of... ._...___. ....._...._ do hereby grant and convey to IDAIi POWER COMPANY, a corporation, its licensees, succeseois aad assigns, Grantee, for One Dollar and other valuable considerations, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, a right of way and easement for the erection and eontimied operation, main- tenance, repair, alteration, inspection and replacement of the electric transmission, distribution and telephone lines and circuit. of the Grantee, attached to poles or other supports, together with guys, crossarms and other tachments and incidental equip- ment thereon, and appurtenances, with the right to permit the attachment of the wires an//d~~fiz res of other companies or parties, over, o~~an~~`~•a,,cross a following premises, belonging to the said Grantor(s) in.. ....._.G...C~__ ..:__..w__C only, ate of u~~ -.--...yr,.L~=~~-~~_ ' ..., in the following location, to-wit: ~~ / / ~~aG- ~/~~/ „~ G/ t~ /~/ T' Together with all rights of ingress and egress necessarq for the full and complete use, occupation and enjoyment of the ease• meat hereby granted, and all rights and privileges incident thereto, including the right from time to time to cat, trim and remove trees, brash, overhanging branches and other obstructions which may injure or interfere with the Grantee's use, occupation or enjoy- ment of this easement and the operation, maintenance and repair of Grantee's electrical system. Executed and delivered this_..~~ .day STATE OF .~.. . ~~ ..._------.__.......... w. County of...._.._..~ ....~...~.~~.--..-•_ On this. ~ ~ - da of_.,.~~ ..P .._, 19 before m ~ ~ ~ a No ublio, persoaal~, ap red..._._ ~ 722L~~ ,~1L5_~^ sad ~'' ~ ~..,., known to me to be the person(a) who ezecuted the foregoing instru- ~~ c~c edged to me th .~~~. ment aqd a ~ now[ executed the same freely and voluntarily for the uses andwpurposea therein mentioned. +~ f., r . -„~,. ~~ ~..,',~• ~C-~;';"':' CF ADA, ss Notary Public, '1~::.d u?pt~ri.°_~rG~"l~,ti. ---------------~~1~H0 -POWER.-LE: ..Gommissioa--ez 19 ~. `~. V ~- ~~...da;,' mYSte -. ....., 29.10. •it...'.'Iin. FJ,....;.:..1.--_..o'clocii.. _ .-I. This. .. - ~ •-S~i Pg... ~~.....-. CI~"~Ft)uNCE A 'WING so~ecbMi:e~3Jl~'~c:..::>........... ~/ fee' '~ ~aL.=.- ~ ~l1 c~ Recorder BY -~ ~-E' / t/, ..,,,.:• Deputy '~,~.- - .3/ 7 «~ `~ c ~C~~ December 4, 1996 ~EC r~ug~~~7l~~v ~~" Will Berg, City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Annexation Request by Properties West and Preliminary Plat for Medimont Subdivision Monte McClure 1475 E. Franklin Road Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mr. Berg, City Council Members and Planning & Zonning Commission Members: My wife and I own the home on Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road just to the east of the proposed Medimont Subdivision as submitted for annexation and approval by Jon Barnes, Properties West, Inc. I have met with Mr. Barnes and his engineer, Gary Lee, J-U-B to review the proposed site development plan. Mr. Barnes has agreed to construct a 20 foot wide landscaped strip on his property along my western boundary. In addition, he plans to install a six foot chain link fence along the west side of this 20 foot strip. This landscaped strip should provide ample buffering to my home and we are in agreement with his proposed planting scheme. I have also reviewed Mr. Barnes' proposed concept in developing the overall look and use of his development. We agree with Jon that it would be redundant to require each lot owner to be subjected to a Conditional Use Process for each of the end users of these lots. Therefore; I would suggest that the City NOT require a Conditional Use Permit for each lot owner. It would be a waste of your time and the tax payers money to process and police 18 CUP's. In summary, I would like to say that Mr. Barnes has addressed all of my concerns for this proposed subdivision and that I believe this is the highest and best use for this property. Sincerely, Monte C. McClure • RECE1Vm DEG - 4 1996 C~IY OF MF.R~IAiil November 18, 1996 George and Mary Ann States 1175 E. Franklin Rd. Meridian, Idaho 83642 The Honorable Walt Morrow, Chairman Meridian City Council Meridian City Hall 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Chain link fence screening for our home adjacent to Medimont Subdivision (marketed as Stonebridge Business Center). Dear Chairman Morrow: We own the home on Franklin Road west of and adjoining the proposed Stonebridge Business Center (platted as Medimont Subdivision). We had a meeting with Mr. Jon Barnes, the developer/applicant, to discuss the subdivision and the proposed concrete tilt-up building to be built on Lot 3. Mr. Barnes has agreed to install a 6' chainlink fence with gray vinyl slatting to buffer our home. He has agreed to do this for the length of lot 3. This fence buffer with the vinyl slatting is satisfactory to us. We understand that Mr. Barnes will provide a 10' landscape strip on the east side of the fence when he develops 1..oT 3. Sincere y ~~~~~%~ George and ry Ann States 01/13/97 14:23 ~~-u January 13, 1997 $208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE ~ 001/005 .~-U- GINEERS Inc. B EN ENGIt~IEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 250 S. Beachwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, ID 83709-0944 208/376-7330 FAX: 208/323-9336 Mr. Will Berg, City Clerk ~~~ a~ ~ 3 ~"`'7 City of Meridian ~~•~ QF ~~~~~~~~ 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Transmitted via Fax to Will Berg & Shari Stiles: 887-4813 Transmitted via Fax to Bruce Freckleton: 887-1297 and by mail Dear Mr. Berg: RE: MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION (Properties West, Inc.) Annexation with Preliminary Plat We have received a Memorandum dated January 9, 1997, from Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, identifying their general and site specific comments concerning the above-referenced application to be heard by the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission on January 1 a, 1997. We wish to make a response to each of the items discussed in that memorandum. In addition, please find enclosed a revised Preliminary Plat and Engineering Concept Plan per the requirements of Staff review. Our response is arranged in the same order and format as the above-mentioned memorandum: GENERA QMMENTS: The annexation legal description submitted is in conformance with City and State Ordinances as stated by Staff. The Engineering Concept Plan, Sheet 2 of the Preliminary Plat, shows piping of two user ditches along the south and east property boundaries. NMID has no jurisdiction over the delivery ditches. Plans will be submitted to the users of the ditch for approval. Please note that the bulk of the water delivery is for the Medimont Subdivision property. Any existing wells and septic tanks will be removed from service that may be situated on the property. 4. A soils profile has been prepared along with a groundwater monitoring program this past irrigation season. This information was gathered by STRATA, and their recommendations will be submitted to the City with the first-phase plans. 5. A storm water system design will be prepared during the first-phase plan development process. The storm water master plan, with detailed plans, will be submitted to ACHO and NMID for their review and approval. These approval letters will be submitted to the City. r.. '.: JAN 13 '9? 14 26 208 323 9336 PAGE.01 14:24 x`208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE ~ 002/005 ~~ ~~-u~. l;ugineers Surve rs Planners Mr. Will Berg, Ciry Clerk 3'0 January 13, 1997 Page 2 6. The fire hydrant placements are shown on the Engineering Concept Plan. We hereby request that the City Water Works Superintendent review these placements and comment on their positions. 7. There are no known flood plain areas on this site in accordance with FEMA mapping. 8. The developer will install the street name signs, construct an approved water system, pressure irrigation system, and road base system prior to building permit issuance. 9. This letter shall act as our response to the City Staff's General and Site Specific Comments. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: The Engineering Concept plan shows the proposed sanitary sewer line connection at the NW corner of the development in East Franklin Road. The developer hereby requests that the City notify him immediately if there is a lack of wastewater treatment plant capacity for this development. Main sine sizing shall be 8" throughout with the sewer mains situated in the south and west corrldors as shown on the Concept Plan. The Engineering Concept plan shows the proposed water line connection at the NW corner of the development in East Franklin Road. The developer hereby requests that the City notify him immediately if there is a lack of domestic and fire water capacity for this development. The main line sizing is shown on the Concept plan. we hereby request that the City staff review these sizes for compliance with their requirements. All waterlines are shown on said Concept Plan to be situated within the north and east corridors. A detailed landscape plan will be prepared and submitted to the City with the first-phase development plans for approval by City staff. The landscaping proposed wiill be discussed during the January 14, 1997 public hearing. All necessary letters of credit will be submitted to the City during the processing of the Final Plat, after preliminary and final plat approval. 4. A development agreement is anticipated and encouraged by the developer for this project. It is suggested that the development agreement be used to strengthen the requirements that the City deems appropriate for the developer and individual lot owners within this subdivision. The development agreement should also be used to restrict the types of uses in the IL Zone, the individual landscape requirements, maintenance of properties, building types, storage limitations, etc. In other words, this agreement can perform the same functions as a Conditional Use Permit without the requirement to process multiple permits in the future. 5. A chain link fence is planned for the perimeter of this subdivision. It will be installed during each phase of construction (two phases planned). The preliminary plat (Concept Plan) has been amended to show the proposed fencing. 6. The present land uses and zoning have been added to the enclosed amended preliminary plat per your request. ' JAN 13 '97 14:26 208 323 9336 PAGE.02 rJ (,!-B ~ x`208 323 9336 Engineers Surveyors Planners I@J 003/005 ~4r, will Berg, City Clerk January 13. ~ 997 Page 3 To design the placement of the pressure irrigation line along the rear of these industrial size lots would be costly. Therefore, we wish to address an alternative design. The main line could be positioned along the west and south sides of the planned streets within a utility easement. All other utilities will be installed in a common trench along the north and east sides of the street, The individual pressure irrigation connection could be positioned in the center of the lot, 10 feet from the planned sanitary sewer connection. This arrangement should avoid conflicts with all other utilities, including individual domestic water meters. We will discuss this concept and any supplementary water connection to the City's system at the time of development plan preparation for Phase I. 8. 250 watt street lights are shown on the Engineering Concept Plan. We concur that the final location should be established after the electrical distribution plan is prepared by Idaho Power Company, Their plan will be developed during the Phase I Development Plan preparation. The developer will install street lights at hls expense. 9. The street name of "E. Kalispell St." is shown for the stub street in question on the Preliminary Plat. However, this street name was accidentally deleted from the Engineering Concept Plan. The amended plan is enclosed for your use. We hereby request that the City allow the developer to use a "hammerhead style" tum-around in lieu of the requested SO-foot radius turn-around. The hammerhead has been used and approved in many other locations within the City. It also has less impact on adjoining lots. In addition, the Meridian Fire Chief and ACHD have indicated that they will accept this style of turn-around. A temporary easement document will be prepared for owner signature and delivered with the final plat to ACHD and the City. 10. ACHD has recommended in their Site Specific comments that the developer provide a road trust fund for the construction of the sidewalk along East Franklin Road. If ACHD will allow the developer to construct the sidewalk in lieu of paying the road trust fee, he will do so. But he cannot do both. Therefore, if the City requires the sidewalk to be constructed at this time, we respectfully request that they make that request to ACHD. 11. A 20-foot planting strip is not planned along the westerly boundary of this development. There is a small residence and a mobile home situated on property owned by Mr. and Mrs. States adjacent to the northwest corner of this development. They have indicated to us, and the City has a letter on file from them, that they do not desire a landscaped buffer. Therefore, to comply with City codes, the developer will be submitting a variance application to remove this portion of landscape buffer strip for City Council consideration prior to their public hearing for the annexation/preliminary plat for this development. 12. The developer will be offering his lots for sale to all persons interested in light industrial uses. These potential buyers will include contractors in the building trade such as electrical, mechanical, plumbing, cabinetry, etc. However, the 300-foot setback is too restrictive since the storage yard will be screened and its use limited. Therefore, to comply with City codes, the developer will be submitting a variance application to reduce this setback for City Council consideration prior to their public hearing for the annexation/preliminary plat for this development. J-U-B ENG. BOISE • JAN 13 '9? 1427 208 323 9336 PAGE.03 01/13/97 14:25 $208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE • ~~+~~ Engineers Surveyors Planners ~ 004/005 Mr. will Berg, City Clerk January 13, 1997 Page a 13. The users in this development will require security lighting for their propert,~. There are lighting methods available to reduce glare to adjoining properties. The developer is agreeable to implementing these requirements within the CCR's and development agreement, if necessary. Therefore, we respectfully request that the City Staff provide us with their recommended standards for acceptable levels of impact or glare. 14. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan is a general guideline to direct the planning and growth of the City of Meridian. Certain suggestions and policies have been identified within the Comp Plan. However, even though the City has officially adopted the Comp Plan, it does not represent Zoning Ordinance Amendments. Also, the Comp Plan states the following: "Implementation is the phase of the planning process which makes the goals and policies, as stated in the Comprehensive Plan, become realities. The Plan, no matter how good it may be, is a useless document if it is never used and implemented." Implementation procedures must include zoning amendments. The Meridian Comp Plan further states: "The land use delineations depicted in the Comprehensive Land Use Map are not precise, but rather the Comprehensive Land Use Map represents along-range vision of community development in generalized areas." With regard to the Conditional Use Permit requirement, the Comp Plan states: "Mixed Use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as specialty retaiVcommercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, and public and semi-public uses." Medimont Subdivision is a single controlled industrial use, not a mixed use. In addition, the Comp Plan states: "Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed." Again, Medimont Subdivision is a single planned use. It is not a mixture of uses as defined in the Comp Plan. In addition, the developer will have a very restrictive and controlling set of CCR's that will dictate the look of the project, as well as the allowed uses. These allowed uses are more restrictive than the current IL allows. As mentioned before, these restrictions and requirements can be incorporated within the required development agreement. Therefore, stringent guidelines are self-imposed. In addition, the Conditional Use process will bean expensive and time-consuming venture for each and every user within Medimont Subdivision as well as the City Staff. The City staff will be required to process 18 separate CUP's. The City Planning & Zoning and City Council will need to review each application and make recommendations. These extra expenses and added time will constitute extra burden being placed upon City Staff, elected officials, and land owners. It JAN 13 '9? 14:2? 208 323 9336 PAGE.04 01/13/97 14:25 $208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE @J 005/005 s • ~~~u Engineers Surveyors Planners Mr. Will Berg, City Clerk January ~ 3, 1997 Page 5 would seem that the City should seek out a more streamlined method, such as Design Review by Staff. It is our opinion that a streamlined method is available with the CCR's (approved by the City) and the Development Agreement which can identify these goals. Also, the City should take note that by requiring this development to be placed under the CUP requirement is essentially placing the developer, Properties West, at art unfair disadvantage compared to his immediate competition. The City would be creating an un-level playing field in the marketplace. Many other industrial subdivisions within one mile of this site enjoy the benefit of not being governed by the CUP requirement rule. The Meridian Comp Plan states: "Every effort shall be made by the City of Meridian to encourage commercial and industrial growth and development which furthers employment and economic self sufficiency and reduces Meridian's present reliance on Boise's Metropolitan economic and employment center." The Meridian Comp Plan also states: "Industrial development within the urban service planning area should receive the highest priority." In summary, the developer does nvt agree with a Conditional Use Permit requirement for Medimont Subdivision. Further, he believes that better, more efficient controls are available. Please review the enclosed information . If you require additional information, please call. Sincerely, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. Project Manager GAl:lhc Enclosures cc: Jon Barnes, Properties West, Inc. Honorable Robert Corrie, Mayor, and City Council Members Jim Johnson, Planning & Zoning Commission Chairman and P2 Members f:\projetu\11130\adm~n\cityltr3.doc JAN 13 '97 14 27 208 323 9336 PAGE.05 ~' ~,i u February 20, 1997 Mr. Will Berg, City Clerk Honorable Robert Corrie, Mayor, and City Council Members City of Meridian 33 East Idaho" Street Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mr. Berg: RE: MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION (Properties West, Inc.) Annexation with Preliminary Plat 208-376-7330 FAX: 208-323-9336 F ~ 2 1 e~~~~1 Enclosed please find an UPDATED DRAFT, dated February 20, 1997, fora "Proposed Development Agreement for the Medimont Subdivision". This has been revised to incorporate a few suggestions as discussed with Ms. Shari Stiles on February 19, 1997. Our goal is to develop an agreement that will address the concerns of the City at the onset of this project without causing undo hardship and delays for the end buyer and user of the lots within Medimont Subdivision. At this point, since the Planning and Zoning Commission has made a recommendation to the City Council to require Conditional Use Permits on each lot within the development, we wish to solicit the Council's approval of the Development Agreement in lieu of making the CUP's mandatory. Please forward a copy of this document and letter to each City Council member for their review as soon as possible We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. Project Manager GAL:Ihc Enclosures cc: Jon Barnes, Properties West, Inc. f:\projects\1 T130\admin\cityltr5.doc J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 is ~~ ~~ • UPDATED DRAFT 2-20-97 PER MEE G WITH MS. STILES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1997, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, party of the first part, hereinafter called the "CITY", and PROPERTIES WEST, INC., part of the second part, hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER", whose address is 1401 Shoreline Drive, Boise, Idaho 83702. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of a certain tract of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the State of Idaho legislature, in 1991, passed Idaho Code, 67-6511A, Development Agreements, which provides that cities may enter into development agreements with developers upon rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, the CITY has passed Ordinance 11-2-417 D, which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has submitted an application for annexation and zoning of that certain property described in Exhibit "A", and has requested zoning of Light Industrial (I-L) without a conditional use permit to allow a limited use light industrial project on said property which has been recommended for approval by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission to the Meridian City Council; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER made some representations at the public hearings before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission as to how the land would be developed and what improvements would be made; and WHEREAS, the CITY has authority to place conditions and restrictions upon annexation or rezoning of property; and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER deems it to be in its best interest to be able to enter into this agreement and acknowledges that this agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its urging and request, and DEVELOPER submitted a proposed Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER, as sole owner of said land, has made request to the CITY to have the same annexed to said CITY and requested that a Conditional Use Permit not be required for the development, and has submitted to the CITY site plans as to how the property might be platted, landscaped, bermed, lighted, access provided, and elevations, which, except for the site plans, have been approved for annexation by the CITY and as part of the annexation the CITY adopted and approved Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law required that the DEVELOPER enter into a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the CITY, in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, annexed the property subject to de-annexation if the DEVELOPER did not enter into a Development Agreement. • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: DEVELOPER agrees, and hereby binds its heirs, successors and assigns to this agreement, in consideration for the annexation, rezone, or the non-de-annexation of the area, as follows: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and the terms of this agreement cannot be altered, changed or modified without the express written consent of the CITY. 2. That DEVELOPER, in accordance with its representations before the CITY, shall, on the land described in Exhibit "A": a) Develop and construct a light industrial subdivision restricted as identified in the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance with the exception that the following uses are not allowed: • Asphalt and concrete operation • Automobile wrecking yard and storage • Fuel yards • Junk yards • Mobile home manufacturing • Railroad yards and shops • Recycling plants • Solid waste transfer stations b) Further, for those lots identified as Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9 of Block 3, the following permitted uses within the IL Zone shall be allowed only with an approved Conditional Use Permit by the City: Contractors Yard Equipment -Heavy, Farm, etc. (Sales and Repair) c) Submit to the CITY applications for site review and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any building(s) or improvements on the property, intended for industrial or other uses. d) Submit a subdivision plat application of the property to the CITY to be approved by the CITY and recorded in the Ada County Recorder's office prior to any development. 3. That DEVELOPER will file or cause to be filed with the City Engineer, a complete set of Improvement Plans ("Improvement Plans") showing alt streets, entry drives entering the property from a public right- of-way, utilities, pressurized irrigation facilities, tiling and piping of irrigation ditches, fire hydrants, extensions of sewer and water lines to and along the exterior boundary of such property, landscaping, drainage, street and other similar signing, barricades, and other such improvements contemplated within the development, which Improvement Plans, and all improvements shown thereon, shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Said Improvement Plans shall be and are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. It is agreed that the improvements to be constructed and installed by successor owners which are located wholly within the boundaries of the Medimont Subdivision (hereafter "On-Site Improvement') are subject to the terms of this Development Agreement, and shall be subject to approval by the CITY in the normal course of the CITY's review of each building permit for the construction of a building on such separate lot, with the CITY's remedy for the failure to construct or install such On-Site Improvements being as provided in the Ordinances of the CITY or the denial of a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to the building constructed on said lot. The failure of the owner of a lot within the property to construct or install the On-Site Improvements on said lot shall not affect or interfere with -2- • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 the issuance of a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to any other lot within the property, provided the owner thereof is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the approvals granted for that lot by the CITY and/or the plans approved by the CITY for the building constructed thereon. 4. That DEVELOPER will, at its own expense, construct and install all sanitary sewers, storm drains, utilities, pumping stations, water mains and appurtenances, fire hydrants, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, pressurized irrigation system, tiling and piping of irrigation ditches, electrical transmission lines, natural gas lines, telephone lines, cross drains, street, street surfacing, street signs, and barricades as well as any and all other improvements shown on the Improvement Plans as reviewed and approved by the CITY. 5. That DEVELOPER will construct and install all such improvements in strict accordance with a filed and approved plat and Improvement Plans, and the City Standard Engineering Drawings and Standard Engineering Specifications current and in effect at the time the construction of said improvements is accomplished. 6. That DEVELOPER will provide the City Engineer with at least fifteen (15) days advance written notification of when and of what portion, or portions, of said improvements he intends to complete and the time schedule therefor; and agrees to make such modifications and/or construct any temporary facilities necessitated by such phased construction work as shall be required and approved by the City Engineer. 7. That DEVELOPER will have "corrected" original drawings of the Improvement Plans of all said improvements prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and will provide the CITY with said Plans or a duplicate mylar copy of said Plans. The Improvement Plans of the proposed improvements shall be "corrected" to show the actual constructed location (both horizontally and vertically) of the various water and sewer lines, all utility lines, tiled and piped irrigation ditches, and pressurized irrigation lines and their individual building service lines, sidewalk, curb and gutter alignment and grades, etc. The corrected Improvement Plans shall include a "Certification" thereon, signed by the Registered Professional Engineer in charge of the work, that said Plans of the various improvements are true and correct and that he (the Registered Professional Engineer) has inspected the construction of the various improvements (water lines, sanitary sewer lines, pressurized irrigation lines, piped and tiled irrigation ditches, gas lines, electricity lines, storm drain lines, sidewalks, curb and gutter, street paving, etc.) and that the materials for and the installation of the same were all done in conformance with the applicable City Standard Engineering Drawings and Standard Engineering Specifications governing the construction of these facilities. 8. That DEVELOPER shall, immediately upon the completion of any such constructed portion, portions, or the entirety of said development, notify the City Engineer and request his inspection and written acceptance of such completed improvements or portion thereof. 9. That DEVELOPER agrees, upon a Finding by the City Council, duly entered in the official minutes of the proceedings of the City Council, that a portion, or portions, or the entirety of said improvements need to be completed in the interest of the health, welfare and/or safety of the inhabitants of the CITY, the DEVELOPER will, within a reasonable time as determined by the CITY, construct said needed improvements, or, if he does not so construct within a reasonable time after written notification of such Council action, and the CITY thereafter determines to construct, and does construct such improvement, or improvements, the DEVELOPER will pay to the CITY the actual costs paid or incurred by the CITY for such improvements so constructed by the CITY, plus interest thereon at an annual interest rate equal to the prime interest rate of First Security Bank of Idaho ~ five percent (5.0%) until paid, said payment to be made in such manner and under such terms as the CITY shall order after conference with the DEVELOPER. Provided, however, the City Council shall not make the Finding except at a regular or special meeting of the City Council, duly held, and unless the DEVELOPER has been notified -3- Updated Draft, 2-20-97 in writing of the time and place of such meeting at least three (3) days prior thereto and has been given an opportunity to be present in person or by counsel, and to be heard on the merit of the proposed Finding. 10. That DEVELOPER agrees that upon its having received written notification from the City Engineer, that any of the requirements herein specified have not been complied with, that the CITY shall have the right to withhold the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy within such annexed area and/or shall have the right to withhold the providing of culinary water service to any part, parcel, or portion of such annexed area until such time as all requirements specified herein have been complied with; provided, however, the DEVELOPER shall have the right to appear before the City Council at any regular meeting after any Certificate of Occupancy or any water service shall have been withheld for reasons set forth in this paragraph, and shall have the right to be heard as to why such Certificate of Occupancy should be issued or water service allowed. The Council shall then decide whether said Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued or water service to said property allowed, and its decision shall be final, except that the rights of the parties are preserved at law and equity, including, but not limited to, the right of appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction. 11. That DEVELOPER agrees that as security for the construction by the DEVELOPER of the Project Improvements, the CITY shall require from the DEVELOPER irrevocable letter(s) of credit, cash deposit(s), certified check(s), or negotiable bond(s) as allowed under Section 11-9-606 C of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and the CITY shall have the right to withhold a building permit with respect to any lot within the property until same is provided by the DEVELOPER. Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to, sewer, water, irrigation and drainage piping, pressurized irrigation system, landscaping and berming, and fencing. 12. That DEVELOPER agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued until all improvements as listed on Exhibit "B" are completed, unless the CITY and the DEVELOPER have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements will be completed in a phased development; in any event, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the CITY. 13. That DEVELOPER agrees, in recognition of the unique and peculiar circumstances relative to this development, to the special conditions set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and agrees to construct a perimeter fence around construction areas to contain debris prior to any construction, except where roadways and streets for access are located and except where the CITY has agreed in writing that such fencing is not necessary. 14. That DEVELOPER agrees that any notice required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or deposited in the United States mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY OF MERIDIAN City Engineer City of Meridian East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 with copy to: Wayne G. Crookston, Jr. Ambrose, Fitzgerald & Crookston Box 427 Meridian, ID 83680 DEVELOPER Properties West, Inc. c/o Jon L. Barnes 1401 Shoreline Drive P.O. Box 2797 Boise, ID 83701 -4- • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this Section. The parties may at any time hereafter modify or amend this Agreement by a subsequent written agreement executed by the parties. This Agreement shall not, however, be changed orally, nor shall it be deemed modified in any way by the act of any of the parties hereto. Nothing herein is intended, nor shall it be constructed, as obligating a party to agree to any modification to this Agreement. 15. That DEVELOPER agrees to pay all recording fees necessary to record this Agreement with the Ada County Recorder's office. 16. All conditions of approval as set forth herein shall be appurtenant to and run with the land and shall be binding upon DEVELOPER's heirs, successors or assigns. 17. This Agreement shall become valid and binding only upon its approval by the City Council and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. 18. That DEVELOPER agrees to abide by all ordinances of the CITY of Meridian and the property shall be subject to de-annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Development Agreement, the Ordinances of the CITY of Meridian, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian which was approved and adopted on January 4, 1994. DATED the date, month and year first appearing. By: STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. DEVELOPER: PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Jon L. Barnes President CITY OF MERIDIAN By: Robert Corrie, Mayor By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk -5- County of Ada Updated Draft, 2-20-97 On this day of 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared JON L. BARNES ,known to me to be the President of Properties West, Inc., who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. SEAL STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this day of , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT CORRIE AND WILLIAM G. BERG, known, or proved to me, to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian that executed this instrument, and the persons who executed the said instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that said City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public, State of Idaho Residing at My commission expires: Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: My Commission Expires: -6- EXHIBIT `A' Updated Draft, 2-20-97 TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. LEGAL DESCRIPTION A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 01°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section and the center line of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.59 acres, more or less. SUBJECT TO: land. All existing easements and road rights-of--way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of -7- • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 EXHIBIT `B' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 1. DEVELOPER shall develop the property described in Exhibit 'A' as a Light Industrial Development pursuant to §11-9-607 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. 2. DEVELOPER acknowledges and agrees that DEVELOPER, assigns, or lot owner will not be required to submit to the CITY an application for Conditional Use pursuant to §11-2-418 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any buildings or improvements on the Subject Property intended for industrial or other uses. 3. DEVELOPER agrees to comply with the requirements of the Meridian Police Department, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian City Engineer, Meridian Planning Director, Ada County Highway District (hereafter'ACHD'), Central District Health Department and the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. 4. DEVELOPER covenants and agrees that, in connection with the development of the Subject Property as may be approved by the CITY pursuant to Annexation and Preliminary Plat Applications filed by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall, at is cost and expense, do and perform the following: a) Berming -Franklin Road. Construct a berm within the Subject Property along the full length of the Subject Property adjacent to the south right-of-way line of Franklin Road, except for public street accesses and landscaped irrigation/storm water ponds. The Franklin Road Berm shall be a minimum of thirty-five feet (35') in width beyond required ACHD right-of--way, including any necessary sidewalks. The Franklin Road Berm will be extended into the Subject Property a minimum of twenty-five feet (25') from the property line on each side of the entrances to the Subject Property off Franklin Road, said extensions to be a minimum width of twenty feet (20'). The Franklin Road Berm, including the entrance extensions, will be landscaped and sprinkler irrigated in accordance with a landscape plan to be submitted by DEVELOPER and approved by the CITY as part of an Annexation/Zoning Application for the development of Medimont Subdivision proposed by DEVELOPER. b) Sidewalk -Franklin Road. At the time of the construction of the improvements upon the Subject Property, construct afive-foot (5') concrete sidewalk in the public right-of--way of Franklin Road along the full length of the Subject Property adjacent to the north boundary of the Subject Property (Franklin Road Sidewalk). The Franklin Road Sidewalk shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter "ACHD") in effect at the time of construction. c) Dedication/Sale of Additional Ri ht-of--Way -Franklin Road. Dedicate or sell land adjacent to the existing south right-of--way line of Franklin Road as required to meet ACHD's requirement for a forty-five-foot (45') right-of--way from the centerline of Franklin Road, including necessary bike lanes. d) Design/Alignment of Entrances. Design/align the public street entrance from Franklin Road to meet current ACHD requirements. e) Open Space and Landscaping. Provide open space and landscape areas along the east boundary of the Medimont Subdivision as shown on the preliminary plat submitted as part of the Medimont Subdivision application. -8- • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 f) Subdivision Plat(s). DEVELOPER shall timely prepare, submit, and obtain the required approval by the CITY of a subdivision plat for the Subject Property, said plat(s) to be in conformity with the requirements of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and State Code. g) Plan Approvals. Timely submit and obtain, as part of the regular building permit acquisition process, the required approval by the City of all drainage and grading plans, building plans, lighting plans, landscaping plans, parking and other plans relating to the development of each buildable lot within Medimont Subdivision. h) Compliance with ACHD Conditions of Approval. In the development of the Subject Property, comply with the terms and conditions of the approval by ACRD of the development of the Subject Property, as set forth in the ACHD Staff Report, or as may be required by ACHD with respect to the approval by ACHD of the Medimont Subdivision Application to be filed by DEVELOPER. In cases where ACHD's and the CITY's conditions of approval conflict, the CITY's conditions shall take precedence. i) Canals, Ditches and Waterways. Tile all canals, ditches and other waterways and submit evidence of appropriate approvals from the irrigation district and/or downstream water users. j) Water and Sewer Service. Connect all water and sewer facilities within the Subject Property to the municipal water and sewer service of the City of Meridian. All water and sewer facilities constructed or installed by DEVELOPER on the Subject Property shall be in accordance with plans and specifications therefor which shall be first approved by the CITY. k) Landscaping -General. Construct and install all landscaped areas, as shown on plans to be submitted and approved by the CITY, with grass and sprinkler irrigation system, except as otherwise expressly noted on said approved plans. All shrubs and trees planted on the Subject Property will comply with the CITY's landscape requirements, unless otherwise expressly approved by the CITY in connection with a specific building permit issues by the CITY with respect to the development of the individual lots within Medimont Subdivision. I) Paving -General. All parking areas and driving lanes required for a specific lot must be paved prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy For lots undeveloped at time of initial building construction, unpaved areas shall have an all-weather surface or temporary fencing, at the option of DEVELOPER. m) Payment of Impact Fees. Pay, in accordance with an ordinance of the City of Meridian in effect at the time of the application by DEVELOPER for a building permit, impact fees, transfer fees (if applicable), development fees, or similar fees or assessments which may be imposed upon, or by reason of, the development of the Subject Property, based on the uses to be developed on the Subject Property. DEVELOPER acknowledges that at the date of this Agreement, the CITY does not have in force and effect an ordinance requiring the payment of such fees, but has under consideration such an ordinance. DEVELOPER waives the right, if any, to object to the imposition of such fees on the grounds that the Subject Property was annexed and zoned prior to the adoption of such an ordinance. n) Li htin .All lighting will be designed in accordance with Meridian Ordinance Section 2-414.D.3 and approved by the Meridian City Engineer. o) Maintenance of Improvements. All improvements referenced in this agreement shall be perpetually maintained by the DEVELOPER and/or his successors, heirs and assigns in a neat, aesthetically pleasing and workmanlike manner. p) Each buildable lot within Medimont Subdivision shall be subject to the "Special Development Requirements for Individual Buildable Lots" attached as Exhibit `C'. -9- • • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 EXHIBIT `C' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUAL BUILDABLE LOTS The following building setbacks shall be required unless waived by the City and developer to account for unusual circumstances: a) The minimum front yard building setback shall be 35 feet from property line. b) The minimum side yard building setback shall be 5 feet from property line. c) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 20 feet from property line. Lots 3 through 10, Block 3, of Medimont Subdivision shall have a rear yard setback of 40 feet. d) The minimum building setback at a side street shall be 30 feet from property line. e) All building setback areas fronting a street shall be fully landscaped or paved in a manner approved by the City and developer. f) Planters, walls and sign elements not exceeding 3'0" in height may be permitted in the front setback areas with the written approval of the City and developer, subject to requirements of applicable governmental agencies. 2. No fence or wall shall be constructed closer than thirty-five (35) feet from the property line of a fronting street and thirty (30) feet from a side street. No fence or wall shall exceed a height of 8'0" unless otherwise approved in writing by the City and developer. All fences and walls shall be designed as an integrated part of the overall architectural and site design. All fences and walls shall be constructed of materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent buildings within the Medimont Subdivision. 3. No on-street parking shall be permitted. On-site parking shall be provided as required by government agencies having jurisdiction. 4. Storage, service, maintenance, and loading areas must be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the following conditions: a) Unless approved in writing, no materials, supplies, or equipment, including trucks or other motor vehicles, shall be stored upon a site except inside a closed building or behind a visual barrier screen of a wall or fence so as not to be visible from any streets or neighboring residential areas. Such visual screens shall be constructed of materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent buildings if visible from street frontage and shall be designed and placed to complement the building design. Storage areas shall be located upon the rear portions of the site, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Committee. No storage areas may extend into a setback fronting a street. b) Provisions shall be made on each site for any necessary vehicle loading. No on-street vehicle loading shall be permitted. -10- -J • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 c) Loading dock areas shall be set back, recessed, or screened so as not to be visible from adjacent lots, or sites, neighboring properties, or streets, and in no event shall a loading dock be closer than seventy five (75) feet from a property line fronting upon a street unless otherwise approved in writing by the City and developer. 5. All utilities including electrical, telephone service, water, gas, and sewer shall be brought underground to the buildings from the nearest available lines at the expense of the lot owner. 6. Lot grading design should complement and reinforce the architectural and landscape design character by helping to screen parking and service areas, to help reduce the perception of height and mass on larger buildings, by providing reasonable transitions between on-site uses, by providing elevation transitions contributing to the efficiency of on-site and off-site movement systems, and by providing reasonable transitions between lots, as approved by the City and developer. 7. Draina a -Each lot owner shall be responsible to properly design for on-site retention of storm water run- offfor its building lot. The method of on-site storage of storm water shall be reviewed and approved by the City and developer and each lot owner shall submit to the City and developer written evidence of the approval thereof by all governmental agencies having jurisdiction over storm drainage run-off. All elements of drainage design and improvements shall conform with applicable regulations of Ada County Highway District and the City. 8. Buildings -All buildings are to be constructed of quality products with methods of construction to achieve a visual and harmonious appearance in the development. a) The building footprint shall not exceed 50% of the building lot as well as the standards set by the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance. b) Durable exterior finishes such as concrete or concrete block are encouraged, although are not mandatory. c) Metal exterior finishes are allowed except that the front exterior or side exterior of a building facing any street shall not be 100% metal. Alternate exterior finishes or alternate exterior finishes in combination with metal shall be approved by the City and developer. d) Those buildable lots identified as Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 of Block 3 shall have a building height restriction of 40 feet. 9. Electric Lighting -All exterior and security lighting shall either be mounted on the building or shall have underground service to a light pole in accordance with plans and specifications approved in writing by the City and developer to the end that lighting shall be compatible and harmonious throughout Medimont Subdivision. 10. Fences -Fences shall be required around all storage yards. 11. Landscaping -The Meridian City Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with regarding maximum improved areas. Each lot owner or occupant within Medimont Subdivision shall be responsible for the construction, installation, and maintenance of functional and aesthetically suitable landscaping on its building lot. Such landscaping shall be subject to the following requirements and shall be installed only after plans therefore have been submitted to and approved by the City and developer. a) Required Landscaping -The lot owner or occupant must install suitable landscaping in the following areas: All landscaping shall be irrigated and maintained in a first class condition. -11- • Updated Draft, 2-20-97 ii) All areas, not devoted to buildings, parking areas, storage lot, roadways, and sidewalks, shall be landscaped. iii) Each building site shall be landscaped twenty (20) feet inside the property boundary behind the sidewalk line along any street. Each building lot shall, as a minimum, install a seven (7) foot wide landscaped strip along all interior side lot lines between the front property line, behind the sidewalk, and the front line of the building. Entry drives and visual triangle requirements are exceptions to this requirement. The remainder of any required setback may be used for automobile parking or for a different kind of landscape treatment. The twenty (20) foot landscaped area along any street shall have a berm with an approximate rise of three (3) feet. iv) Landscaping shall also be required on each building lot in all front areas that are not otherwise used for automobile parking. v) In addition to the required landscaping of required setback areas, any unpaved areas lying within adjacent street right-of--ways shall be landscaped and maintained to the finished sidewalk by the owner or occupant of the property. vi) All lot landscaping shall comply with the typical Landscape Plan per Exhibit "D". b) Tree Standards i) Existing healthy trees shall be preserved where practical. ii) The tree variety approved by the developer for the twenty (20) foot landscaped area behind the sidewalk fronting any street shall be a 3" caliper Washington Hawthorne Tree centered in the twenty (20) foot landscaped area. Spacing of trees shall be a maximum of twenty five (25) feet for uniformity throughout Medimont Subdivision. iii) The twenty (20) foot wide landscaped berm behind the sidewalk fronting any street shall be planted with lawn for uniformity throughout Medimont Subdivision. iv) Each twenty (20) foot wide landscape berm behind the sidewalk, regardless of length, shall have a minimum of one (1) tree. v) All other landscaped areas except for the twenty (20) foot landscaped area behind the sidewalk fronting the street shall be landscaped with a choice of trees and shrubs pre- approved by the City and developer. 12. Activity Times -Activities conducted in rear yards adjacent to residences shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 13. Dust Abatement -Lot owners shall perform yearly dust abatement on storage yards unless said yards are paved. f: \projects\11130\ad m in\develag r.d oc -12- • --- -~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~gLL C E a ~ ~~ p~ ~€ z 4 i~ ' . ~_. ~. . ~t Itl ~~: i ~~ ~~ FI ~ r _1 ~_ ~\ A A EXHIBIT 'D' to the Development Agreement ;?~~ by and between the City of Meridian, Idaho, and Properties West, Inc. ~~~ v=d~~~ ~'~~~~~ PkaTaa'f' ~ G~~E.t~T ~ T~ ~,~~ L4r/cJy K ~viw5 ~. ~ L .~ . ~. tst8 ~ ctaerrai[r,cc. ttr}t, ~v+ro WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANiCE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: ~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA REE C L ENN R. BENTLE G 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 P & Z COMMISSION (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman Public WorksBuilding Department (208) 887-2211 KEITH BORUP Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND ROBERT D. CORRIE MALCOLM MACCOY Mayor January 9, 1997 To: Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor and Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer ~~~ Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator ~=~~ Re: MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION (Annexation/Zoning with Preliminary Plat - By Properties West, Inc.) We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: The legal description for annexation included in the application appears to conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158, and the requirements of the Idaho State Tax Commission. 2. Any existing irrigationldrainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on the Preliminary Plat. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 3. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 4. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the street development plans. 5. Submit a master street drainage plan approval from the affected irrigation drainage district 6. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. c:tt~ntt~vrrr.rr • • P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council January 9, 1997 Page 2 7. Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat Map, and/or any plans to reduce said boundaries. 8. Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, pressurized irrigation system shall be approved and activated, and road base to be approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to any building permits being issued. 9. Respond, in writing, to each of the comments contained in this memorandum, and submit with copies of the revised Preliminary Plat Map to the City Clerk's Office prior to the scheduled hearing date. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS: 1. Sanitary sewer service for this development shall be off of an extension of the existing sanitary sewer main shown on the plat at the NW comer in E. Franklin Road. The treatment capacity of the Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being evaluated. Approval of this application needs to be contingent upon our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage generated by this proposed development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of roadway centerlines. 2. Water service for this development shall be off of an extension of the existing 12-inch diameter main shown on the plat at the NW corner in E. Franklin Road. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. The subdivision designer is to coordinate sizing and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. Water lines shall be located on the north and east sides of roadway centerlines. 3. A detailed landscape plan for the common areas shall be submitted for approval. A letter of credit or cash surety will be required for the improvements prior to signature on the final plat. 4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 5. Install non-combustible, six-foot-high, permanent perimeter fencing prior to obtaining building permits unless this requirement is specifically waived in writing by the City. C:V~DAtONf.PP P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council January 9, 1997 Page 3 6. Please revise the Preliminary Plat map to include land use and existing zoning of the land adjacent to the proposed development. 7. The pressurized irrigation system within this development needs to be designed along the rear of the lots to avoid conflicts with utilities. Any proposal for a supplementary connection from the City's water system to the pressurized irrigation system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely due to the size of the area to be watered. 8. 250-watt, high-pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Meridian Public Works Department after Idaho Power Company completes their design for the service of this development. All street lights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. 9. Add a street name to the stub street going to the west boundary, and provide a 50 foot radius temporary turnaround at the west end. This may require some building restriction status for Lot 1, Block 4, and/or Lot 8, Block 1, depending on an acceptable turnaround design. John Priester, the Ada County Surveyor, has recently indicated that it is not desirable to show these temporary turnarounds on the plats, because it is then a dedicated public right-of--way that must later be vacated. Mr. Priested stated that the best solution to this problem is to record an instrument, either prior to or after plat recordation, providing an easement for this purpose. The document would have a provision that the easement would automatically be rescinded once the streets are able to go through. 10. Applicant has indicated in his preliminary plat Note No. 9 that "improvements along E. Franklin Road (future) will be Road Trusted and constructed by ACHD at a later date" . Applicant is to install afive-foot wide detached sidewalk along the Franklin Road frontage at this time ahead of the ACHD reconstruction. 11. Twenty-foot-wide planting strips are required to be placed adjacent to all residential properties in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.G. A planting strip needs to be added on the westerly boundary of the property. The planting strip shall not be a part of the normal street right-of--way or utility easements 12. Any contractor's yards proposed must be located a minimum distance of three hundred feet (300'} from any residence except for an owner's residence, have a screening fence around areas utilized for storage of equipment, and be limited to storage, maintenance and processing incidental to contracting work. C:1A~DAt(HV7'.PP • • P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council January 9, 1997 Page 4 13. Lighting shall be designed so as not to cause glare or impact adjacent residential properties, as determined by the City of Meridian. 14. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that all uses within this Mixed/Planned Use Development Area shall be developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use process. This will be particularly important if the proposed zoning is approved because of the possibility of adverse impacts on adjacent residential properties. The potential for incompatible uses is great if the I-L zoning is approved without stringent development guidelines being imposed. C:~DIMONTI'.PP Meridian Planning & Z~g January 14, 1997 Page 2 Johnson: Moved by Commissioner Oslund, second by Commissioner MacCoy to approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE FOR 12 CHILDREN BY PATRICIA REED: Johnson: Any. comments or discussion or corrections necessary on the findings of fact as prepared by our City Attorney? If there is no further discussion I would invite one of the commissioners to recommend approval. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as written, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Oslund -Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Recommendation to pass onto the City? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as found justified as appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to meet the water and .sewer requirements, fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code and other ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the City. Oslund: Second Johnson: All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L, SOUTH OF FRANKLIN ROAD, WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD BY PROPERTIES WEST, INC.: Meridian Planning & Z~g January 14, 1997 Page 3 Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to address the Commission. Gary Lee, 250 S. Beachwood, Boise was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: Just a point of order Chairman Johnson about the two public hearings this evening. Of course the first one is for annexation and rezone, the second if for a preliminary plat for Medimont Subdivision on the same parcel. I would like to request an opinion I guess from the Commission on how we .should proceed with the presentation. Do we want to limit the first public hearing just to annexation and rezone items and then get into the preliminary plat 'rn more detail in the second agenda item? Johnson: It is a mixed (inaudible) and what really occurs in this instance is people testifying usually don't make the distinction and so they testify and express their concerns on the total application including the conditional use permit. So what we have done in the past and Counsel can guide me on this, we have incorporated all of the original testimony in the first public hearing- into the second and it seems to be the quickest way to go without trying to make any divisions as we go along. Is that acceptable? Crookston: That is how we have handled it in the past and yes it is acceptable unless the. applicant desires to do it differently. Lee: I don't think so, we can approach the project (inaudible) Johnson: We have to formally have two public hearings so we will have another public hearing but you can incorporate any of your presentation in there as well as anybody that testified can have that testimony incorporated in there. The lay people and even ourselves at times we are not going to be able to make the distinction, it could all be one sentence or whatever. I think I probably touched on that enough but that is the way we will proceed if you don't want a distinction. Lee: That is fine, I will just incorporate the two and (inaudible). As stated earlier I represent Properties West, John Barnes on this application. The particular property in question is a little over 26 acres, gross acreage. Again situated off of Franklin Road on the South side and about 500 feet West of Locust Grove Road. Currently the property has been used as agricultural, it has been pasture lands. There was an old house on it at one time and it has since been removed. Right not the property is zoned RT, Rural Transitional zoning for Ada County designation and the application tonight is to seek annexation and rezone to industrial light or the I-L zone along with a preliminary plat we have identified as Medimont Subdivision but we will be marketing it as Stonebridge Business Park so there is no confusion in the names there. The surrounding uses in this particular area, we have a mixture of uses, to the north we have industrial light Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 4 businesses, there is a subdivision to the northwest that is being marketed as industrial. There is the pumice block which is right across the street on Franklin that is of course industrial. A recent application that was approved by the City kind of north and northeast is the Doug Tamura property being zoned commercial general and industrial light. There exists some RT zoning to the west, south and east of the property. There are some smaller pieces of R1 zoning at the northwest corner and also at the southeast corner. Currently there exist 6 single family homes along the easterly boundary situated on acreages ranging in size from 1 to 3 acres. There are two single family homes on the westerly boundary, one of which is a rental mobile home belonging to the same property owner. South of the property is basically agricultural right now and it is zoned RT. Southwest of the property is in the City and it is commercial general although there is no use there yet. The applicant, Properties West, intends to develop an upper end light industrial business park with 18 building lots and 5 common lots as you can see on the exhibit which is a recreation of the preliminary plat. All of the uses within this development will be specifically permitted by City of Meridian zoning ordinance for the I-L zone or as restricted within the CC&R's that the developer plans to present. Some of those restrictions that we have identified in the CC&R's I will just read briefly here from a list of approved uses in the I-L. We intend to restrict the asphalt and concrete, automobile wrecking yard and storage, fuel yards, junk yards, mobile home manufacturing, rail road yards and shops, recycling plants, and solid waste transfer stations. Those particular uses won't be allowed within this development. Again those are defined within the CC&R's. We had discussed with City staff about how this project could be brought in into the City. I know that the City in the past has annexed industrial and commercial uses with conditional use permits in mind for those annexations. We would like to submit to you that we would like to bring this project in without a conditional use permit tied to it. The reason being we have one use planned for the project. We are going to have a controlled environment on how the project is developed. We think this approach would be a good way to go for the City and help free up some of the staff time and some of the Council time in reviewing CUP's. To touch briefly on the possibilities of using development agreements to take care of that. I think that could be worked out in such a way that would be beneficial to the City. The property has services available to it. Of course transportation, there is Franklin Road on the north for access. We are in the Meridian City and rural fire district. City water and waste water is available at the northwest corner which will be extended down Franklin Road and into the property. Currently the project is located in Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, it is our intent to construct a privately held pressurized irrigation system for the project for the landscaping features. The proposed improvements that ~ are identifying are of course are the roads, water, waste water collections facilities, storm drain facilities and pressurized irrigation. In addition to that there will be a landscaped common lot along Franklin Road, 35 feet in width. There will be a landscaped entry island into the project and there will be a landscaped buffer strip along the easterly boundary 20 feet wide. I would like to kind of give you a view of some of the landscaping. This is a perspective looking I guess it would be southwesterly from Franklin Road into the Business park. It shawl the landscaping Meridian Planning & ~ng • January 14, 1997 Page 5 concept at the entry going to construct a (inaudible) type entrance with some water features along the east and west side with kind of a bridge effect masonry wall. The building that you see there is one that Mr. Barnes is envisioning constructing in the future. It is intended to be a light industrial use that would lend itself to a small business operation that needs somewhat of a store front and also has the requirement for storage in the rear. That particular rendering there shows a concrete tilt up type structure. We did have a couple of neighborhood meetings with the adjoining property owners. We had sent invitations out to all those within 300 feet of the property and we did have occasion to meet with a couple of the property owners on a one on one basis and we reviewed some of the concerns that they had expressed during the previous submittal to this Commission. We talked about the irrigation system that is in an existing ditch right now that will have to be piped. That particular ditch in its state today has caused some leakage problems and it is contr~uting to some flooding of basements and that sort of thing off to the east side of the property. Of course by piping that we can help alleviate some of that problem. A~s I have discussed before, on the CUP process, I know this is an item that the City again has initiated and I have made a response to the staff on some of their concerns on that particular item. I think you probably have copies of that letter in your packets. The meat of the discussion which is fairly lengthy. Johnson: Excuse me Gary, is that the January 13`h letter you are referring to? Lee: Yes it is and that is in response to a January 9"' memorandum from Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles. Most of the general commerrts in that response from the City has been things like confirmation about the annexation legal description and so on and so forth. Piping of the irrigation ditch, abandonment of wells and septic tanks, soils profiles, storm water design approvals which we will have: to acquire in our first phase design from ACRD and from the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. Fire Hydrant placements, we had shown those on the engineering concept plan and it is our intention to review the placements and modify as necessary with fire and water master. Flood plain issues, FEMA maps don't show any on this particular property. Street name signs, sewer and water connections are basically as we have shown on the concept plan. Details on the landscape plan, again we are talking about those right now in general terms. Although they will be submitted to the Cety for final review in that first phase. Chain link fence, we have identified around the perimeter of the property per the city's requirement. And also show present land uses on the preliminary plat. Most of these things are engineering related that are generally handled during design phases and I would be glad to discuss these if you have any particular questions about them. But in the past we have been able to work through these with the engineering and planning staff. However, I do want to talk about the ANeridian Comp plan a little bit, there was indications that the CUP process is required, although, I am sure that most of you are real familiar with that comp plan and there are a number of items in there that speak to these processes. The comprehensive plan is just a general guideline to direct the planning and the growth of the City of Meridian which you are all aware. Certain Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 6 suggestions and policies have been identified Although those, suggestions and policies are, need to be substantiated by zoning or resolution ordinance changes. Lane use delineation's on the comp plan map is not precise which is identified again on the comp plan. They are used for long range vision for the community. The mixed use identification in there that requires conditional use permit refers coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project such as specialty retail commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, public and semi-public uses. This particular development is not a mixed use, it is a single use. We have identified what that use is gang to be and we are going to identify controls. We think there is probably a better way, to handle whatever concerns staff may have about items they look at in the conditional use process. Either through the development agreement or the CC&R's or a corr~ination of both or to adopt some sort of design review process. Which I understand is in the works. To place this particcular project under the CUP requirement is going to put this developer at a disadvantage to his competitors right across the street. You have industrial uses all over the Cit~r of Meridian that don't require conditional use processes. One important statement in the comp plan was that every effort shall be made by the City of Meridian to encourage commercial and industrial growth. Of course what we are attempting to do here is to develop business atmosphere and to create jobs, increase economic base, the things that the City of Meridian in the comp plan are looking for. I have a couple of other little exhibits here. This is an enlarged copy of an exhibit that was placed in the CC&R's that were submitted to the City for review. It is a method that we propose to use to help maintain the look that we are trying to achieve in this particular development. That is we are going to have requirements for landscape strip along the entry roads, along all public roads. That will be a minimum of 20 feet wide. It will have a minimum of a 3 foot high berm and it will be a specific type of tree, and spacing. There will be of course requirements for landscaping in other areas along the~side yard, up to the face of the building and all of this will be irrigated by the privately held irrigation system. This is a sketch of what we had proposed to the property owners at our neighborhood meetings about the type of buffer that we are looking for. We propose a series of pine trees through there with a ground cover of a pasture type grass, something that will be easy to maintain that won't require continual mowing program. That concludes my presentation, if you have any questions I can either answer them now or after the other comments. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Lee, any of the commissioners have any questions of the applicant's representative at this time? MacCoy: I do, you have shown the picture, the drawing plat, the entire area that you are going to be working on, are you going to control the building construction, the type of material, the coloring, so that it reads like (inaudible) a lot of pieces going together there? Meridian Planning & Z~g January 14, 1997 Page 7 Lee: Yes we are, there will be an architectural control committee set up and we have identified building materials to be used, particularly in the front facade of the building, the types of products that we are going to allow in there. It will have to be approved by the architectural review committee for. both landscape plans, site plan, building materials, the basic look. The intent is to try and carry the same feel throughout the project as we have created at the entrance. MacCoy: So you are planning to keep full control of everything that goes on inside of that? Lee: Yes, until the last lot is sold. Johnson: Counsel? Crookston: Thank you, Gary, I had two questions. In your proposal on the not to have conditional uses on each use, is your proposal not to have any at all for the 18 lots, do you propose that there not be a conditional use for a use. on each lot or do you propose to have one conditional use hearing which would apply to each of the 18 lots or have none. Lee: Well the intent was to not have any conditional use permit requirements unless it specified in the zoning ordinance for that use and there. are those in the I-L zone that require a CUP. Crookston: But you are proposing that be waived even though the zoning ordinance requires that for a use? Lee: Well just the uses the uses that identify the requirement then yes they would have to have a conditional use process. But if it is a permitted use in your zoning ordinance then we are saying it is a permitted use and it doesn't require a CUP. Crookston: What we have done in the past is in the mixed use areas we required a conditional use permit for each use. That is the Commission and the Council. The other question I had, maybe you stated it but I didn't hear it. You were talking about improvements, you said that you would do pressurized irrigation and roads and water, are you going to do sewer? Lee: Yes and storm drains. Johnson: Commissioner Borup? Borup: Not at this time. Johnson: Commissioner Oslund? Meridian Planning & Z~g January 14, 1997 Page 8 Oslund: One of your contentions is that if we require a conditional use on each and every parcel that creates an unfair advantage to your competitors. You made reference to I think there is an industrial use across. the street and to the west, is that correct? Lee: Yes there is. Oslund: I am not familiar with that development, it has come through P & Z while I have been here, but maybe somebody knows, what is the nature of that development. Is it one parcel one use or is it, I am thinking that is what it is. Is it a subdivision? Lee: It is a subdivision, I think he is involved in the marketing of that project and could probably speak a little more in detail about that. Oslund: This question v~uld be directed been here maybe when that came through seems to be a similar project in fact why requirement or does it? to Counsel or Chairman anybody that has To help me understand why that one which doesn't it have that conditional use permit Crookston: Any land that is within a mixed use area, each use has been required to obtain a conditional use permit. Oslund: Okay, so this is in the mixed use overlay. I see, thank you. Lee: I guess the contention is this particular development is not a mixed use but even though it is in that overlay area. Oslund: That is all I had. Johnson: Okay, anyone else on your behalf that would like to present anything at this time, if not we can catch that later. Jim Boyd, 9272 Shalane Avenue, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Boyd: Mr. Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission, my name is Jim Boyd and I am in the commercial real estate business and have been specializing in industrial real estate for 19 years here in the Boise area. A few things that I would like to in general speak to on behalf of this development. Over the 19 years I have seen a lot of developers develop a lot of different types of projects. There are a few exceptions in the valley but for the most part I see that the industrial developments have been pretty much on the minimal side of putting in the streets, and the sidewalks whatever is required by ACRD and often times complaining about those issues that they have to put in. I think the project that Mr. Barnes is proposing goes well beyond what we have seen with exception of one like Central Valley, that is a nice project. So many of them Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 9 are set up to where when the project is sold out why it is up to the owners to fair for themselves. Some of the items that have been addressed and thought through and even as a group we have encouraged some of these other steps that you see so much in residential today that we didn't see 20 -years ago even. One of those is a good strong set of restrictive covenants developed by the home owners association for those owners within that development. So that you have got a project that is viable not only during the sell out phase but is viable and works well after the project is sold out for years to come. As Gary mentioned earlier on the streets there would be a 20 foot landscaped buffer behind the sidewalk on both sides of the street. On that berm buffer we designated a flowering pear tree so we have consistency. of types of vegetation and not everybody planting everything, different types of vegetation to keep a. continuity in the project. A question that was asked regarding an architectural committee, the purpose of thaf is the landscaping and the building and the types of products being used. You can't necessarily be dictatorial because different products are coming on the market over time. But looking for consistency in the project. The other thing is not to allow an over building ratio to the land. That often times may v~rork for one person but the next user it doesn't work for. So, 50% building ratio onto the lot is a maximum requirement. Another key point that I see over my 19 years is people going in and building kind of this and that and no consistency and you have to realize that not everybody can afford the Taj Mahal in concrete tilt ups. So you have to have some flexibility. But on the fronts of the buildings that face the street they can use some other combination. It doesn't have to be all metal in rrry book. The fronts can be combination of other types of, it can include some metal but other types of frontage to give some architectural change to them. Again we are nct trying to create something that all looks alike in another fashion but some continuity. As well also is to prohibit some uses that are allowed in the light industrial zone because we want a compatibility within the, because we want totally light industrial. We ward some nice compatibility for small businesses. I think there is a need for that in this community. I see a need for it in Boise and there are two factors. Peopfe are looking for a nice environment for their small business and they are looking for affordability. You have to meet that. I would like as Gary mentioned, not have to have the requirement for the conditional use. understand what Mr. Crookston was getting to.but I also know that when you start going conditional use for every use it really puts a damper on things. I am not seeing it in other areas, not only in Boise, Meridian across the street or over on Locust Grove. I am not seeing that requirement. So it puts us at a disadvantage in that respect. It is nice to look at the zoning ordinance, a lot of work went ie~to the zoning ordinance in creating some 8 pages of allowed uses and conditional uses in those zones. If there are some gray areas modify that to where it fits the needs of the community. But look to that as a guide to what goes in those areas. Certainly those that are specified as conditional uses will continue to be conditional use. I guess in closing, it is our goal to establish a product that fits well within the community. Our emphasis would be to establish some parameters that are usable for all of us to live within both government and private enterprise. I would be happy to answer any questions. Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 10 Johnson: Thank you Mr. Boyd, any questions at this time from the Commission? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I would still be interested in a clarification of Mr. Oslund's question on the project across the street. You indicated there was not any conditional use permits for individual lots in that subdivision. Boyd: I believe there are two that come to mind, right off the top of my head would be the one across the street would be Meridian Business Park and the other one would be off Locust Grove it is called Layne Industrial Park I am not aware, unless they have a use that comes in that would, in the zoning ordinance, required to have a conditional use. But otherwise if your allowed use in the zoning ordinance you can go in there as long as you meet the building code and the set backs and that sort of thing. That was originally platted in the 70's and replatted last in 1996. Johnson: Any further questions? Thank you Mr. Bayd. This is a public hearing, is there someone from the public that would like to address the Commission at this time, please come forward. Jim Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Witherell: I think I can clarify your previous questions to the engineer and the realtor. What is different in this case that does not affect any of these other properties being talked about is this immediately adjoins housing. Layne development is out all by itself, the old Meridian Business Park does not touch any houses, it is across ftom the cemetery, it is separated by a road. When the City adopted the comprehensive plan it adopted some very good standards. Among theca was that you can't, the adjoining owners cannot lose property value, they cannot lose water, they cannot suffer damage, they do not incur health risks. For that reason I think the logic was that they put light industrial in segregated areas. Areas where there were no housing. We are asking now because the overall concept of mixed use is innovation. What is innovative about an industrial park in the middle of R1 residential. This does have R1 housing on both sides of it immediately touching it. I am within 12 feet of the property line. The house on the west side is within 1 foot of the property line. So gentlemen if anything proceeds we do want conditional use, we don't want unregulated anything. The architectural committee looks at the front of the buildings. The landscaping committee looks at the landscaping in the front of the buildings. We live at the back of the buildings, it is a pretty horse but we are looking at the wrong end of it. From our angle it is a chain link fence, a couple of trees, which is the same thing we get in Garden City where it is not exactly R1 housing. This incidentally is the fourth amazing ireovation to come along. First it was going to be a trailer park. Then it was going to be (inaudible) R15 manufactured housing. Then it was going to be some condos, that one didn't get here. And then it was going to be C-G, I-L. Now we are back with I-L again, different developer same song. There is something wrong with either this property because all four of these applications have been on the same piece of property, now where else in the mixed Meridian Planning & Z~g January 14, 1997 Page 11 use area is anything developing. By definition or logic you have to deny this application because no amount of lands~ing, no amount of conditional use can quiet industrial noise, dim industrial lighting or prohibit health or safety risks to residential norms in any residential area much less to neighborhood standard of R1, which is our entitlement under civil law. Wait a minute, I keep hearing much (inaudible) CC&R's coming along. And they are going to take care of all of this because they are so tight. For example these CC&R's and we have read them, would have prohibited the 2 warehouses in Boise or Stone's Lumber in Nampa from burning down. Because in these CC&R's this kind of nuisance is not allowed. The CC&R's would prohibit oil and herbicide to be spread over 50% to 60% of the surface of the development, because it is gravel. That is the area behind us. This is the truck fleet parking area. It is required but the CC&R's prohibit this oil and herbicide from seeping into our water table. Therefore it is tight enough that these CG&R's prohibit gravity because gravity is not allowed under these CC&R's because the CC&R's have no standards they are just simply statements. The standards are as it says within industrial standards. This is a residential area for heaven sake we sleep here. But we are only given one protection and these CC&R's read them carefully one protection for the residents, that is that the occupiers will park their cars behind that fence that chain link fence so that we can see them from the residences. To use this concession you will appreciate that we have to close our eyes or it is our fault that we are breaking his CC&R's. This logic once worked for the King of Siam but he got killed. The CC&R's read them carefully, there are weasel words or sorry weasel words they are mink words. It does not say that prohibits nuisances from creeping over onto adjoining residences. It says that it keeps them from intruding onto adjoining lots. As he pointed out on his plat the adjoining lots are his, he has taken the landscaping and spun them off as separate lots. So we are not affected. These are the easements and landscapes there is nobody back there to complain unless you have a gopher with a law degree. This is no accident, in law it is called the (inaudible) it is the grouping of legal words for legal interpretation. He uses the terms residences exactly where he means residences, that is where we can't see the trucks. He uses lots where he mear~ lots which is where his landscape and easements. And he means the adjoining property which obviously neither residences or lots. These mean the lots within the property, we are not given any protection in this except for that. This is a garlic party, it basically means, a nuisance, one machine shop cannot annoy another machine shop. One thing that I meant to point out is that the whole area underlying this is a patented water table which adjoining residents receive by court award in 1993. (Inaudible) an offer whatsoever to hook us up with water and sewer, this is the 4`" time that we have been told that our water right be damned goes through the City it is not the developers problem and we probably will. Thank you. Johnson: I have a couple of questions, does anyone else? There was an indication earlier by the presentation in the presentation by Mr. Lee that they had offered to meet with the property owners notifying everyone within 300 feet and they did meet with a couple of the property owners. Were you one of those, have you met one on one with the developer or his representative? Meridian Planning & Z~g • January 14, 1997 Page 12 Witherell: Yes, there are six affected properties. Two of those affected properties have a financial interest in the property. The other four do not. Those four property owners which were all at the meeting submitted to you on December 9"' a letter protesting this saying those meetings were not held in good faith. Johnson: On what basis did you come to that conclusion? Witherell: Because the issues like the water table, he would not address that. The initial offer for transition was six foot sterilized strip with a six foot chain link fence. That is less than the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, he said he could not do better. The second meeting was a ten foot strip not sterilized with a chain link fence. He could not do better than the comprehensive plan. I see on his final plat he has finally got the easements in there for the utilities except they are on the wrong side of the transition. He has a 20 foot transition, if this goes ahead we will be asking for 35 foot transition with berming and with an 8 foot masonry fence. Johnson: And a final .question I have at this point is obviously this property is the fourth try and I am familiar with two of the other three. It looks like somewhere down the road it will get developed if this one doesn't go through. What would be your response if this was like R-8 density residential (inaudible) what kind of appeal vuould that have to you would you see that as less bothersome? Witherell: If we would have our druthers it would be C-G. We are talking about masonry buildings that don't bum. We are talking about nobody storing chlorine gas for servicing swimming pools. It is much safer, it has low density lights. This thing could be worked C-G but we would want a conditional use, we want masonry buildings, we want paving, we don't want dust, we don't want gravel parking. If this could be worked in with, R-8 failed before, it would have to be along our transition R2 (End of Tape) the R2 next to the R4 and nobody in the R4 is going to want to buy next to the R8. So, we have no problem with that. We do expect that it will be developed some day, we are just hoping in fact we were hoping because this was Properties West and Bames has done some dam good stuff in the City of Meridian and we were actually kind of hopeful that we were going to get something nice. But it is just another industrial park with a fancy front. Johnson: Any other questions of Mr. Witherell? Borup: Just a minor one, you said you would rather see a C-G zoning in that area? Witherell: C-G, what I am thinking of there, some light industrial could go back there. Borup: What is your understanding of C-G zoning? Meridian Planning & Z~ng • January 14, 1997 Page 13 Witherell:- C-G would be commercial, business, we are looking at business. I wrote it down, I can't remember it of course. Borup: Well my reading of the ordinance says C-G is related to auto services, they want it close proximity to major highways so that the motoring and travel related services can have easy access. Witherell: Well unfortunately this is only our fourth time through the process. We don't have everything memorized. Let me give you an example, it is the Cherry Lane Plaza, that type of, Cherry Lane Center on Fairview, that .could where there where you have businesses. I think there are some C-C, I get C-C right (inaudible). Borup: You would rather see gas stations and (inaudible). Witherell: No, we were misinterpreting what C-G meant when we got those. We are novices, we have to study our notes at home. If something goes back in there the economy doesn't favor anything right now. Johnson: So is it safe to say in summary that you are not opposed to the development of the property just this application and what it constitutes? Witherell: That is correct. The lot sizes would be fine by us, but the transition is woeful. The incurred corrosion on the water table will precipitate a law suit unless water and sewer is provided at the developers expense. We want the paving, we want the buildings to actually act as part of the transition, the sound, because masonry would absorb a lot of the truck sounds. We don't want parking in our back yard or his backyard which is also our back yard. Johnson: I was going to say it has to be his back yard or he couldn't park there. Anybody else? Any other questions? Thank you very much, anyone else like to come forward? Ann Witherell, 215 S. Locust Grove Road, Meridian was sworn by the City Attorney. Witherell: I would like to talk a little bit about sound. Something that vuould be going on constantly should this be developed light industrial. An average decibel level or DBA is a measure of vehicle noise starting from idling to running it at speed on pavement. The high ends of these would be at road speed and road gears and running at high RPM in low gears. All of these levels are then averaged to a single figure to form a measure the DBA. Ordinary residential traffic generates about 55 to 60 DBA, at R1 we are well below the ordinary residential level. A level of 75 DBA is established health risk. 125 DBA is the pain threshold. Let me say it again, 75 is a health risk, 125 is pain threshold. At our meetings with the developer and I was at both of them, Mr. Barnes used A-1 Heating and Plumbing as a possible example of a typical tenant. We Meridian Planning & Zing January 14, 1997 Page 14 ~¢~ have learned that A-1 Heating and Plumbing operate a fleet of 15 service trucks, 8,000 gross weight or greater. As A-1 would be typical the mass would be 15 vehicles times 18 tenants equals 270 service trucks in constant movement. Therefore our exposure would be constant. The DBA for a service truck is 90, well above the health risk threshold. Nearly twice residential levels. Amplified by 270 trucks on gravel not pavement this far exceeds the health risk levoel, this probably exceeds the pain threshold. Heavy delivery trucks, those above 12,000 gross weight are 95 DBA, also a constant exposure. Dump trucks 110 DBA. My source is the transportation statistics annual report 1994, .page 168. This source also says on that page using the last study of its type in 1989, "based on total travel in urban areas", this isn't rural areas, °in 1989 noise damage from cars and trucks to property in urban areas is estimated at around $9 billion." Simply said increased traffic damages property values. These are federal statistics gentlemen and federal standards. This should establish that the proposed industrial park is a health risk in a residential area and that our property values must fall. In our meetings with the developer Mr. Bames said that trucks were the nature of light industry and that nothing could be done about it. Something can be done you can deny the application. Knowing the health risk and property damage the comprehensive plan prohibits either one of these. We hope you deny the application. Johnson: Any questions by the Commission? Mr. Oslund? Oslund: Do you have any formal training or certification to evaluate or I guess otherwise interpret noise impacts? Witherell: These were compiled by the Federal Bureau of Transportation? Oslund: Thank you Witherell: I have no argument with that, I am not in the habit of arguing with federal government standards. Borup: Do you know whether these noise levels on the trucks and the different size is that any certain speed or idling? Witherell: That is an ,average speed from idling to full speed and then they even it off as an average. Borup: So like freeway speed? Witherell: Freeway speed would be different from idling or running at low gear et a high RPM that would be very noisy. Borup: So that is what I was wondering, the mack truck at 90 is figuring out on highway speed? Meridian Planning & Zi:!!ring • January 14, 1997 Page 15 Witherell: That would be part of it, it wou~ also be accelerating which would be noisy, very noisy. Borup: This is showing an automobile at ~ which is about halfway between a sewing machine and an alarm clock. So it sounds like the -information you gave us is showing that the trucks you are talking about are fitting right in there with noise level of a lawn mower and alarm clock. Witherell: Yes, a large pick up truck and be very noisy especially when running on gravel. We live next to one. Borup: At what speed? Witherell: On our gravel driveway about 5 miles an hour. Borup: I am aware of the noise of trucks and automobiles on a highway. I am not sure how noisy they are in a parking lot though. Johnson: Anyone else that would like to come forward at this time, yes sir. Ten Hanson, 1882 Bentley Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey. Hanson: I had a couple of questions which weren't addressed. Other than he mentioned that the waste water run off from streets will be dealt with. In the past in this project they were brought to the front on (inaudible) Eventually that evolved into a filtration system adjacent to Franklin Road with it draining into Five Mile Creek. Have they got permission from Corps of Engineers to do that yet or have they addressed that. Any discussion about having control over the properties he stated in the end of that dissertation that they no longer had control once the total project was developed. So is this a 24 hour a day usage in this area? Which would increase the noise level considerably at night? That is what 1 wonder about. Johnson: Any questions for Mr. Hanson? Anyone else that would like to~ come forward at this time? Robert R. Smith, 335 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey. Smith: Well I would like to bring up several things that wasn't spoken about. During this development, during the total development and as it proceeds we are going to be adversely affected by a lot of dust and. noise and pollutants that happen during construction. So we do need a buffer between our property and we are unusual again as Mr. Witherell informed you in the fact thak our properties directly adjoin anything that is developed on that property. We have real concerns with the fact that all of our yards Meridian Planning & Za4fing • January 14, 1997 Page 16 are, back yards excuse me, adjoin this and where we spend our summers and our time it is going to really affect how we live in our homes now. Most of us are retired. So vve spend a lot of time there. We are concemed and hope you will really consider what is going to be developed and how it is going to be developed. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, any questions? Anyone else? Okay, I would like the applicant's representative to come forward at this time and answer a couple of questions please? I know you have a couple of things to say Gary, but specifically I would like you to address both- Mr. Smith's and Ted Hanson's comments if you could and whatever rebuttal you have got at this point. Lee: Mr. Ted Hanson, he mentioned the storm water discharge and approvals from the Corp. of Engineers. As you may or may not know but certainly the property owners know that the storm water discharge or I should say waste water from the irrigation of that property has historically run north. It goes into a drainage that crosses Franklin Road and then goes through a natural drainage way into the Five Mile Creek on the north side of Franklin Road. It has been the policy of Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, the City of Meridian, and ACRD that when we design our storm water facilities with the intention of discharging certain rates of flow that we are allowed to use and take advantage of whatever predevelopment discharge is now occurring. In other words what is going off of there today can continue to go off in the future after development. However there are guidelines that the Highway District and the City and the Corp. of Engineers have for the quality of that water. During our design phase if it turns out that we will be discharging those rates of flow they will be in accordance with current regulations and codes. So to answer his question about the approval from the Corp. of Engineers that is typically is not something that is seeked at this level of the review. It is something that is addressed during final design phases of the first final plat and will be addressed along with other issues. Mr. Smith had discussed the construction process initially which I interpreted to mean the time that is spent to construct water and sewer, pressurized irrigation, utilities and roads for the development. We will be Johnson: I am assuming he was also including construction of the structures too. Lee: Structures too, again there are requirements of the City as placed on us on other developments within the area that addresses things as dust control, which has to be handled during the construction phase. There has to be water trucks available to keep the dust to a minimum. There are trash fences that need to be cx~structed during the construction phase to contain whatever materials may be blown from the property. So we realize there will be some impacts from noise during construction but no matter what is constructed there, there will be that phase of development. As far as the other comments from Mr. and Mrs. Witherell I certainly am concemed about the health and well being of our neighbors and we will make every effort to prepare our designs and seek the approvals of the regulatory agencies, the Central District Health Department on water and sewer and waste water issues. The City of Meridian Public works Meridian Planning & Z~fing January 14, 1997 Page 17 department on water and sewer, the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. There are a long list of regulatory agencies that we have process our plans and seek approvals and we will do so. The uses, people actually using the lots after they are constructed, they are also required to handle hazardous materials in certain manners. They do have to have permits and I am sure there are enforcement agencies that follow up on those requirements. We don't intend to build anything in there that is not in accordance with currently adopted regulations and standards. Is there any other questions I can address? MacCoy: I would like to jump back in this again and (inaudible) where I face the same thing as some of these people here. When you build your complex there and various companies come to buy in, I guess they buy in don't they? Lee: They will purchase lots. MacCoy: Are you going to have as part of the requirements that after a certain hour of the night whatever that may be there, they are not allowed to have noise above a certain decibel level till a certain time in the morning as a criteria of being involved in that area? Lee: There hasn't been anything identified in the CC&R's that I have read at this point. Although something like that could be added if the City so desires. MacCoy: I think for some of these people here that would go probably a long way in helping that out because nobody wants to as you heard here have their life disrupted 24 hours a day if they can get away from it. So I am sure it makes them happier if they can get an assurance that there is a criteria or a ruling or whatever you want to call it in your operation you wouldn't sell to or let in there via a requirement that would control those certain noise levels. Lee: I think that is a good point. Johnson: Any other questions from the Commissioners? Borup: A question on the plat, along the buffer, the buffering strip, you have got a couple of designations for your utility easements on of course outside the strip and then the other mentions the utility/irrigation drainage easement in the strip. Is there a specific utility easement that vrrould be within that 20 foot strip or is that identified at this point? Lee: The original concept there was to accommodate an existing power line and utility line that is there now that serves those homes. Which, based on our survey and it kind meanders in and out of the property line to serve those people. There isn't a specific recorded easement although they obviously have prescriptive rights. The other issue is Meridian Planning & Zo~iing January 14, 1997 Page 18 the irrigation ditch that we intend to remove and install a pipe to provide water service to each of those users as they have today. The idea then was that we would install that in such a way that they could operate it however they chose to. In other words there could be control valves that they can continue to use in a rotation schedule that they have now and maintain the same delivery. That is why those two easements were mentioned in that buffer. Borup: So those are, the other easement I assume is future easements for the subdivision lots themselves? Lee: On the west side of the buffer? Borup: Yes Lee: Yes Borup: So then at this point the utility easements for the residents along there are not on their properties? Lee: Well the poles themselves kind of meander around and if you were to try to establish a width for whatever easement right, Idaho Power, as an example, it could be on both properties. Borup: I also have a question on the landscaping on that buffer, your drawing of the trees looks like at the rendering stage shows a pretty solid wall. Has the landscaping design been established as far as what size the trees would be or what type of growth schedule they would have? Lee: I don't know that I can answer that question although that drawing and the spacing was established by a licensed landscape architect. I am sure that he had something in mind as far as the size to come up with the spacing that he has determined. Borup: I am assuming that is after partial growth, it is not practical to do that without allowing for (inaudible). Another question on the stages in the application talks about wanting to do two phases in the subdivisions. I assume that is also the request to do the buffering strip in two, the eastern buffering strip in two phases also? Lee: Yes Borup: Do you know if there has been any plot or discussion about doing that all at one stage? Lee: Well it is an expense that from the development stand point is better to do during that phase of construction since there are other up front costs that have to be incurred. Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 19 So the economics of the development suggest that you do the improvements on a phase basis. Although the irrigation pipe planned along there will need to be installed in its entirety during the first phase to make the system function. Johnson: Thank you, anyone else? Commissioner Ostund? Oslund: Has there been any thought given to possibly a, 1 don't know what I would call it a compromise position wherein you would designate certain lots for certain uses. In other words the lots that appear that appear most crucial to the neighborhood are all of block 3 it looks like along that eastern edge there. Possibly. that the kinds of uses you would designate in those lots would be a little different than maybe some of these interior lots. Was there ever any consideration for doing something like that? Lee: Well initially the discussion was project. wide and we are trying to identify a certain market that we believe is there for a certain type of user. We don't want to put ourselves in a position where we are being restrictive in one area of the development and not in another. So to answer your question directly. no we didn't really think about trying to further restrict any specific group of lots. Borup: A question related to that, as far as location of buildings, has there been any thought along the same line along that easterly boundary maybe requiring the buildings to be built along the back of the lots. Lee: We kind of approached it from the other direction. That we would try to keep the buildings away from the neighbors. So trying to keep the activity center as far away from them as we could. Borup: I know that has been the thing, I think one of the neighbors mentioned that had some appeal to them rather than the possibility of a storage yard. MacCoy: Along that same line, the buildings that would be right along the back of the residents there you could very easily require those buildings to be, at least the outside section the part that is facing them to be concrete or some type of masonry structure which would give him the best benefit. You would still have your building and they would have a reduced audio problem and I think it would be beneficial for a discussion (inaudible). Oslund: I think I would just like to add one more point that, obviously we are being put in a tough spot here. On your side you want the flexibility to market these lots and not so restricted that they are not marketable. I think most people can understand that. And the other side we have an established neighborhood and this is a little different situation then across the street because across the street there aren't adjacent uses and residential uses immediately adjacent to the development. So I guess the point of my question was looking for a compromise position. Looking for a way to give you Meridian Planning & ~ng January 14, 1997 Page 20 flexibility and allow, you have to mitigate. I don't think the position is a big departure from where you are at because they are saying or at least who ~ think their representative is you may not agree with your representative but he at least said that more of a commercial type use would be acceptable. There are a lot of uses within I-L that are also in commercial. That was the point of my question. Lee: That is something that we can discuss with the developer and see if it is something he can work with. I might point out that in other areas of the state and of course I am familiar with Boise a Little more than some areas and Meridian, I am fairly familiar with. There is a mile stretch and I am sure you have all traveled on it along Emerald Street between Five Mile and Maple Grove that is alt industrial light zone all the way through there. It backs right up to residential on the north side for a full mile without any buffering strips at all. They have managed to in their proceedings to make it compatible and it seems to be working just fine. Oslund: Well we don't do anything like Boise, why would we start now. Johnson: Anything else Gary? Any other comments from the developer or applicant? Do you have one last comment? Smith: I would like to address what Mr. Lee said there for just a moment. First of all on the landscaping, if you do that in a park we could have 2 to 3 years difference in your landscape growth. Some of that will be 2 to 3 years ahead of what the other is and secondly the dirt and the movement of that to remove to reinstall it for the finish of it will make that all look and just regenerate another problem which you could take care of all at one time. If you are going to allow the landscaping to take place. Secondly I have retired from Idaho Power Company, 40 years service as a line crew foreman. I was involved in this development that he just addressed, I was shut down by the Police department one night when we had an outage scheduled to redo the power for Sears computer industry that is there because of the noise that it was generating for the night construction that took place with the trucks, the back hoes and everything to redo that. The police came and shut Idaho Power down. We had to take the outage during the day which constituted that Sears had a terrific amount of time factor involved because of all their computers for the whole United States is housed there. So what he says is not necessarily true. There is just a wood fence that borders that and it is a conflict when the time factor or whatever you do generates a lot of construction noise. Well according to Ada County it is not in the agenda to extend or change Locust Grove road for at least 20 years. So if in fact it is going to change it could be at any time in that time frame of course but right now with the problems they have got with Eagle Road and extending it and Franklin Road needs to be widened and (Inaudible). I don't look to see Locust Grove change for quite some time in our direct area. Parts of Locust Grove may change but right now where we are I don't think we will be looking at that for a while because there are some streets that seriously need addressed more than that. Meridian Planning & Z~ng January 14, 1997 Page 21 We can't even now get on Franklin Road off Locust Grove at 8:00 in the morning, we can't get across Franklin Road. So there has to be other changes. Thank you. Johnson: Anyone else before I close the public hearing? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing at this time. This is a public hearing for annexation and zoning, it would require findings of fact and conclusions of law. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move that we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for this project. Oslund: Second Johnson: We have a motion to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Crookston: Mr. Chairman, could I have John Fitzgerald step into this shoe? If you don't mind I will depart. Johnson: Okay, see you Wayne, hope you feel better. Bocup: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add something on a lighter note. I was interested in the school district's comments that this subdivision will add 9 school children and cause overcrowding of the schools. I didn't know if the developer addressed that. ITEM #3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION, 18 LOTS, SOUTH OF FRANKLIN ROAD, WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD BY PROPERTIES WEST, INC.: Johnson: We will automatically incorporate all of your testimony unless you have an objection to that. I will now open the public hearing. Gary Lee, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: I v~uld like to reiterate what I said before. If there are any further questions about the preliminary plat I would be glad to answer them at this point or the conceptual engineering plan. I think we have adequately addressed all of the City staffs concerns. Oslund: I have a question that may not be directly related, but maybe left over from before, Mr. Chairman. The only one was, in the CC&R's is there anything in there about the hours of operation? ~ ~ MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: February 11.1997 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST INC. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 3 ~ 4 REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATIONAND ZONING TO 1-L WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDMSION AG CY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: COMMENTS l~ ~G~ J~ ~ ~V'~ a~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ a C`' OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~JU~ • February 10, 1997 208-376-7330 FAX: 208-323-9336 -:.~-.~~ Mr. Will Berg, City Clerk FE9 ~ O ~~~~ Honorable Robert Corrie, Mayor, and City Council Members ~~„r~m~.,~~,.~, 1jm Johnson, Planning & Zoning Commission Chairman and P2 Members ~ ~~ ~~=.tiy:~'td~.~~ City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mr. Berg: RE: MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION (Properties West, Inc.) Annexation with Preliminary Plat Enclosed please find a "Proposed Development Agreement for the Medimont Subdivision". This has been developed to show how the agreement can be used to eliminate the need for a Conditional Use Permit process for each of the buildable lots within the Medimont Subdivision. The suggested agreement is a "Draft" only and should be reviewed by the City and modified as may be necessary to meet the requirements and desires of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please forward a copy of this document and letter to each P&Z member prior to Tuesday night's meeting (February 11, 1997). We have enclosed copies for all members with a copy of this letter. We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. Gary .Lee, P.E./L.S. Project Manager GAL:Ihc Enclosures cc: ton Barnes, Properties West, Inc. f:\projects\11130\admin\cityltr4. doc J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 250 South Beachwood Avenue, Suite 201 Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 is ~~ M~ • • DRAFT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1997, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, party of the first part, hereinafter called the "CITY", and PROPERTIES WEST, INC., part of the second part, hereinafter called the "DEVELOPER", whose address is 1401 Shoreline Drive, Boise, Idaho 83702. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of a certain trail of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the State of Idaho legislature, in 1991, passed Idaho Code, 67-6511 A, Development Agreements, which provides that cities may enter into development agreements with developers upon rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, the CITY has passed Ordinance 11-2-417 D, which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and rezoning of land; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has submitted an application for annexation and zoning of that certain property described in Exhibit "A", and has requested zoning of Light Industrial (I-L) without a conditional use permit to allow a limited use light industrial project on said property which has been recommended for approval by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission to the Meridian City Council; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER made some representations at the public hearings before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission as to how the land would be developed and what improvements would be made; and WHEREAS, the CITY has authority to place conditions and restrictions upon annexation or rezoning of property; and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER deems it to be in its best interest to be able to enter into this agreement and acknowledges that this agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its urging and request, and DEVELOPER submitted a proposed Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER, as sole owner of said land, has made request to the CITY to have the same annexed to said CITY and requested that a Conditional Use Permit not be required for the development, and has submitted to the CITY site plans as to how the property might be platted, landscaped, bermed, lighted, access provided, and elevations, which, except for the site plans, have been approved for annexation by the CITY and as part of the annexation the CITY adopted and approved Findings of Fad and Conclusions of Law, which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and WHEREAS, the Findings of Fad and Conclusions of Law required that the DEVELOPER enter into a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the CITY, in the Findings of Fad and Conclusions of Law, annexed the property subject to de- .annexation if the DEVELOPER did not enter into a Development Agreement. • NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: DEVELOPER agrees, and hereby binds its heirs, successors and assigns to this agreement, in consideration for the annexation, rezone, or the non-de-annexation of the area, as follows: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and the terms of this agreement cannot be altered, changed or modified without the express written consent of the CITY. That DEVELOPER, in accordance with its representations before the CITY, shall, on the land described in Exhibit "A": a) Develop and construct a light industrial subdivision restricted as identified in the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance with the exception that the following uses are not allowed: • Asphalt and concrete operation • Automobile wrecking yard and storage • Fuel yards • Junk yards • Mobile home manufacturing • Railroad yards and shops • Recycling plants • Solid waste transfer stations b) Submit to the CITY applications for site review and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any building(s) or improvements on the property, intended for industrial or other uses. c) Submit a subdivision plat application of the property to the CITY to be approved by the CITY and recorded in the Ada County Recorder's office prior to any development. That DEVELOPER will file or cause to be filed with the City Engineer, a complete set of Improvement Plans ("Improvement Plans") showing all streets, entry drives entering the property from a public right-of-way, utilities, pressurized irrigation facilities, tiling and piping of irrigation ditches, fire hydrants, extensions of sewer and water lines to and along the exterior boundary of such property, landscaping, drainage, street and other similar signing, barricades, and other such improvements contemplated within the development, which Improvement Plans, and all improvements shown thereon, shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Said Improvement Plans shall be and are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference. It is agreed that the improvements to be constructed and installed by successor owners which are located wholly within the boundaries of the Medimont Subdivision (hereafter "On-Site Improvements") are subject to the terms of this Development Agreement, and shall be subject to approval by the CITY in the normal course of the CITY's review of each building permit for the construction of a building on such separate lot, with the CITY's remedy for the failure to construct or install such On-Site Improvements being as provided in the Ordinances of the CITY or the denial of a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to the building constructed on said lot. The failure of the owner of a lot within the property to constructor install the On- Site Improvements on said lot shall not affect or interfere with the issuance of a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to any other lot within the property, provided the owner thereof is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the approvals granted for that lot by the CITY and/or the plans approved by the CITY for the building constructed thereon. -z- • 4. That DEVELOPER will, at its own expense, construct and install all- sanitary sewers, storm drains, utilities, pumping stations, water mains and appurtenances, fire hydrants, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, pressurized irrigation system, tiling and piping of irrigation ditches, electrical transmission lines, natural gas lines, telephone lines, cross drains, street, street surfacing, street signs, and barricades as well as any and all other improvements shown on the Improvement Plans as reviewed and approved by the CITY. 5. That DEVELOPER will construct and install all such improvements in strict accordance with a filed and approved plat and Improvement Plans, and the City Standard Engineering Drawings and Standard Engineering Specifications current and in effect at the time the construction of said improvements is accomplished. 6. That DEVELOPER will provide the City Engineer with at least fifteen (15) days advance written notification of when and of what portion, or portions, of said improvements he intends to complete and the time schedule therefor; and agrees to make such modifications and/or construct any temporary facilities necessitated by such phased construction work as shall be required and approved by the City Engineer. That DEVELOPER will have "corrected" original drawings of the Improvement Plans of all said improvements prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and will provide the CITY with said Plans or a duplicate mylar copy of said Plans. The Improvement Plans of the proposed improvements shall be "corrected" to show the actual constructed location (both horizontally and vertically) of the various water and sewer lines, all utility lines, tiled and piped irrigation ditches, and pressurized irrigation lines and their individual building service lines, sidewalk, curb and gutter alignment and grades, etc. The corrected Improvement Plans shall include a "Certification" thereon, signed by the Registered Professional Engineer in charge of the work, that said Plans of the various improvements are true and correct and that he (the Registered Professional Engineer) has inspected the construction of the various improvements (water lines, sanitary sewer lines, pressurized irrigation lines, piped and tiled irrigation ditches, gas lines, electricity lines, storm drain lines, sidewalks, curb and gutter, street paving, etc.) and that the materials for and the installation of the same were all done in conformance with the applicable City Standard Engineering Drawings and Standard Engineering Specifications governing the construction of these facilities. 8. That DEVELOPER shall, immediately upon the completion of any such constructed portion, portions, or the entirety of said development, notify the City Engineer and request his inspection and written acceptance of such completed improvements or portion thereof. 9. That DEVELOPER agrees, upon a Finding by the City Council, duly entered in the official minutes of the proceedings of the City Council, that a portion, or portions, or the entirety of said improvements need to be completed in the interest of the health, welfare and/or safety of the inhabitants of the CITY, the DEVELOPER will, within a reasonable time as determined by the CITY, construct said needed improvements, or, if he does not so construct within a reasonable time after written notification of such Council action, and the CITY thereafter determines to construct, and does construct such improvement, or improvements, the DEVELOPER will pay to the CITY the actual costs paid or incurred by the CITY for such improvements so constructed by the CITY, plus interest thereon at an annual interest rate equal to the prime interest rate of First Security Bank of Idaho I~us five percent (5.0%) until paid, said payment to be made in such manner and under such terms as the CITY shall order after conference with the DEVELOPER. Provided, however, the City Council shall not make the Finding except at a regular or special meeting of the City Council, duly held, and unless the DEVELOPER has been notified in writing of the time and place of such meeting at least three (3) days prior thereto and has been given an opportunity to be present in person or by counsel, and to be heard on the merit of the proposed Finding. -3- • 10. That DEVELOPER agrees that upon its having received written notification from the City Engineer, that any of the requirements herein specified have not been complied with, that the CITY shall have the right to withhold the issuance of any Certificates of Occupa~ within such annexed area and/or shall have the right to withhold the providing of culinary water service to any part, parcel, or portion of such annexed area until such time as all requirements specified herein have been complied with; provided, however, the DEVELOPER shall have the right to appear before the City Council at any regular meeting after any Certificate of Occupancy or any water service shall have been withheld for reasons set forth in this paragraph, and shall have the right to be heard as to why such Certificate of Occupancy should be issued or water service allowed. The Council shall then decide whether said Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued or water service to said property allowed, and its decision shall be final, except that the rights of the parties are preserved at law and equity, including, but not limited to, the right of appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction. 11. That DEVELOPER agrees that as security for the construction by the DEVELOPER of the Project Improvements, the CITY shall require from the DEVELOPER irrevocable letter(s) of credit, cash deposit(s), certified check(s), or negotiable bond(s) as allowed under Section 11-9-606 C of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and the CITY shall have the right to withhold a building permit with respell to any lot within the property until same is provided by the DEVELOPER. Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to, sewer, water, irrigation and drainage piping, pressurized irrigation system, landscaping and berming, and fencing. 12. That DEVELOPER agrees that no Certificates of Occupa~ will be issued until all improvements as listed on Exhibit "B" are completed, unless the CITY and the DEVELOPER have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements will be completed in a phased development; in any event, no Certificates of Occupa~x shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the CITY. 13. That DEVELOPER agrees, in recognition of the unique and peculiar circumstances relative to this development, to the special conditions set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof; and agrees to construct a perimeter fence around construction areas to contain debris prior to any construction, except where roadways and streets for access are located and except where the CITY has agreed in writing that such fencing is not necessary. 14. That DEVELOPER agrees that any notice required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or deposited in the United States mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY OF MERIDIAN City Engineer City of Meridian East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 DEVELOPER Properties West, Inc. do Jon L. Barnes 1401 Shoreline Drive P.O. Box 2797 Boise, ID 83701 with copy to: Wayne G. Crookston, Jr. Ambrose, Fitzgerald & Crookston Box 427 Meridian, ID 83680 -4- • A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written notification thereof in accordance with the requirements of this Section. The parties may at any time hereafter modify or amend this Agreement by a subsequent written agreement executed by the parties. This Agreement shall not, however, be changed orally, nor shall it be deemed modified in any way by the act of any of the parties hereto. Nothing herein is intended, nor shall it be constructed, as obligating a party to agree to any modification to this Agreement. 15. That DEVELOPER agrees to pay all recording fees necessary to record this Agreement with the Ada County Recorder's office. 16. All conditions of approval as set forth herein shall be appurtenant to and run with the land and shall be binding upon DEVELOPER'S heirs, successors or assigns. 17. This Agreement shall become valid and binding only upon its approval by the City Council and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk. 18. That DEVELOPER agrees to abide by all ordinances of the CITY of Meridian and the property shall be subject to de-annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Development Agreement, the Ordinances of the CITY of Meridian, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian which was approved and adopted on January 4, 1994. DATED the date, month and year first appearing. DEVELOPER: PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Jon L. Barnes President By: CITY OF MERIDIAN By: Robert Corrie, Mayor By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk -5- • • STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this day of 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared JON L. BARNES ,known to me to be the President of Properties West, Inc., who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. SEAL STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) Notary Public, State of Idaho Residing at My commission expires: _ On this day of , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT CORRIE AND WILLIAM G. BERG, known, or proved to me, to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian that executed this instrument, and the persons who executed the said instrument on behalf of said corporation, and acknowledged to me that said City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: My Commission Expires: -6- EXHIBIT 'A' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. LEGAL DESCRIPTION A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly as follows: Commencing at a found brass cap at the section corner common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 01°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1/16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1/16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section and the center line of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 26.59 acres, more or less. SUBJECT TO: All existing easements and road rights-of-way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of land. -7- • • EXHIBIT'S' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. DEVELOPER shall develop the property described in Exhibit 'A' as a Light Industrial Development pursuant to §11-9-607 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. DEVELOPER acknowledges and agrees that DEVELOPER, assigns, or lot owner will not be required to submit to the CITY an application for Conditional Use pursuant to §11-2-418 of the Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and obtain the CITY's approval thereof, prior to, and as a condition of, the commencement of construction of any buildings or improvements on the Subject Property intended for industrial or other uses. 3. DEVELOPER agrees to comply with the requirements of the Meridian Police Department, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian City Engineer, Meridian Planning Director, Ada County Highway District (hereafter 'ACRD'), Central District Health Department and the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. 4. DEVELOPER covenants and agrees that, in connection with the development of the Subject Property as may be approved by the CITY pursuant to Annexation and Preliminary Plat Applications filed by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall, at is cost and expense, do and perform the following: a) Berming -Franklin Road. Construct a berm within the Subject Property along the full length of the Subject Property adjacent to the south right-of-way line of Franklin Road, except for public street accesses and landscaped irrigation/storm water ponds. The Franklin Road Berm shall be a minimum of thirty-five feet (35') in width beyond required ACRD right-of-way, including any necessary sidewalks. The Franklin Road Berm will be extended into the Subject Property a minimum of twenty-five feet (25') from the property line on each side of the entrances to the Subject Property off Franklin Road, said extensions to be a minimum width of twenty feet (20'). The Franklin Road Berm, including the entrance extensions, will be landscaped and sprinkler irrigated in accordance with a landscape plan to be submitted by DEVELOPER and approved by the CITY as part of an Annexation/Zoning Application for the development of Medimont Subdivision proposed by DEVELOPER. b) Sidewalk -Franklin Road. At the time of the construction of the improvements upon the Subject Property, construct afive-foot (5') concrete sidewalk in the public right-of-way of Franklin Road along the full length of the Subject Property adjacent to the north boundary of the Subject Property (Franklin Road Sidewalk). The Franklin Road Sidewalk shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter "ACRD") in effect at the time of construction. c) Dedication/Sale of Additional Right-of-Way -Franklin Road. Dedicate or sell land adjacent to the existing south right-of-way line of Franklin Road as required to meet ACHD's requirement for a #orty-five-foot (45') right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road, including necessary bike lanes. d) Design/Alignment of Entrances. Design/align the public street entrance from Franklin Road to meet current ACRD requirements. e) Open Space and Landscaping. Provide open space and landscape areas along the east boundary of the Medimont Subdivision as shown on the preliminary plat submitted as part of the Medimont Subdivision application. -8- f) Subdivision Plat(s). DEVELOPER shall timely prepare, submit, and obtain the required approval by the CITY of a subdivision plat for the Subject Property, said plat(s) to be in conformity with the requirements of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and State Code. g) Plan Approvals. Timely submit and obtain, as part of the regular building permit acquisition process, the required approval by the City of all drainage and grading plans, building plans, lighting plans, landscaping plans, parking and other plans relating to the development of each buildable lot within Medimont Subdivision. h) Comoliance with ACHD Conditions of Approval. In the development of the Subject Property, comply with the terms and conditions of the approval by ACRD of the development of the Subject Property, as set forth in the ACHD Staff Report, or as may be required by ACHD with respect to the approval by ACHD of the Medimont Subdivision Application to be filed by DEVELOPER. In cases where ACHD's and the CITY's conditions of approval conflict, the CITY's conditions shall take precedence. i) Canals. Ditches and Waterway. Tile all canals, ditches and other waterways and submit evidence of appropriate approvals from the irrigation district and/or downstream water users. j) Water and Sewer Service. Conned all water and sewer facilities within the Subject Property to the municipal water and sewer service of the City of Meridian. All water and sewer facilities constructed or installed by DEVELOPER on the Subject Property shall be in accordance with plans and specifications therefor which shall be first approved by the CITY. k) Landscaping -General. Construct and install all landscaped areas, as shown on plans to be submitted and approved by the CITY, with grass and sprinkler irrigation system, except as otherwise expressly noted on said approved plans. All shrubs and trees planted on the Subject Property will comply with the CITY's landscape requirements, unless otherwise expressly approved by the CITY in connection with a specific building permit issues by the CITY with respect to the development of the individual lots within Medimont Subdivision. I) Paving -General. All parking areas and driving lanes required for a specific lot must be paved prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy For lots undeveloped at time of initial building construction, unpaved areas shall have an all-weather surface or temporary fencing, at the option of DEVELOPER. m) Payment of Impact Fees. Pay, in accordance with an ordinance of the City of Meridian in effect at the time of the application by DEVELOPER for a building permit, impact fees, transfer fees (if applicable), development fees, or similar fees or assessments which may be imposed upon, or by reason of, the development of the Subject Property, based on the uses to be developed on the Subject Property. DEVELOPER acknowledges that at the date of this Agreement, the CITY does not have in force and effect an ordinance requiring the payment of such fees, but has under consideration such an ordinance. DEVELOPER waives the right, if any, to object to the imposition of such fees on the grounds that the Subject Property was annexed and zoned prior to the adoption of such an ordinance. n) Li htin .All lighting will be designed in accordance with Meridian Ordinance Section 2-414.D.3 and approved by the Meridian City Engineer. o) Maintenance of Improvements. All improvements referenced in this agreement shall be perpetually maintained by the DEVELOPER and/or his successors, heirs and assigns in a neat, aesthetically pleasing and workmanlike manner. p) Each buildable lot within Medimont Subdivision shall be subject to the "Special Development Requirements for Individual Buildable Lots" attached as Exhibit 'C'. -9- ~XHIBIT'C' TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND PROPERTIES WEST, INC. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUAL BUILDABLE LOTS The following building setbacks shall be required unless waived by the City and developer to account for unusual circumstances: a) The minimum front yard building setback shall be 35 feet from property line. b) The minimum side yard building setback shall be 5 feet from property line. c) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 20 feet from property line. Lots 3 through 10, Block 3, of Medimont Subdivision shall have a rear yard setback of 40 feet. d) The minimum building setback at a side street shall be 30 feet from property line. e) All building setback areas fronting a street shall be fully landscaped or paved in a manner approved by the City and developer. fl Planters, walls and sign elements not exceeding 3'0" in height may be permitted in the front setback areas with the written approval of the City and developer, subject to requirements of applicable governmental agencies. 2. No fence or wall shall be constructed closer than thirty-five (35) feet from the property line of a fronting street and thirty (30) feet from a side street. No fence or wall shall exceed a height of 8'0" unless otherwise approved in writing by the City and developer. All fences and walls shall be designed as an integrated part of the overall architectural and site design. All fences and walls shall be constructed of materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent buildings within the Medimont Subdivision. 3. No on-street parking shall be permitted. On-site parking shall be provided as required by government agencies having jurisdiction. 4. Storage, service, maintenance, and loading areas must be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the following conditions: a) Unless approved in writing, no materials, supplies, or equipment, including trucks or other motor vehicles, shall be stored upon a site except inside a closed building or behind a visual barrier screen of a wall or fence so as not to be visible from any streets or neighboring residential areas. Such visual screens shall be constructed of materials and finishes compatible with the adjacent buildings if visible from street frontage and shall be designed and placed to complement the building design. Storage areas shall be located upon the rear portions of the site, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Committee. No storage areas may extend into a setback fronting a street. b) Provisions shall be made on each site for any necessary vehicle loading. No on-street vehicle loading shall be permitted. -~0- • • c) Loading dock areas shall be set back, recessed, or screened so as not to be visible from adjacent lots, or sites, neighboring properties, or streets, and in no event shall a loading dock be closer than seventy five (75) feet from a property line fronting upon a street unless otherwise approved in writing by the City and developer. All utilities including electrical, telephone service, water, gas, and sewer shall be brought underground to the buildings from the nearest available lines at the expense of the lot owner. 6. Lot grading design should complement and reinforce the architectural and landscape design character by helping to screen parking and service areas, to help reduce the perception of height and mass on larger buildings, by providing reasonable transitions between on-site uses, by providing elevation transitions contributing to the efficiency of on-site and off-site movement systems, and by providing reasonable transitions between lots, as approved by the City and developer. Drainage -Each lot owner shall be responsible to properly design for on-site retention of storm water run-off for its building lot. The method of on-site storage of storm water shall be reviewed and approved by the City and developer and each lot owner shall submit to the City and developer written evidence of the approval thereof by all governmental agencies having jurisdiction over storm drainage run-off. All elements of drainage design and improvements shall conform with applicable regulations of Ada County Highway District and the City. 8. Buildinas -All buildings are to be constructed of quality products with methods of construction to achieve a visual and harmonious appearance in the development. a) The building footprint shall not exceed 50% of the building lot as well as the standards set by the City of Meridian Zoning Ordinance. b) Durable exterior finishes such as concrete or concrete block are encouraged, although are not mandatory. c) Metal exterior finishes are allowed except that the front exterior or side exterior of a building facing any street shall not be 100% metal. Alternate exterior finishes or alternate exterior finishes in combination with metal shall be approved by the City and developer. 9. Electric lighting -All exterior and security lighting shall either be mounted on the building or shall have underground service to a light pole in accordance with plans and specifications approved in writing by the City and developer to the end that lighting shall be compatible and harmonious throughout Medimont Subdivision. 10. Fences -Fences shall be required around all storage yards. 11. Landscaping -The Meridian City Zoning Ordinance shall be complied with regarding maximum improved areas. Each lot owner or dccupant within Medimont Subdivision shall be responsible for the construction, installation, and maintenance of functional and aesthetically suitable landscaping on its building lot. Such landscaping shall be subject to the following requirements and shall be installed only after plans therefore have been submitted to and approved by the City and developer. a) Required Landscaping -The lot owner or occupant must install suitable landscaping in the following areas: All landscaping shall be irrigated and maintained in a first class condition. ii) All areas, not devoted to buildings, parking areas, storage lot, roadways, and sidewalks, shall be landscaped. -11- • iii) Each building site shall be landscaped twenty (20) feet inside the property boundary behind the sidewalk line along any street. Each building lot shall, as a minimum, install a seven (7) foot wide landscaped strip along all interior side lot lines between the front property line, behind the sidewalk, and the front line of the building. Entry drives and visual triangle requirements are exceptions to this requirement. The remainder of any required setback may be used for automobile parking or for a different kind of landscape treatment. The twenty (20) foot landscaped area along any street shall have a berm with an approximate rise of three (3) feet. iv) Landscaping shall also be required on each building lot in all front areas that are not otherwise used for automobile parking. v) In addition to the required landscaping of required setback areas, any unpaved areas lying within adjacent street right-of-ways shall be landscaped and maintained to the finished sidewalk by the owner or occupant of the properly. vi) All lot landscaping shall comply with the typical Landscape Plan per Exhibit "D". b) Tree Standards Existing healthy trees shall be preserved where practical. ii) The tree variety approved by the developer for the twenty (20) foot landscaped area behind the sidewalk fronting any street shall be a 2" caliper Redspire Pear Tree centered in the twenty (20) foot landscaped area. Spacing of trees shall be a maximum of twenty five (25) feet for uniformity throughout Medimont Subdivision. iii) The twenty (20) foot wide landscaped berm behind the sidewalk fronting any street shall be planted with lawn for uniformity throughout Medimont Subdivision. iv) Each twenty (20) foot wide landscape berm behind the sidewalk, regardless of length, shall have a minimum of one (1) tree. v) All other landscaped areas except for the twenty (20) foot landscaped area behind the sidewalk fronting the street shall be landscaped with a choice of trees and shrubs pre- approved by the City and developer. 12. Activi Times -Activities conducted in rear yards adjacent to residences shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p. m. 13. Dust Abatement -Lot owners shall perform yearly dust abatement on storage yards unless said yards are paved. f:\projects\ 11130\admi n\develagr. doc -12- Z r ?~- ~ .. ~~ v ~L ~~ E r--- ( ~j ~I I ~~ ~_ ~~ ~~ ~~ C d ~, EXHIBIT 'D' to the Development Agreement ~~~~~ by and between the City of Meridian, Idaho, and Properties West, Inc. ~~ V=dc~~ ~'~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ j ~ Tai J ~~/~~Go~ Lqucly ~ ~ac/s A.3~ L A. .~-• ~ Sy' " ~. ~4~'1 ~. fl ~_:. :, Ham. mwo • ~~ ~ ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: March 4,1997 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST INC. ITEM NUMBER; 11 REQUEST;_PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION/ZONING TO I-L AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: P ~ Z MINUTES FROM 1-14-97 CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: FINDNGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS u~~ ,~r ~~ ~~ 9~ ,d' r~ 4 r~ ~~~ ~~ All Materials presented at public f gs she e p rcy of the C' Meridian. ~~~ ~• Y ~~ .~, ~ 11 ~, ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~' ~ `~ a Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission February 11, 1997 Page 9 Tealey: What we were trying to do tonight was get the annexation and zoning moving forward on the Packard No. 2 so that we would feel comfortable redesigning the sewer system and moving it further to the north as part of our construction plans. Johnson: I think we are starting to get repetitive here. We have a motion on the floor, alf those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 2 Yea, 1 Abstention Johnson: Okay we have a motion to delay and bring ourselves up to speed and for a new public hearing. At this point it is 2 votes for and 1 abstention so we will do that. would instruct the Commission to get with staff and get abreast of the history of the project so that we are in better position to handle it at the next meeting. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, one last, since we are not reopening the hearing but it is a brand new hearing and given the notice requirements is it going to be possible to do it at the next meeting. How much notice do we need? Stiles: It would be possible, however I would like the applicant to submit a new list of names of property owners within 300 feet because I am sure what we have is out dated. Johnson: Good point, the list we have is over 2 years old, there probably have been some ownership changes. ITEM #2: TABLED DECEMBER 10, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION N0. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I would like to see number 2 tabled to the same date which would be next month. Oslund: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table the item until a date certain, March 11, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY PROPERTIES WEST, INC.: Johnson: You have the findings, there has also been some correspondence submitted by the applicant. Is there any discussion regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attorney? Meridian Planning & ~ng Commission February 11, 1997 Page 10 Oslund: Mr. Chairman, reviewing these findings, it appears that we are not going to allow the alternative plan that the applicant proposed for omitting the need for conditional use on each and every parcel, am I reading this thing right? Johnson: Yes, the findings of fact conclusion is that the CUP process is necessary for all applicants. There has been a development agreement a draft copy proposed submitted by the applicant which I believe is an attempt to satisfy our concerns about not going through the CUP process on every structure or tenant in that development. But I am not comfortable with it myself in that it addresses all the use concerns. It is a well prepared document, but it doesn't spend a lot of time on use, it spends more time on landscaping and mitigating noises and that sort of thing. It tells us what will not be permitted but it doesn't really in my opinion give us comfort with respect to tenants there and property as it turns over. No question about the initial phase, there would be control. Anyway that is my reading of that. There are a couple of typographical errors on the preparation of the findings of fact. Page 2, maybe I just don't read well but this item 4 in the middle of that paragraph, 9 lines down, I think it reads better if we deleted the word "that". On page 13, item 26, the sentence beginning with "that while working for Idaho Power" there is a word in there that needs to be changed or deleted. It reads "he the worked to". That is all I have, are there any other changes that anybody else? Borup: Not in that aspect, but I do have some, I have written some proposed changes down. Johnson: Well, let's discuss your proposed changes. Borup: I have a question first Mr. Chairman that maybe the Council might ask and that is pertaining to the proposed development agreement. Johnson: Incidentally, I don't think any of us received this early enough to really read it thoroughly. I just got my copy today. Borup: Well my question, generally can an additional development agreement, for one thing this was just a proposed outline for the City to use as it sees fit as I read it. Johnson: Well a development agreement can be drafted either by the City or by the applicant. Borup: Can a second development agreement also be added? Johnson: Well the final document has to be approved by the City Council regardless of its origin. So it can be changed and it can be altered but the ultimate document is approved by the City. Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission February 11, 1997 Page 11 Borup: And I say that in light of your comment on not all of the uses being specified. I think they are specified in the zoning ordinance so that leaves it open to everything that is not prohibitive that is allowable in that use and Johnson: I disagree with that, but that is all right. When you say always and does it, for examples one of the discussions !had with a member of staff was that contractors yard is not addressed but I don't think the applicant has any intention of having a contractors yard in there but he may have. This document doesn't prohibit that. Borup: I think some of those things would be appropriate to include in. The items that I marked were specifically, I thought there were 3 of them., 13 and 15 on page 21 of the findings. Those are the items pertaining to the conditional use process. Thirteen and 14 and 15, all three of them. I think those three could be reworded to include the development agreement. I do think maybe though something needs to be refined on that. As you stated the option is there. If we are looking at approving this development as a whole without individual conditional use the thoughts I had would be on 13 is include as a condition of annexation and zoning a development agreement must be entered into prior to any use or development of the property. And basically the same thing on the end of 14, the development of the property shall first require a development agreement. And then just restating the same thing on 15 after light industrial enter development agreement be entered into. I added, well then that wouldn't be pertinent, that does not preclude any additional agreements, apparently that (inaudible). Johnson: Well I will play Devil's advocate. The problem with a development agreement is it is basically a one time document where the conditional use process isn't. Change of occupancy you have an opportunity to review it through the conditional use process. That is the history of developments like this that we have recently annexed and zoned and the City has permitted development on. Is that we have consistently had the conditional use process as part of the agreement. I am not saying that is the only way to do it but this reflects consistency on the part of what we have done in the past for this type of development and that is to protect the neighbors, that is the main purpose of it. Perhaps that can be done with the development agreement, I am not saying it can't be, I don't think it can be done by the one that was proposed to us because I think that has a couple of holes in it. The other, since we are just throwing out ideas here the other thing we talked, I talked with some staff people about is the possibility of maybe, making conditional use for a portion of the project and those areas that lie immediately adjacent to property owners as opposed to the whole project and the rest be handled through the development agreement. That might be kind of a convoluted way of doing it however. So I mean that is the thinking I think where the City At#orney with the testimony that he received and the discussion we had came to the conditional use permit process as just a matter of consistency in what we had done historically or are trying to do to project the adjacent land owners and in accordance with the comprehensive plan. Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission February 11, 1997 Page 12 Borup: I would have the same concern that you had mentioned on secondary use, secondary owner on changing the use. Can I ask that question, what protection does the City have? Johnson: Let's get our paid staff to address that Borup: Without conditional use it what I am referring to. Say a good development agreement perhaps could handle that on the initial business going in but then years down the road a secondary business (inaudible) what protection would there be if there was not a conditional use permit (inaudible). Fitzgerald: Simply when you zone a parcel as in this instance light industrial the zoning provides what is permitted and what is permitted by conditional use. If you go through the list the control that the city has in terms of permitted use is lost. So you are basically going back and relying on the zoning. Johnson: Do you have a comment on that Shari? Would you prefer not to commen#? Stiles: Chairman Johnson and Commissioners it is, we are able to have a lot more control during the conditional permit process. It is a very staff intensive and time consuming process. However, with the conditions that have been put on other developments in the City I don't believe that we could reduce that requirement to go through the conditional use permit process when there are properties that are not in the mixed planned use development area that has a result of annexation they were required to undergo that process for each lot. So I don't know if that answered your question. Johnson: No it doesn't but that is okay. Any other discussion? There is always an appeal process on everything we do. Any further discussion Mr. MacCoy? MacCoy: No, not on that. Johnson: What would you like to do on these findings of fact? Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Borup: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as written, this is a roll call vote. Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission • February 11, 1997 Page 13 ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Oslund -Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a decision or recommendation you wish to pass on to the City? Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommend that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City Council for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicants or their successors and interests, assigns, heirs and executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement and that the property only be developed under the conditional use process. And that if the applicant's are not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions of law and are riot agreeable with entering into a development agreement the property should not be annexed. Borup: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded we pass the decision and recommendation onto the City as read by Commissioner Oslund, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION BY PROPERTIES WEST INC.; TABLED JANUARY 14, 1997: Johnson: This is a preliminary plat. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the preliminary plat submitted by the applicant Properties West Inc. Borup: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we approve the preliminary plat, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY MICHAEL AND MICHELLE MURASKO: Johnson: Any discussion regarding these findings of fact as prepared? If there is none will entertain a motion for approval Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 22 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow that we continue the public hearing request for this annexation, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea FIVE MINUTE BREAK ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY PROPERTIES WEST INC.: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask the representative of Properties West to speak first. Gary Lee, 250 South Beechwood, Boise, was s~nrorn by the City Attorney. Lee: I am the representative for Properties West on this application before you this evening. We also have a second Morrow. I am sorry Mr. Mayor I am in error here, I have done business and purchased lots from Mr. Barnes the last one was probably 3 years ago. I do need to ask the Council if there is the perception of a conflict of interest there and if so If I need to stand down during this hearing. Corrie: Mr. Morrow, you are not involved in this particular piece of property are you? Morrow. In no way, shape or form, but I have been involved in prior business (inaudible). Rountree: Did you get a good deal? Morrow. I paid through the nose. Rountree: I don't see a conflict Corrie: Mr. Morrow you can stay. Lee: As I was saying, of course the first hearing tonight is for the annexation and zoning and the second hearing is for the preliminary plat is being submitted. I will probably go through this presentation and speak to both issues and they generally come up during the discussions. I will be glad to go over any points you may have. Again the applicant is Properties West, the project is a 26 acre piece of land situated on Franklin Road west of Locust Grove. We are seeking an annexation and zoning of I- Lwhich is light industrial. The project will consist of 18 business lots, buildable lots along with 5 common lots that will be held in common ownership by the business Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 23 owners association. The lots size will range from about 41,000 feet to approximately 76,000 feet is the largest lot in that development. It is of course situated in the County right now, it is contiguous with corporate city limits of Meridian. The current zoning is RT or rural transition. Surrounding uses, it is a mixture of City and County zones. There is light industrial to the north, across Franklin Road. There is commercial general of C-G to the southwest. There are some Ada County zones that are RT to the west side of the property south and east. There are a couple of smaller areas zoned R-1 in the county, one at the northwest corner and one at the southeast. There are six single family homes on acreages adjacent to a portion of the easterly boundary. There are two single family homes at the west boundary on the north end. One of those is a rental. Some of the adjacent land uses consist of tight industrial, agricultural and residential. The developer intends to prepare and develop an upper end type light industrial use type park with this project. If I may I will put up another exhibit. This particular rendering should set the tone of how we envision this project developing. This is a view from Franklin Road into the entry. We will have some landscape along Franklin Road and also some landscape medians. We will be requiring some heavy landscaping within the development itself. In our application we have identified that the allowed uses within this development will conform to the City's current zoning ordinance for 1-L with the exception of 8 uses we have identified in our CC&R's as not being an allowed use. Those are asphalt and concrete, automobile wrecking yard and storage, fuel yards, junk yards, mobile home manufacturing, rail road yard and shops, recycling plants and solid waste transfer stations. All of those uses will be excluded from this development. In addition, we have presented this application with support document requesting that the property be annexed and zoned I-L but not be tied to a requirement for conditional use permit on the uses. I will discuss that a little bit later in here. The services available, of course transportation is Franklin Road, a major arterial. Fire protection will be an extension of the existing city system. The water will also be included with that. Wastewater facilities are available for the site. Irrigation on this property on the landscaped areas and each individual lot will be provided through a privately held pressurized irrigation system. This particular rendering that you see there, I don't know if you can see the water amenity on the left hand side or not but our intent is to develop some ponds in the front in that 35 foot landscape strip to store some of our irrigation water. It will probably act as some storm water retention as well. But there will be a water amenity on both sides of the entry as you come in. We will be using that source for providing our irrigation through the system. The roadways of course are all public and we have gone to ACRD through their review process. They have made a few suggestions on right of way widths which we have accommodated in our most recent plat submittals to you. They will all be public collector style streets 41 foot back to back. There will be a landscaped buffer lot along the easterly boundary. Proposed a 20 foot wide landscaped area with a mixture of (inaudible). This will be set up with kind of a staggered tree placement. We propose to use an easily maintainable pasture type grass something that doesn't grow real fast but will stay green and require less mowing during the growing season.. Of course it will be irrigated off our same system. There were a couple of neighborhood meetings held with the adjacent Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 24 neighbors. We sent out notices to everyone within 300 feet of the property and solicited their involvement. We met at one of the neighbors homes, the Preseley's and entertained their questions and concerns. (End of Tape) that is a concrete ditch now but it is cracked in numerous places and it leaks pretty badly. So this development, Properties West will be installing a piping system that will provide them their irrigation ,water and at the same time eliminate some of those leakage problems. I did make response to the City's staff comment letter which we had received on January 9th just prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission. I believe that is probably in your packet somewhere. I believe we have addressed most of their concems or will in future design phases. One of the main items of discussion was the conditional use permit requirement and subsequent to that we developed a draft copy of a proposed development agreement and we have also prepared an amended draft for the City's review. We have attempted to address what we felt are the concerns that the City has with these types of projects. We have done it in such a way that we believe we have addressed types of uses, the look of the building. The landscape requirements, (inaudible) within the CC&R's and also as an exhibit in the development agreement and it is criteria for landscaping requirements for all lots. We have required that there be a 20 foot landscape strip along all streets and that there be a 3 inch caliper tree planted at a maximum interval of 20 feet. So as you go through the project there will be a sense of continuity in the way the project appears. There will be controls on the types of buildings that will be allowed within the development. So we have a common look and a common feet of a coordinated neighborhood. I believe that probably concludes what I have to say this evening, if you have any questions I would be glad to entertain those or speak to them after to the other testimony. Corrie: Thank you Gary, anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time? Jim Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney Witherell: My elocution and voice are terrible. At the last Planning and Zoning meeting where this was discussed I had the same flu that Mr. Crookston did, so ii sounded even worse. We picked up a copy of the transcript from that meeting and whoever transcribes that managed to get through all of this and missed only two words in my entire testimony and they were Latin. We v-rould like to publicly give some recognition to the transcriptionist for doing an excellent job on this, it is not an easy job. With one exception the new Councilman, you know this property quite well it was previously going to be a trailer park, Aspen Groves. It was going to be a manufactured home, high density park, Preston Aspen Groves. And then it was going to be a mixed light industrial and general commercial. The later two were turned down, the first one was withdrawn. Most of you have walked the property I believe, you know that it is a residential area that keeps being described as industry here and a few homes there. Well yes, there'are 6 of there and then across the road there are bunch more and then after that is Springwood Subdivision. The biggest problem we have with any Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 25 development behind us is this is also right on top of our potable water table and our only source of water. The other problem we have is the comer, because the corner is wetland and we have some very strong issues on that. But in this particular case this application does not include it. We were told by your director of planning while not included in this development; the developer has purchased or has an option to purchase that comer property for conversion of a house to a commercial building or an office building which is going to require C-G so really we have the same plan we have had before. There is nothing new here. As far as our comments are concerned at this hearing, if anybody is looking for fire works I am sorry, we pretty well did that at Planning and Zoning and they are all incorporated into the findings of fact. There are six affected parties on the east , we have, two of those have a financial interest in the development. The four that do not put in a joint letter back in December which was incorporated into the findings of fact and which we also testified on for the most part. We think the findings of fact are very good but they have left out a few things which we have raised which weren't addressed. The first one, well they did address it. They said the findings of fact did find that it was a residential area and they put severe restrictions on this development. For example even though it is industrial cannot produce more light, more sound, more pollution than the current residential use. But there are no measures, if we are going to proceed further with this wa would ask that the City of Meridian establish what the measures are that we are generating. Now this can be done simply by having your engineer set up controlled studies about how much dust we generate, how much noise we generate, how much pollution we generate and have the developer pay for the City to do these studies then we will have a measure. Otherwise it is going to be an issue where a machine shop is going to go behind me and I am going to say that makes more noise than I do and they are going to say no you don't. And it could end up being a whole series of lawsuits as to who is making the most noise. The second thing again is our water, this is, we have raised this a couple of times but it has never really been addressed. I don't know if the City doesn't consider this its problem or what. But the simple solution, there are three solutions to this. He is proposing to put just gravel parking and of course the truck fleet will sit in this space, and drip oil and so forth. Our water table, we have 95 foot wells but my water is down only 20 feet so we are very close. We can expect some kind of damage it is foreseeable. The first thing is he can either offer us water and sewer , I don't think there is much chance of that. He can drill out our wells deepen them down to the same level as the City of Meridian where it is down below a pollution level or he can simply pave his parking areas. What we are looking for is the water not to seep into the ground. Third is the issue of landscaping, the findings of fact from Planning and zoning just simply say that the landscaping the transition is inadequate. What we asked for in our letter is very simple. We want a 35 foot transition. There are two reasons for that. Thirty five feet is what is being offered to the public with no interest in the property. We live by it, we think we have as much right. More practically these Scotch pines he is talking about will grow to be 15 to 20 feet in diameter. Then the five feet, at that point we want a masonry fence fluted on the inside, that will deaden a lot of the sound. That fence will be 6 feet high on a 2 foot berm that is 8 feet which is what is allowed for light Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 26 industrial under the plan. Now I know that your ordinance section 11-9-605 G specifies 20 foot minimum and what we are looking for is more than the minimum. This is an industrial park going into an R-1 residential area. Finally, it didn't come up in this meeting but it did come up in Planning and Zoning. There are a set of utility poles that services these existing houses and there is an easement on those. It has been bantered around by the developer or by the (inaudible) well it may be or it may be scriptive or he can't find one. So we went down to Idaho Power and got a copy of it and it is in your packets. Now it is in specific width, Diana Pon is the right of way and the easement specialist for Idaho Power, who simply said that easement was filed in 1965 but not to a specific width. Now at this time, Idaho Power should be contacted and they have not yet been contacted to come out and say okay there is going to be a permanent barrier put here in the way of landscaping. So they can now choose how many feet they want. I suppose that is really it again, the findings of fact as prepared by Planning and Zoning pretty much have covered our issues except these. Any questions? Morrow: Yes, Mr. Witherell, and you can give me a real brief explanation. I am not real clear in my mind in terms of the power pole easement with the service power poles that service apparently south on Locust Grove are at a distance back from Locust Grove and do they access down Franklin Road or come across the back of your property? Witherell: They come across the back of the properties. Morrow. So They would bisect this particular property that we are talking about? Witherell: They would be between our properties, my pole, the pole from my house is about 7 feet over into the development, the area to be developed They are strictly for those houses, there are power lines on Franklin Road. These were put in there when that area was subdivided by, I can't remember the name of the Family, Frost I believe back in the 60's. That is why we checked to see if there was an easement. Morrow. What you are desiring to protect is that easement apparently the easement doesn't spell out a width for the easement for those power poles. Witherell: Right, it is an unspecified width but it is a specific easement, in other words it is a filed legal easement. That means the power company reserves the right now to come out there. We are asking for this landscaping and we want trees that are grow over, you know up to 30 feet. They hive to be able to get a truck in there to take those poles out, they are getting old. Perhaps that will be next year or perhaps it will be in 20 years when the tress are good size. So they want the right to come out and say okay we want this 10 feet first before the landscaping starts. That is all that easement realty is. Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 27 Rountree: Have you had an opportunity to review or even see the proposed development agreement? Witherell: No, we have seen the CC&R's, we are flabbergasted by the CC&R's. These CC&R's have a clause in there that they will preserve every mature tree on the property as far as practical. Now there used to be one there .but they cut it down before they wrote the CC&R's. So I don't think, as far as they have some legal validity but we v~uld not want the developer to decide without any conditional use or design review what he thinks is appropriate behind us and leave it up to the CC&R's. We asked the City to set the standards we are doing that because the CC&R's have no standards either. They simply said it is prohibited that you annoy the neighbors but what does this mean? Cowie: Any one else have any questions? Thank you Mr. Witherell. Robert R. Smith, 335 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Smith: Well I would like to clarify one thing, I understood Mr. Lee to say they would like a conditional use on this property and if I understand that properly that we would never have another say so on whatever business comes in on each lot that might affect us. I think we need that to be, in case we v~ould object to what facility is ever put in there we need that for our own use to protect us. Secondly, there is a big issue going on right now in Boise with Home Depot with noise levels because the customer didn't meet the conditions of the agreement there and I can see that this could happen to us very easily if we don't have as Mr. Witherell said either a barrier fence or more than just trees. The trees that they are proposing are going to be about probably 5 to 6 feet in height, they are evergreens, their growth period is going to be 25 to 30 years before we really have a barrier between our properties at this time. That isn't going to be a sound barrier in any way, shape or form during construction and during the times that that businesses or whatever happens at that time goes into place. I would just tike to voice our concerns and hope you take them into consideration. Thank you. Cowie: Any questions of Mr. Smith? Anyone else from the public that vuould like to issue testimony? Ann Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Witherell: Mr. Lee mentioned the neighborhood meetings where he believed he had addressed our concerns. He did discuss the landscaping at the second meeting after he discovered that a 6 foot sterilized strip as a transition is not quite good enough. He offered us a 10 foot strip with some pine trees and asked which one of us is going to mow it. We complained about the chain link fence because it is not a barrier for sound or light or dust or noise. He told us it had to be a chain link fence so that when our Meridian City Council ~ • March 4, 1997 Page 28 power poles need to be serviced that our power poles could be serviced through the chain link fence. It is easier to take that down. Completely ignoring the easement Also, on those Scotch Pines, if you ever have any pine trees in your yard, as they grow one of the first things you do is chop off the lower branches so you can mow under them so it is not such a fire hazard and rake out the needles. That will leave us looking at tree trunks and a chain link fence if it is left as Mr. Barnes proposes. Also, I would like to show you something on the plat that was hastily covered up. On this area map it looks like the nearest housing is here at Locust Grove Heights Subdivision or over here the Greenhill Estates Subdivision. It .looks like that is the nearest housing, it is light industrial along here, R-1 housing here down to here, here, almost to the freeway. Also, completely down this side of South Locust Grove Road as well. On the other side it is R-1 all the way to the cemetery, so it is surrounded by R-1 housing. It is not light industrial area, it is a residential area. The Tamura property here that has been recently annexed is buffered on Franklin Road by C-G. It is not all I-L so it is basically a residential neighborhood. I also want to reiterate how important it is to realize that on our water right, we are not sure exactly where .the easterly boundaries area, we know it was awarded to us here and the westerly boundary was the cemetery. So all of this water here is used by the people along Franklin Road, Locust Grove Road, possibly beyond as our sole source of potable drinking water. If that gets polluted and with light industry especially with these CC&R's which are developed for an industrial area and not on top of someone's water our properties would be worthless. When we mentioned this to Mr. Bames at the neighborhood meeting he told us it was not his problem that we should take it up with the City. So that is why we are mentioning it, he wanted nothing. to do with it. When we mentioned any other concern other than the landscaping and what we wanted on the irrigation ditch he didn't respond. So the meetings, it is good that we had the meetings so that we could at least get a feel for what he was proposing but we do not feel that he addressed our concerns. Any questions? Corrie: Any I have one, we talked quite a few times about properties our there, and I am not being facetious and you know I am not. You talked about the chain link fence and the Scotch pines, do you have anything that you would like to see there since the chain line fence and they cut the trees. What would be apropos if we approve that, what would be your idea? Witherell: If it is going to be light industrial , we need a sound barrier, a light barrier something to keep the dust out. There are two directly affected parties who have chronic asthma. Mr. Lee has, in Planning and Zoning addressed the dust issue by saying that during the construction .phase he will have water trucks out. But after construction is, there has to be something long term. So we need a masonry fence. We believe it if was a 2 foot berm with a masonry fence on top it would blend more with our back yards. Our property, my roof line is gosh 12 or 15 feet from the property line. Same thing with some of the others, they are right up there, right there. That is awfully close to have living next to an industrial complex. One more thing, we have contacted a couple of Realtors. Our residences if this is approved will drop in value between 20% Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 29 and 40% and that is if we are lucky enough to find a buyer who just can't wait to live next to an industrial area. So our property values will go down if this is approved. Corrie: Anyone else from the public that would like to testify? Jim Boyd, 9272 Shalan, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Boyd: The Commission, I would like to address just a few issue and I will let Gary Lee address issues regarding the issues because I think the intent is to be sensitive to the neighbors and the concerns that they are raising. I have been in the industrial real estate business for over 19 years and I have seen a lot of different types of developments throughout my career. I have to say that the development that is being proposed is certainly one of the higher caliber projects in the area. I know, one of the things that work has gone into is the covenants and the restrictions that are going in to do the development. As was stated earlier having a 20 foot landscape buffer behind the sidewalk on the street in the project. Having a requirement that the buildings not exceed 50% of the lot on the build out. Also, the requirement that buildings even though a metal building can be allowed but not be 100% metal buildings so we don't get what we see in some of the industrial developments, just a minimum type development in terms of the building. But that there be mixed exteriors beside the metal. Some of the prohibited uses trying to establish a project that fits well within the community. Our emphasis should be to establish parameters that are reasonable for all of us to live within both on the government and the private enterprise side of things. That would be all that l have to say. Corrie: Are there any questions? Any further testimony from the public at this time? Bonnie McKague, 885 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. McKague: I live right behind the police academy and we have a sound barrier of a chain link fence. If you are sitting in your house and you have about five or six police cars with sirens, lights going round and round for hours there is no protection. We hear it, it scares you half to death when it first starts because you think my god there is a horrible accident. And you get up and look all around and it dawns on you, it is the police academy. So for them to say that a chain link fence and trees are going to stop noise we don't even have the trees we just have the chain link fence, very much mistaken. Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else that would like to issue testimony? Council, questions of Staff? Gary would you like to answer any questions that were brought up tonight? Leer As we discussed, these things pretty much came up at the P & Z meeting during the public testimony. We are sensitive to their concerns about contamination to their Meridian City Council ~ • March 4, 1997 Page 30 drinking water. This development will proceed under the guidelines of the State and Local regulations for water quality and protection of those items. We did include in our CC&R's and also in our development. agreement language conceming lighting, concerning sound and times of operation for the facilities. We are trying to accommodate some of the neighborhood concerns. The dust issue. was discussed as well and we talked about after development the gravel parking lots requiring yearly maintenance and a dust abatement programs to maintain that dust level. Of course during construction water trucks are available to take care of roadwork as it commences. What is interesting about the utility poles, the easement didn't show up on the search and on the title report. I guess I would like to see what that easement says, if it is an easement or just a work order. The vicinity map was discussed, I guess t take exception to it being surrounded by R-1 uses. There are only two small R-1 zones on the county map and one of them is at the northwest comer of the development. The other properties are zoned RT and the current use is agricultural and pasture lands. Of course you have all been out there and are probably aware of what is there. We did talk about the irrigation ditch, I guess I didn't understand Mrs. Witherell's comment . We met with Bob Smith and Mr. Pressley on the site and walked that ditch, talked about their concerns. Talked about how the piping system could be used to enhance their water delivery. Of course that is certainly our intent. If you have any other questions about the testimony I would sure address them. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I have a couple of questions. The first question is that have you done core drilling to see if there is' an impervious layer of soils at some level that would protect the water supply? Lee: We have done some excavation pits there to analyze the soil types. There is a layer of hard pan that is in those excavations. In fact Mr. Smith brought that to our attention at our first meeting that there is a fairly dense hard pan layer fairly close to the surface. That is one of the .reasons it has caused them some flooding problems in the past in their basements. The water that has been placed on the pasture land of this development migrates to the east because it is downhill, lands on that impervious layer and then moves straight east into their crawl spaces and basements. That is what has been causing that problem. So there is a limiting layer between this surface area and their 95 foot level. Morrow: I guess part of the question is, is it sufficient enough to protect the domestic waters at the 95 foot level? Lee: I -don't know that I could answer that without doing some water quality testing to see what the quality of the water is now. Morrow. The next question is that in my packet there was a fetter and I believe that Chairman Johnson had an identical letter .from the States who apparently live to the western side of this development and it is indicated that Mr. Barnes has agreed to Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 31 install a 6 foot chain link fence with gray vinyl slating to buffer a home and has agreed to do this for the length of lot 3. This fence buffer with the vinyl slating is satisfactory to us. We understand that Mr. Bames will provide a 10 foot landscaping strip on the east side of the fence when he develops lot 3. Is that agreement actually in place between Mr. Barnes and the States'? Lee: Yes it is. Morrow. I did not see it alluded to in any place in the findings of fact and conclusions nor the development agreement of the CC&R's. Lee: I don't believe it is in the- development agreement, it certainly can be if the City desires. Morrow. Thank you I have no more questions. Bentley: Mr. Lee, you spoke of this hard pan layer, 'if that is going to be the case throughout your parking area how are you going to contain your run off water? Lee: Well they will have to use some sort of surface wells, maybe some bioswales there area number of ways they can do that. It will percolate to a point, but there will have to be some special consideration given to that along with sand and grease traps. Rountree: I am going to give you my trick question, define upper end? Lee: Well I guess when John and I first started~talking about this project his vision was to build some facilities in there himself, have them be built in such a way that it could be partitioned off and leased to small businesses that require somewhat of a store front maybe some light retail for their business maybe like a plumbing business. And also have room in the building for storage of their wares or maybe a shop, something of that nature. But it was intended to be more geared to a smaller user at least on the ones that John is entertaining and that will be the ones along Franklin Road. But the sense is with the restrictions that we are imposing upon ourselves that we would solicit purchasers who are looking for a little more value in what they are buying and hopefully have a higher sense of ownership to get a better quality business in there. That is certainly the intent of the CC&R's and the requirements that we have placed for landscaping and setbacks and types of buildings and that sort of thing. Rountree: There was a comment made about a rumor that was out there with respect to the corner lot on Locust Grove and Franklin that in fact the developer had an option on that property and envisioned some type of commercial activity. Lee: Well as you know Monty McClure owned all of that property and still owns the piece that has his house on it, it stretches over to Locust Grove. I am -not entirely Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 32 certain on what John's option agreements read other than the fact that he has purchased part of it, but not all of it. I do know-that he was skeptical about buying that other piece from Monty because of the wetland issues that Jim Witherell had mentioned that ran along Franklin Road. Plus the fact that it lies pretty low and would be a difficult piece to develop. But I certainly don't think at this point he has any desire to buy that ground. You can ask him that I suppose yourself. Rountree: He looks like he might answer. Thank you, there have been several mention the possibility of a berm primarily for sound it appears but it also could provide some visual buffering.. What are your thoughts on that? If you visually buffer the development then one would wonder why the extensive landscaping would be required, is that something you have thought about? Lee: Well certainly it has been discussed, we talked about masonry walls and at one time there was mention in one of our neighborhood meetings that they would like to have 50 foot masonry wall with flags on top of it. But I took that in jest. It was talked about it and there were discussions about varying sizes of landscaping and we ended up with the 20 feet and the Scotch pines to meet the City ordinance. A certain amount of berming I suppose .could be done but those types of things create cost problems obviously and maintenance problems too. Rountree: I have a copy of that easement for you. I have no more questions. Morrow. I would like to do a follow up question with respect to the landscape. areas. Are those common areas and lots that are owned by the proposed owners association and maintained by that association? Lee: They are to the extent of the piece along Franklin road the 35 foot strip and the 20 foot strip along the east boundary. Although along the fronts of the lots where we have required in our CC&R's that they maintain a 20 foot wide landscape strip that will be maintained by the business user. Although, I might point out that we intend to require a certain type of planting along there so that the look remains the same, the same type of tree and the same caliper. Morrow: So your proposal has the perimeter landscaping then around this as being owned by the users or the owners association and the individual lots would be landscaped to a spec provided by the CC&R's? Lee: That is correct. Corrie: Any further questions of Mr. Lee or the developer? Lee: I was just looking at this easement, the only comment I have about this is it says E '/Z, NE, NE %4 Section 18 for location. I don't know where that is, it covers a big piece of Meridian City Council ~ • March 4, 1997 Page 33 ground which is typical of Idaho Power back in those days, a lot of them were that way. Just wherever the pole goes is where our easement is. But we will take care of whatever requirements they may have. Corrie: Thank you, 1 will close the public hearing at this time. Council any questions of staff or comments? Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would like to ask Shari if she has had time to review the updated draft of the proposed development agreement and what her comments are on that? Stiles: Councilman Bentley, Mayor and Council I did look at it briefly just tonight. I didn't want you to think because it said it was updated per our meeting that it indicated I had been through this and reviewed it and that this reflected all of my comments. I believe that it is possible to set up a development agreement that would be restrictive enough to cover all of our concerns. I guess I would prefer that those uses adjacent to the residential use would be restricted to the conditional use. But again this is just a draft of the development agreement. If you will note on exhibit B, page 8 of the development agreement, the second paragraph says that the developer acknowledges and agrees that the lot-owner will not be required to submit to the City an application for conditional use permit. That should be stricken in its entirety because there may be some uses that would require a conditional use. Other than that as far as going through this entire agreement, I have not done that. Morrow. Follow up question Mr. Mayor, Shari on page 2 of the proposed development agreement, item 2 B, it says "further for those lots identified as lot 6, 7, 8 and 9 of block 3 the following permitted uses within the I-L shall be allowed only with an approved conditional use permit by the City." Are these the lots that in fact.border the residential uses? Stiles: On the east side yes. Morrow. And for those two, if I am interpreting this correctly for those two uses, then they are proposing to do conditional uses for those two uses, then the City would set the conditions of approval for whoever might have one of those two uses or a variation of those uses. Is that correct? Stiles: That is what they are proposing. Morrow. Mr. Crookston have you seen these proposed CC&R's and development agreement? Crookston: I have not reviewed them, I believe that I have seen them but I have not reviewed them. Meridian City Council ~ • March 4, 1997 Page 34 Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would have one final question. Mr. Crookston is there a substantial difference in terms of testimony and the presentation of the proposed development agreement and CC&R's which would have occurred after the P & Z meeting that would require new findings of fact and conclusions to be written? Crookston: No there are not. Morrow: So P & Z had the opportunity to review this concept of development agreement? Crookston: I don't know about the development agreement, I am just talking about the testimony. Morrow: And CC&R's? Crookston: I don't know that the P & Z reviewed the CC&R's or not, they may have I just don't know. I would also say that it is rare that Planning & Zoning sees the CC&R's they may have seen them. Generally they do not, they may have in this case however. Morrow. The point of my question is that the findings of fact from the P & Z talk about conditional uses for the lots and these have been presented spelling out conditional uses for certain lots. As a means of identifying prohibited uses such that conditional use wouldn't be needed for the remaining lots that seems to me ~to be substantially different than the P & Z findings that are prepared for us. Crookston: That is true, it is my understanding this property is in a mixed use planned area which does require conditional uses on all proposed uses. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, follow up question for Mr. Crookston, on item 12 on page 20 of the findings of fact and conclusions, it says that it is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it I-L light industrial. Once the property was zoned I-L light industrial the applicant (inaudible) without additional approval from the City. So 1 am confused, by virtue of that statement does that mean conditional uses vouldn't be required? Crookston: Mr. Morrow, I did not prepare those, John Fitzgerald prepared those. So I can't specifically indicate what his referencing was or the language that he used. What I stated about it being in a mixed planned use area was just my understanding of what it was, where the property was located and what the requirements were in our comprehensive plan and our zoning and development ordinance. Morrow. I have no further questions Mr. Mayor. I guess not having any further questions and no one else (inaudible) Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 35 Rountree: I had a question, you pointed out the mixed use comprehensive classification of the area and it v~rould require a conditional use for this area. (End of Tape) what bearing does that have on it? Crookston: Councilman Rountree, it is my understanding that the comprehensive plan designates that area as a mixed planned use area: We don't have that designation in our zoning ordinance. But we have followed the guidelines of the comprehensive plan for other developments. We did that with Eagle Partners, we did that with Fred Meyer, not just Fred Meyer but that whole development. And I believe several other areas. Because it is in the comprehensive plan, the comprehensive plan is a guideline. It is not like a zoning ordinance which is a mandatory controlling device. It is up to the Council as to how much they want to follow the comprehensive plan. I would just say that in the past and in the recent past the City has done that. Technically you do not have to do what the comprehensive plan states. Rountree: Thank you, go ahead Mr. Morrow Morrow. I guess for point of discussion, it seems to me in light of, I would like to have the staff and the City Attorney review both the proposed development agreements and review the CC&R's, have their input back before us. If in fact that is going to be acceptable to the Council it seems to me that it ought to be part of the findings of fact and conclusions and 1 see if those are incorporated substantial .difference between the findings of fact that we have before us and what they ought to be addressing those other issues that P & Z didn't have an opportunity to address. So, 1 guess from my perspective I would like to see these issues reviewed or proposals reviewed by our staff to see if they are doable. Both within the ordinances and from a legal standpoint. And address the questions of conditional use on the designated lots. I would like some input back from the development team in terms of the soils and the protection of the domestic water. So, I think that from my perspective we need to do a little more work here or our staff does and kind of clean up some of these issues that are hanging out there. Rountree: To carry that a little further, I know in previous planning discussions that we have had specific to design review, one of the options that we have considered is development agreement- to establish criteria for design review. This is really the first instance where we have seen that proposed. I would like to explore it a little more in the way you suggested Walt. It gives us an opportunity to look at it. Tolsma: 1 agree with both of them. Corrie: Council, would you like to continue the public hearing under these auspices or do you want to have it still (Inaudible) Meridian City Council March 4, 1997 Page 36 Morrow: I think that my preference would be to continue the public hearing so that we can have the input back from our staff from the City Attorney, the development team's response and certainly for those within the neighborhood for any issues that they may bring up that would be appropriate to the. things that we have talked about and we are laboring with tonight. So my preference would be to continue the public hearing. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would agree, I think we need to continue on with this so we can get better input from the staff and the legality from the City Attomey. Corrie: Mr. Crookston, do we need to vote on it or do we just continue it? Crookston I think it would be appropriate to have a motion on it and vote on the continuance. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we continue the public hearing on the proposed annexation and zoning to I-L by Properties West Inc. Bentley: Second Rountree: To March 18tH Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bentley to continue the public hearing on the request for annexation and zoning to I-L by Properties West Inc. to March 18t'' meeting, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Crookston: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Lee indicated in the first portion of his presentation that he was treating the item 12 as being part of item 11. I think that the Council needs to probably open the public hearing and see if that is what is desired to be done and see if there are any comments from the public. And to see if either group wants to incorporate what they stated in the annexation for their testimony in the preliminary plat public hearing. ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION BY PROPERTIES WEST, INC.: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing, Gary. Gary Lee, JUB, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: As stated earlier in the annexation public hearing I think we addressed the items with the plat. Talked about the subdivision in quite a lot of detail. I will confirm to the Meridian City Council • March 18, 1997 Page 11 future councils is to put the City in-the point of a gray area. At a point of annexation I think we can define within the findings of fact and conclusions the issues that we talked about the simply changes in verbiage that Councilman Rountree has talked about with a little bit of enhancement can cover fihose issues with respect to sewer and water so that anybody reading these documents whether it would be future City councils, future City staff, future buyers are totally aware of what this Council and this development team intended to happen. I want to see that language cleaned up and put together in a fashion so that it is clear in everybody's mind and address the issue of water, sewer, utilities, the easement accesses and the maintenance of those and so on and so forth. So my preference would be that we request new findings to be rewritten so that those things are inclusive. If the Council's desire is to go forward with these findings of fact and conclusions as written then I will vote in opposition to thaf. That is my discussion. Corrie: Further discussion Mr. Rountree? Rountree: I think that is reasonable, there are several items in here that are kind of gray particularly the access. I would concur that we ought to have them re-written to reflect that and clear up those issues. Tolsma: Mayor, I concur in that also. Corrie: I will entertain a motion to that effect. Morrow. That being the case Mr. Mayor I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare new findings of fact and conclusions for the annexation and zoning to I-L as requested by Michael and Michelle Murasko. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to instruct the City Attorney to draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law for the annexation and zoning to I-L by Michael and Michelle Murasko, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MARCH 4, 1997: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY PROPERTIES WEST INC.: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite Mr. Lee. Gary Lee, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 12 Lee: At the close of the public hearing two weeks ago on the 4`h of March Council had requested a couple of things, one of which they (Inaudible) JUB Engineers and that was to seek an opinion from a soils engineer about the potential ground water contamination of the existing domestic wells along the easterly side of this development next to the 6 or so residents along that property. On the 14"' of this month I faxed a letter to Will Berg, I don't know if he had an opportunity to distribute that to the Council. In that letter, this came from Strata geotechnical engineering and materials testing in Boise, Mr. Van Gato professional engineer. I would just like to read this paragraph into the minutes, it is the third paragraph of the first page. Mr. Gato says, "Based on our review of the hydro-geological conditions in the vicinity of the project site, it is our opinion that any surface contaminants that may be spilled near the ground surface at the project site would not likely be transmitted to the lower potable water supply aquifer that is located at a depth of 70 to 130 feet below the ground surface due to the presence of impermeable (inaudible), layer of silt and clay, soils that underlay the site. Additionally, the ground water gradient to the northwest would cause contaminants to flow away from the residents located east and south of the proposed development." I think that should address the concerns that you may have had about some of the potentials of contamination. Also, I had an opportunity to meet with City staff and Wayne Crookston to discuss the possibilities of using that development agreement for this particular project. During that discussion we kind of summarized towards the end that there are probably 3 or 4 different options that the city can take at this particular junction. The first one obviously is to deny the application in its total form. Second would be to annex and zone the property I-L without the special conditional use permit requirement. And of course the next one would be to annex and zone the property I-L with the requirement that all of the lots be required to process a conditional use permit. And the last one we talked about is something in between the second and third and that would be to annex the property with this development agreement and put some language in that development agreement that would require conditional use permit for those lots that are adjacent to those residential houses. And that give the City some further latitude in their building permit review process on these applications as they come in to place some additional requirement depending on the type of use being proposed. It would be kind of like a design review process and could be handled internally. I discussed those options with John Barnes the owner of the Properties West and we think that option would be a workable scenario. If there are any questions about any of these items I would be glad to address those now. Corrie: Council, any questions of Mr. Lee at this time? Morrow. I have none at this time Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time? Jim Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 13 Witherell: I am amazed that the hydrologist, the soil sample, I have 30 feet of pipe in my well and I am still 45 feet from the water according to that description. This is getting far beyond what we lay people understand about the annexation and the conditions. Let me tell you what our group sort of expected was going to happen. You have a comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan says that in a mixed use area you can put light industrial but you would really (End of Tape) at least on two sides. Of course the comprehensive plan is attempting to limit City's liability under Idaho, Title 52, Idaho Code which is nuisance which includes water, incursion on water. The findings of fact came back and did in fact say those things. They recommended it be seriously held down and that it look like the rest of the neighborhood, the R1 that it blend in, that is sound like it and smell like it. At the last meeting we thought okay we are getting someplace now this-kind of looks like what we were hoping it would look like that was something like very well, scenic Artech. Artech works it is light industry, it doesn't burn at least not the same as a steel warehouse. It is quiet ,its hours are limited. We figure with transition this could possibly work. Then we threw in the whole issue of this development agreement and this is kind of over our head. So the best I could do is go back an read the development agreement against what the findings of fact said and see if there are any discrepancies and I prepared these. (Inaudible) The findings of fact said the contractors yards must be 300 feet from any residents. The response to that in the developers agreement was the contractors yards will be a maximum of 40 feet from the residents, it is on lots 3 through 6, Block 1 only. That is sited from exhibit C, section 1, subjection 3. Let me explain the blocks 6 through 10 are not all the residents in the area, these are only the residents which are protesting the development. Three hundred feet and 40 feet don't sound the same to me but I am sure there is something about yard as opposed to rear yard as opposed to contractors yard as opposed to side yard because all 4 of those terms show up. Second, findings of fact said that conditional use every building should be subject to conditional use and I quote, "it is particularly important because of the adverse affects on the residential properties." And I point out that there are still 7 residential properties there. The developers agreement says no conditional use except on lots 6 through 9, and only if these include yards at the back or heavy equipment sales or repair, that is you can put a machine shop back there and leave it behind us if it doesn't have a yard. It will have a yard because it says all yards will be to the rear of the properties. The findings of fact #3, all buildings shall go through the design review process for compatibility with the area. This is a large area, this is not just our little residences. The developers agreement says no review, building permits only and the building permits are appropriate in, "the interest of the health and welfare and or safety of the inhabitants of the City" subsection 9 emphasis is added because we don't live in the City. Therefore technically these agreements don't even apply to us. Number 4, require stringent development guidelines. The developers agreements says no conditional use except on lots 6 through 10, Block 3, and that is the only restriction is the building height is limited to 40 feet adjoining the residences. Exhibit C, subsection 8, clause D and note 40 feet is the maximum height of a building allowed under I-L. Five, that the findings of fact said this should not create noise exceeded by that of the surrounding Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 14 neighborhood. The developers agreement said there is no such restriction except on lots 6 through 9, Block 3 adjoining the residences on the lots yards and the lots yards are restricted from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. That is you can operate everything else 24 hours a day including the plant but the yard adjoining those four sites. That is exhibit C, subsection 12. The findings of fact said it should not create lots exceeding that of the surrounding residential neighborhood. We don't generate any noise, we don't generate any lights. We are rural but there are not restrictions in the developers agreement. Except that lights shall be up on posts in accordance of the standards of a regular preapproved industrial area such as the Layne Subdivision. It should not create odors exceeding that of the surrounding neighborhood, there are no restrictions in the developers agreement. It should not create dust exceeding .that of the surrounding neighborhood. He has promised on those lots actually all lots that there will be an annual dust abatement of the yards, exhibit C, subsection 13. Once a year, we are talking about daily dust from trucks using the yards behind for parking and machine work. I used to work for Yanke Machine Shop, I worked in the yard 1 know we created dust everyday. The findings of fact says the storage or production of hazardous materials is prohibited near residential, there are no restrictions in the developers agreement. It says adequate landscaping and buffering east and west boundaries. All of the developers agreement says is as illustrated on the plat. Now that has never really been described as to the size nor type of tree. It is not referenced in the landscaping section which is exhibit C subsection 11 and the landscaping as illustrated was a chain line fence or at least along those four parties. As we testified last meeting we believed we had legal cause to ask fora 35 foot setback with full landscaping on a berm with a. 6 foot masonry sound fence. That is on the western .side, on the eastern side as illustrated there is no landscaping of any type and only a 10 foot setback. Now a letter was read at the last meeting from the people that are on that site saying that they were quite satisfied with the ten foot setback, the chain link fence and the plastic slats. I hope that when they were being talked to that they were told that the minimum in the City ordinance was 20 feet with landscaping. Number 11, the development must be designed to blend in with surrounding neighborhood. Well, the developers agreement says that all storage yards will be in the rear of the lots which is of course next to our housing. Including the adjoining residential. That is exhibit C, section 4, subsection A. And of course the building height near the residential will be restricted to 40 feet exhibit C, subsection 8, part B. And in non-compliance with the findings of fact (inaudible) total de-annexation as we read it. The non-compliance for the sanctions under the development agreement will be the withdrawal of an occupancy permit. Neither the findings of fact because it probably never anticipated putting an industrial, plain Jane industrial park next to residential regarded the water table. As I said it is nice to hear from the soils expert that my water table is 40 feet or 75 feet down and my pipe is only 30 feet long. And the developers agreement doesn't mention it either. So we would ask frankly that the first option be pursued. Turn this down and maybe we will get a better deal next time but we certainty are not going to get what blends with a residential area. This is an industrial park, it is a chain link fence park, there are cranes parked behind a very minimal barrier. It is noise and it is dust. It would work fine very Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 15 probably just like his CC&R's worked very probably in the area for which they were written which is an industrial area which still exists. In making this a new industrial area you are creating yet a fourth de facto area in that mixed use area because nothing else is probably going to want to build next to light industry except light industry. Thank you Corrie: Thank you Mr. Witherell, any questions? Anybody else from the public that. would like to give testimony at this time? Ernestine Robertson, 185 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Robertson: After the City Council meeting 2 weeks ago which was March 4, my son and I were discussing the response of Mr. Lee to Councilman MorrovWs question if there was an impervious layer of soil on the property to be developed. The reply given by Mr. Lee was unclear to us, however it is my understanding that soil testing was done to a depth of 3 in two places. I have lived on our property for 25 plus years. During that time we have dug post holes and other miscellaneous digging projects discovering each time that the soil was discontinuous. Since I already had concerns about the water table, toxic spills and etc. I decided to call the geosciences department at Boise State University for an opinion. I discussed the issue with Dr. Monty Wilson, a professor in the geosciences department. I would like to read you Dr. Wilson's letter. To Ernie Robertson from Monty Wilson, Professor of Geology, Idaho Registered Professional Geologist #11. March 17, 1997, regarding soils in the area south of Franklin Road near Meridian. Most of the soil types along the south side of Franklin Road near Meridian tend to have substantial amounts of hard pan. In some places, particularly along depressions this hard pan is discontinuous. And even where the hard pan is continuous there are fractures that penetrate completely through it. Further more a variety of human activities such as excavation for building foundations, drilling wells or placement of septic tanks produce other breaks that may go partially or completely through the hard pan. In some spots the hard pan may well be thick enough and solid enough so that it will act as a barrier to the downward migration of contaminated water or other liquid pollutants. It is also the fact however, that fluids tend to flow laterally along the top of the hard pan until it reaches a fractured zone, deep post hole or any or one of the many breaks in the hard pan. Obviously such a discontinuity in the hard pan provides an avenue through which fluids can migrate downward and contaminate the underlying aquifer. Thus it is absolutely incorrect to say that the hard pan will keep the aquifer from becoming contaminated. A particular useful reference about the soils in tha area of concern is the soil survey of Ada County published in 1980 by the USDA soil conservation service. It is signed by Monty Wilson. In light of Dr. Wilson's letter I believe we should again address this issue. 1 feel it is relevant to the possible contamination of our precious water supply. If necessary 1 suggest that a study or survey be done to determine if the ground does in fact have the possibility of a high rate of absorption from spills due to chemicals and or other toxic materials or pollutants. Thank you Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 16 Corrie: Thank you, anyone else from the public? Morgan Plant, 300 South Locust Grove, Meridian was sworn by the City Attorney. Plant: As an operator of a commercial back hoe in the Meridian area for a number of years anyone who thinks that the hard pan layer in the Meridian is continuous and is solid hasn't dug very many holes. In order to determine any kind of a valid basis for saying that it is solid or not solid you would have to grid that entire area every ten feet because you can dig, go drop right off of it off a shelf and you can go down another 8 to 10 feet. And obviously the reason we dig through that hard pan soil is to get into septic systems. So no it is not continuous, it is not sealed. It is very impervious, I have 2 '/ acre alfalfa field across the road from it and have about 8 different types of soil in that 2 '/ acres. So I kind of think I know what I am talking about. Councilmen, I would like you to consider if this were your home that this park is going next to. Would you like to have your home there whether it be a $100,000 or $200,000 home to allow an industrial park with noise, pollution, lights, activity 24 hours a day, in your backyard? You don't design residential subdivisions with this in back of it. There are yards facing yards in the back. You are asking these people along here to allow an industrial yard backing up to their domestic back yard. If this were yours would you allow it? The least you can do is to put in a 6 to an 8 foot masonry fence to keep the trash, the dust, the noise out. But if you would allow it in your backyard by your back fence then I think probably it is okay to put here. But I don't think you would want it there. I surely don't, we get enough noise right now from the Masonry products place over there, we hear their bull horns, we see their lights. Our back yard, our hay field is lit up so that I don't hardly have to use a flash light if I want to check the water at night with the lights from the masonry products place. And that is quite further away then these.people are living. Of course if the lights get put up in this park I won't have to use a light at all I can turn my yard light off. Because with the light from the St. Luke's complex up there and the Masonry Products on the other side when the police academy is lit up it is pretty well daylight around there 24 hours a day. Thank you Robert Smith, 335 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Smith: I would like to affirm what Mr. Plant said, he looks right across the road and will look right into this. This is in our back yards but it is kind of in his front yard and what happened to us unbeknownst to anything that we had any say so for, the St. Luke's complex showed up in our front view with a great big flashing sign from a Jackson service station that flares in our face just continually. We had no say so whatsoever in that. We can see now what is going to happen to us right in our backyards so we really want to address this and get our concerns to you. As Mr. Plant said would you really want this to happen to you? We have lived there, our home, I am one of the oldest tenants there I have lived there for 31 years, a second home to be built there. Again I worked for Idaho Power for 40 years and I have dug soil probably more than anybody Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 17 around here all over this valley. I have dug a lot of holes in Meridian.. Again to attest to what he said, you can go down one span which is about 300 feet, you have good digging all the way and the next hole you can't get it down because of hard pan or rock. We all know the guys that have worked. in the valley here where the good digging is and where it isn't. So, again I can't really say that any of these soils unless you really do pursue and scrape them down know what happens. I know the first year that we lived in our home we didn't have our yards in or anything but we had excavated down into the hard pan layer and our backyard within about 3 weeks after the water came in the ditch and we didn't irrigate water began to flow right over the hard pan layer and flowed into where we had to dig around our home drainage .line to get rid of this water. It all came from the west, it didn't come from the east. We are all downhill running into easterly direction. I think that is all, thank you. Corrie: Thank you Mr. Smith? Anyone else want to enter any testimony? Thank you, Council, would you like me to close the hearing? I'm sorry, Mr. Lee do you have a rebuttal? Lee: Some of the comments that were addressed to the Council, I have been thinking about as they were speaking to you. The landscape buffer, first of all in your current ordinance you guys are probably as familiar with that as anyone in this room allows for a mixture of uses. You allow for industrial in commercial zones next to residential zones. There are allowances in there for landscape buffers which we have addressed. The findings of fact as prepared for P & Z have not been approved by you, the final decision makers. We would expect that they would be revised in such a manner that would allow a development agreement to proceed. The soils a couple of comments about that. Mr. Gado, I did have a chance to talk to him on the phone after he wrote this report. He did investigate not only his own test pits that they. had excavated on the site, I think most of those were 10 to 12 feet deep, but also he acquired all of the well lots for the adjacent wells in the neighborhood. On those well logs it identifies the soil types as they are going through the strata. It identifies the links of the casing for each well and in his letter he had addressed that these wells were drilled and cased to depths that range from 70 to 130 feet. He also goes on to say that the colichi layer that Mrs. Robinson spoke about is a shallow layer. It is not continuous and I don't think anyone has represented that it is. It can be broken and most times it is broken through. But the water that they are taking into their wells comes from a deeper aquifer. If you read his letter he states that there are clay layers throughout that strata that attract the water source. That is of course the key in developing good domestic wells is to have those barriers so you do .have protected water. The key thing here is the gradient of water flow in this valley at those depths is northwest, it is flowing away from those domestic wells. So contamination from anything on the property west of their homes is very unlikely to flow easterly. The gradient is northwest in this valley. Some of the water that does move west, we talked about this at the last councilman is that surface water coming from the irrigation of that pasture that we are proposing to develop and also coming from that concrete ditch that is leaking irrigation water. The water does go Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 18 down that first 2 to 3 feet of top soil, lands on top of that colichi layer and it does slope back towards Locust Grove Road. That is the water they are getting from this side (inaudible). I certainly hope that water that was coming off that pasture isn't getting into their wells, it would be highly contaminated with fecal coliform and nitrates from that pasture operation. If you have any other questions I would be glad to address those at this point. Bentley: I still have a problem with your talking of the surface water flowing because if you have these gravel beds in the back in these back yards, in the back yards of your development, then you are going to have what is everthere.flowing out towards Locust Grove and you are going to have (inaudible). I haven't heard any way that this is going to be contained. I also have a problem with the fencing and the buffering to the residents. I feel we owe it to them to give it some decent buffering if we are indeed going to go with a light industrial in this area. I don't feel that a chain link fence even with slats in it is going to do them any good. Lee: First of all the water issue, whatever drainage occurs on that site will be, if it sloped properly and they should be to a low point it will be collected into storm water sand and grease traps or if it is not going to be sloped the water will percolate and it will come down on top of that colichi layer and it will move. It will be a rain fall situation, I can't tell you that it is going be a certain amount of flow but it is certainly going to be a lot less than is flowing there now. It will be rain, not irrigation water (inaudible) pretty good sized area. The landscaping issue in our previous proposal is more than a chain link fence. We talked about putting in the scotch pines and we are planning on a staggered installation along that 20 foot buffered area along with some low growing grasses. So there will be some trees in there in~the boundary along with the fence. Corrie: Any further questions? At this time t will close the public hearing, Council, questions of staff or comments? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I guess my position is not much different on this project than on the prior one. I think that the findings of fact and conclusions as prepared for P & Z don't accurately reflect the testimony and the issues that have been brought before the Council. I would like to see those findings of fact redrawn by the City Attorney. Very candidly if the option is to have conditional uses for the properties that are adjacent to the existing homes then I would like to see that addressed and talked about in the findings. Get some of those things tightened down with respect to the development agreement if that is the avenue that we choose to go or not and with respect to CC&R's and have all of those things as part of the findings of fact and conclusions so that once again in .the short term we know what it is we are buying. In the long term potential users if it is approved would know what the conditions are and that the neighbors would know what the conditions of approval are if that is case. And by and large if it is turned down that all would know the reasons for such. It doesn't appear to me that the Meridian City Council March 18, 1997 Page 19 findings of fact and conclusions of law adequately addressed the issues that have been brought to the table since the P & Z hearing. Bentley: I would concur with Councilman Morrow, I too feel that the findings don't reflect the testimony and the information that has been before us. Tolsma: Yes I believe Mr. Morrov~s very eloquent oration (inaudible). Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I think if this goes to an approval or disapproval the key to me is the conditions and findings of fact need to be real specific, as to the buffering of the adjacent owners. I think that is an area that the findings need. to emphasize. 1 guess I agree with everybody else. I guess the only other thing I would say is that I would like to have some comments from staff as it relates to the meeting that was held with the developers. Or was it just a sit down session of exchanging ideas and really no resolution of any, no resolution (inaudible) Stiles: Perhaps Counsel would be better prepared to answer that question. Crookston: Our discussion basically related to how it could be done, we of course informed Mr. Lee that we can listen to him and he listened to us that no decisions can be made, that decisions will be made by the City Council and the Mayor. We discussed the having the property zoned I-L and allowing all conditional uses. We discussed having conditional uses only be required around the homes to the east. Or denying the whole thing just as stated earlier. We discussed it more in depth but we made no decisions as we can't. I think that Mr. Lee has fairly well represented what was done at that meeting when he first started. That is really all the more that I can say that happened at the meeting. Nothing was really done, we discussed things but no decisions were made. Rountree: Thanks Wayne. Corrie: Any further comments from staff? I guess hearing what I just heard I would entertain a motion for new findings. of fact and conclusions of law. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that instruct the City Attorney to prepare new findings of fact and conclusions of law for the annexation and zoning request to I-L by Properties West Inc. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to have the City Attomey draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law for the public hearing tonight for the annexation and zoning to I-L by Properties West Inc., any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? Meridian City Council Malrch 18, 1997 Page 20 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Rountree: I guess Mr. Mayor before we leave this item to get a sense of when that can be done because our next item hinges on that. And when we may or may not reschedule that. Crookston: That is very true, what had been done in the past on this particular application was that the findings of fact were not adopted or anything. It was only moved to allow the findings of fact and conclusions of law for the annexation and then the platting would be subsequently. If that is the request of the applicant he should make that request, if he does not make the request that is the decision of the council as to whether that shall be done or not. Corrie: So you will have time to do them by the April 1~ meeting? Crookston: I believe so yes, but we still have item 4 on the agenda for tonight. Corrie: That is correct, does that answer your question Mr. Rountree? Rountree: The April 1~ does. ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MARCH 4, 1997: Corrie: I will open the is public hearing and ask the developer if we would like to make the request to continue that to the April 1 ~ meeting. Gary Lee, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: Yes, on behalf of the developer of Properties West we would like to request that the City continue this preliminary plat contingent upon the new findings and the action on the annexation. Corrie: Thank you Gary, since this is a public hearing continuation, is there anybody from the public that would like to enter any testimony at this time? Jim Witherell, 215 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Witherell: We would like to point out so far we don't really know what this place looks like So none of the affected parties have any comment to make on it. It still, the lots at the back that may change, it is all, businesses are central that may change. The easement may be introduced, the landscaping may be introduced but we would like to have a comment that the public doesn't know what we are seeing yet. i ,~ r MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Aaril 1.1997 APPLICANT: PROPERTIES WEST INC. ITEM NUMBER; 3 ~ 4 REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDMSION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: S'~e c~f~e~ ~~~ ~ ~'~~ CITY POLICE DEPT: ~C CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: a~ a" .,~ Y 1 oPPrD~~~ c~c`S ~ ~,,x,Pw~ ~,oP „~~I e'~" ~,a U,r, r'~~("i r~ OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MR JON L. BARNES - FROPERTIES WEST, INC. APPLICATION FOR ANNE7CATION AND ZONING A PORTION OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO SOUTH OF FRANKLIN ROAD. WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD MERIDIAN. IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing before the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on January 14, 1997, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., and also for public hearing before the Meridian City Council on March 18, 1997, both at the Meridian City Aall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, a representative of the Applicants, Gary Lee, hereinafter referred to as the "Representative," appearing in person, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, both of the City of Meridian and having duly considered the evidence and the matter City Council makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The. notice of public hearing on the application for annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • prior to both of said public hearings, the Planning and Zoning hearing scheduled for January 14, 1997, and the City Council hearing scheduled for March 18, 1997, the first publication of each notice being published for fifteen (15 ) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the January 14, 1997, and March 18, 1997, hearings; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. The property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein. The property is approximately 26.6 acres in size. 3 The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT, Rural Transitional, and is used as agricultural pasture land; the Applicant requests the property be zoned I-L, Light Industrial. 4. The Applicant intends to develop an upper end light industrial business park subdivision of 18 building lots and five common lots. The use of the lots will be specifically permitted uses under the I-L, Light Industrial, zone as set forth in the present Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter referred to as the "Zoning Ordinance," or otherwise restricted by the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) which .the Applicant plans to present. The Applicant stated that the uses it will not allow on the property, and are thus restricted uses and which are restrictions to be imposed by the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • Applicant pursuant to the CC&Rs, are Asphalt & Concrete, Automobile Wrecking Yard & Storage, Fuel Yards, Junk Yard, Mobile Home Manufacturing, Railroad Yards & Shops, Recycling Plants, and Solid Waste Transfer Stations. The forgoing permitted uses are permitted uses, but will not be allowed on or at the property pursuant to the CC&Rs to be recorded with the final plat of the property. 5. In the application and at the hearing, the Representative requests that the conditional use process not be a condition of annexation. Applicant requested that the uses which are permitted uses in the I-L, Light Industrial zone pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance be permitted uses at the property without the necessity of securing conditional use permits; uses which are allowed by conditional use permit in the I-L, Light Industrial zone pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance would still require the necessity of securing a conditional use permit for such use pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant will consider entering into a development agreement with the City of Meridian to restrict the permitted uses of the property. The Applicant has one use planned for the property, and will have a controlled environment as to the development of the property. That at the City Council Hearing the Representative of the Applicant, Gary Lee, stated as set forth in Paragraphs 30. a. and f., and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 6. The property is south of Franklin Road and approximately 500 feet west of Locust Grove Road. The surrounding properties are of mixed use: to the north are light industrial businesses; to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • northwest a subdivision presently being marketed as industrial; across Franklin Road is a pumice block business which is industrial; to the north and northeast is the Doug Tamura property being zoned commercial general and light industrial; to the west, south and east of the property is not in the City and is zoned RT by Ada County; also there is property zoned R1 by Ada County, which is at the northwest corner and southeast corner of the property. 7. There currently exists six single family homes along the easterly boundary of the property situated on acreages ranging in size from one to three acres. There exists two single family homes on the westerly boundary, one of which is a rental mobile home which belongs to the owner of the parcel. 8. Mr. Jon L. Barnes, of Properties West, Inc. is the Applicant. Properties West, Inc. owns a portion of the property. Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little own the other portion of the property. Gary R. Little and Deborah A. Little consented to the application and have requested and consented to the annexation of the portion of the property they own. The application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 9. Ada County Highway District (ACHD) has submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; the comments did not address the annexation or zoning issues, but only the Medimont Subdivision issues and, therefore, have no bearing on the annexation and zoning issues. 10. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, submitted comments FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • which comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The comments included: that the legal description for annexation included in the application appears to conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158, and the requirements of the Idaho State Tax Commission; that any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in the project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605 M.; that the ditches to be piped are to be shown on the Preliminary Plat; that the plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department; that no variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing the project; that any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517; that wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation; that the Applicant .determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the street development plans; that the Applicant submit a master street drainage plan approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district; the Applicant coordinate fire hydrant placement with Meridian's Water Works Superintendent; that the Applicant revise the Preliminary Plat map to include land use and existing zoning of the. land adjacent to the proposed development; that the pressurized irrigation system within the development needs to be designed along FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • the rear of the lots to avoid conflicts with utilities; that any proposal for a supplementary connection from the City's water system to the pressurized irrigation system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely due to the size of the area to be watered; that 250-watt, high-pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Meridian Public Works Department after Idaho Power Company completes their design for the service of this development; that all street lights shall be installed at subdivider's expense; that the Applicant add a street name to the stub street going to the west boundary of the property, and provide a 50 feet radius temporary turnaround at the west end of the property; that the temporary turnaround at the west end of the property may require some building restriction status for Lot 1, Block 4 and/or Lot 8, Block 1, depending on an acceptable turnaround design; that John Priester, the Ada County Surveyor, has recently indicated that it is not desirable to show these temporary turnarounds on the plats, because. it is then a dedicated public right-of-way that must later be vacated; that Mr. Priester stated the best solution to this problem is to record an instrument, either prior or after plat recordation, providing an easement for this purpose, and that the document would have a provision that the easement would automatically be rescinded when the streets are able to go through; that the Applicant has indicated in his preliminary plat Note No. 9 that "improvements along E. Franklin Road (future) will be Road Trusted and constructed by Ada County Highway District at a later date; " that the Applicant is to install afive-foot-wide FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • detached sidewalk along the Franklin Road frontage at this time ahead of the Ada County Highway District reconstruction; that a 20 feet wide planting strips are required to be placed adjacent to all residential properties in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-605 G.; that a planting strip needs to be added on the westerly boundary of the property; that the planting strip shall not be a part of the normal street right-of-way or utility easements; that any contractor's yards proposed must be located a minimum distance of 300 feet from any residence, except for an owner's residence, have a screening fence erected around areas utilized for storage of equipment, with the areas limited to storage, maintenance and processing incidental to contracting work; that lighting shall be designed so as not to cause glare or impact adjacent residential properties, as determined by the City of Meridian; that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan states that all uses within this Mixed/Planned Use Development Area shall be developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use process which will be particularly important if the proposed zoning is approved because of the possibility of adverse impacts on adjacent residential properties; and that the potential for incompatible uses is great if the I-L, Light Industrial, zoning is approved without stringent development guidelines being imposed. 11. The Meridian Police and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 12. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. These comments included: that there is only one way in and out of the complex; that as long as all codes, number of hydrant requirements, and water supply requirements are met, the Meridian Fire Department will not have a problem. 13. The Central District Health Department submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. These - comments included: that after written approval from the appropriate entities are submitted, it can approve this proposal for central sewage; that plans for central sewage and central water must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality; that it recommends that the first one half inch of storm water be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality; and that the engineers and architects involved with the. design of the project should obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and design a storm water management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. 14. The Representative stated that the proposed improvements that the Applicant is identifying are the roads, water, waste water collection facilities, storm drain facilities and pressurized irrigation. The Representative further stated that in addition to the foregoing improvements there will be a landscaped common lot along Franklin Road, 35 feet in width, a landscaped entry island FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • into the project and there will be a landscaped buffer strip along the easterly boundary 20 feet wide. 15. The Representative stated that the building which the Applicant envisions constructing is intended to be of light industrial use that would lend to a small business operation that somewhat needs a store front and also a requirement of a storage area in the rear. 16. The Representative stated that the Applicant had a couple neighborhood meetings with the adjoining property owners, and invitations were sent to the property owners within 300 feet of the property; that the Applicant had an occasion to meet with a couple of the property owners on a one on one basis and reviewed some of the concerns they had previously expressed. The Representative stated that they discussed the irrigation system that is an existing ditch that will be piped. The ditch, in its state today, has caused leakage problems and contributed to flooding of basements to the east side of the property. By piping the ditch, they can alleviate some of that problem. 17. The Representative, on behalf of the Applicant, responded by letter dated January 13, 1997, to the submitted comments of Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator. Said response of the Representative are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. With regard to the Applicant's request that the conditional use process not be a condition of annexation, the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • Representative stated that this development will not be a mixed use development, but a single use development. The particular uses have been identified, and they will identify controls. The Representative stated that the conditional use permit requirement will place the developer at a disadvantage when competing with the developer across from the property; there exists industrial uses within the City of Meridian which do not require conditional use processes; and consistent with a statement in the comprehensive plan, they are attempting to develop business atmosphere and to create jobs, increase economic base and other things which the City is desiring. 19. In response to a question of Commissioner MacCoy concerning control over building construction, the type and color of the material used, the Representative stated that there will be an architectural control committee established,. and they have identified building material to be used and the types of products to be used in the development. The construction will need the approval of the architectural control committee, including landscape plans, site plan and building materials. The intent is to try to have the same feel throughout the project as created in the entrance. They will keep full control of everything until the last lot is sold. 20. Jim Boyd stated to the Commission that he is in the commercial real estate business and has specialized in industrial real estate for 19 years in the Boise area. Mr. Boyd stated that he believes the project the Applicant is proposing goes well beyond FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • the developments seen in the past with the exception of the one like Central Valley. The restrictive covenants used by residential developments are good for this type of project. The restrictive covenants make the project viable not only during the selling phase, but viable and workable into the future. The architectural control committee cannot be dictatorial because of different products coming into the market; however, it provides for consistency in the project. Mr. Boyd believes there is a need for this type of project; it offers a nice affordable environment for small businesses. 21. Mr. Boyd stated that he would like to see the conditional use process not be a condition of the project. The conditional use process puts the development at a disadvantage. 22. There was testimony at the hearing objecting to the application which was principally as follows: a. Jim Witherell testified that the difference between this project and other properties is that the project immediately adjoins housing. When the City of Meridian adopted its Comprehensive Plan it adopted some very good standards which include the following: the adjoining property owners cannot lose property value, cannot lose water, cannot suffer damage, and cannot incur health risks. For this reason, light industrial is in segregated areas; areas in which there are no housing. The property has R1 housing on both sides. His house is with 12 feet of the property line. The house on the west side is within one foot of the property line. Mr. Witherell desires the conditional use process to be a condition of the approval of the application. As adjacent property owners, they look at landscaping from the rear, whereas the landscaping is designed from the front. From the rear, the landscaping is a chain link fence and a couple of trees. Based upon definition or logic, the application has to be denied because no amount of landscaping and conditional use restrictions can quiet industrial noise, dim industrial lighting or prohibit FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • health or safety risks to residential areas. The proposed covenants, conditions and restrictions do not provide protection because they do not provide standards, only statements. In response to questions from Chairman Johnson and Commissioner Borup, Mr Witherell stated that he does not object to development of the property, but objects to the proposed zoning and use. b. Ann Witherell testified that if the property is developed as light industrial there will be constant noise. .She testified the noise created by traffic and vehicles based upon statistics, and based upon the statistics concerning noise, the proposed industrial park creates a health risk and property values will decline. In response to Commissioner Oslund's question, Ann Witherell stated that the statistics are compiled by the - Federal Bureau of Transportation. c. Ted Hanson stated that he had several questions which were .not addressed. These questions included whether permission from the Corps of Engineers for a filtration system adjacent to Franklin Road and whether the usage of the property would be 24 hours a day which would increase the noise level at night. d. Robert R. Smith testified that during the development of the property, they will be adversely affected by dust, noise and pollutants during construction. They will need a buffer .because his and other neighboring properties adjoin the property. Their backyards adjoin the property and they spend a lot of time in their backyards. 22. The Representative testified in response to Mr. Hanson's testimony, Mr. Smith's testimony and the Witherell's testimony as follows. Irrigation from the property has historically run north. The water drains into a drainage that crosses Franklin Road, and then through a natural drainage into the Five Mile Creek on the north side of .Franklin Road. The policies of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, the City of Meridian, and Ada County Highway District in the design of storm water facilities are to permit the existing .amount of discharge to continue after development. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • However, Ada County Highway District, the City and Corp of Engineers have guidelines for the quality of the discharge water. The rates of flow will be in accordance with the current regulations and codes. The approval of the Corp of Engineers comes in the final design phase of the first final plat along with other issues. With regard to Mr. Smith testimony, there exist requirements imposed upon them; dust will be minimized through the availability and use of water trucks; trash fences will be constructed to contain building materials which may be blown from the property. It does not matter if construction occurs on the property, there will be such a phase of the development of the property. With regard to the Witherell's testimony, they are concerned about the health and well being of the neighbors. They will make every, effort to prepare the designs and seek the .approval of the regulatory agencies having control over the project. There exist agencies to control the use of the. lots after construction. They do not intend to build anything in the project that is not in accordance with currently adopted regulations and standards. 23. In response to questions of Commissioner MacCoy, the Representative stated that he has read nothing in the covenants, conditions and restrictions concerning the restriction of noise, but such could be added if the City so desired. 24. There was comment and discussion between the Commission, the Representative concerning the proposed plat and design for the development of the property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • 25. The Representative further testified that there are other areas in which light industrial borders residential areas. One of these areas is a stretch along Emerald Street between Five Mile and Maple Grove, and there is no buffer strips at all. These areas have managed to make the uses compatible, and it-seems to work just fine. 26. Mr. Smith testified in response to the Representative's comments concerning the bordering of light industrial and residential. Mr. Smith's testimony included that he is retired from Idaho Power. That while working for Idaho Power, he the worked to restore a power outage at Sears computer industry, because of the noise. There is a conflict because of the uses of the respective areas during different hours of a day. 27. George and Mary Ann States submitted a letter concerning this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 28. Monte C. McClure submitted a letter concerning this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 29. Archie T. and Ernistine Robinson, James N. and Ann C. Witherell, Gene and Vernadene Pressley, and Robert R. and Jeri Smith, submitted a letter objecting to this application, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 30. There were comments made from the Applicant's Representative and the public at the City Council hearing, which were as follows, as stated in part: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • a. Gary Lee stated that the City had requested an opinion from a soils engineer about the potential ground water contamination of the existing domestic wells along the easterly side of this development next to the 6 or so residents along that property. He had faxed a letter to the City. The letter came from Strata Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing by Mr. Van Gato, professional engineer. He read a paragraph, which stated as follows: "Based on our review of the hydro-geological conditions in the vicinity of the project site, it is our opinion that any surface contaminants that may be. spilled near the ground surface at the project site would not likely be transmitted to the lower potable water supply aquifer that is located at a depth of 70 to 130 feet below the ground surface due to the presence of impermeable (inaudible), layer of silt and clay, soils that underlay the site. .Additionally, the ground water gradient to the northwest would cause contaminants to flow away from the residents located east and south of the proposed development." Mr. Lee then stated he thought that should address the concerns of the City about some of the potentials of contamination. He then stated that there are probably 3 or 4 different options that the city can take at this particular junction. The City can 1) deny the application in its total form. 2) Annex and zone the property I-L without the special conditional use permit requirement. 3) Annex and zone the property I-L with the requirement that all of the lots be required to process a conditional use permit. And 4), annex and zone the property with a development agreement and put some language in the development agreement that would require conditional use permits for those lots that are adjacent to those residential houses and that gives the City some further latitude in their building permit review process on the applications as they come in to place some additional requirements depending on the type of use being proposed. He stated that it would be kind of like a design review process and could be handled internally. I discussed those options with John Barnes the owner of the Properties West and we think the final option would be a workable scenario. b. Jim Witherell stated, in part, that he was amazed about the soil sample report. He stated that he has 30 feet of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • pipe in his well but still 45 feet from the water according to that description. The comprehensive plan says that in a mixed use area you can put light industrial. Of course the comprehensive plan is attempting to limit the City's liability under Idaho, Title 52, Idaho Code, which is nuisance. The findings of fact came back and did in fact say those things. They recommended it be seriously held down and that it look like the rest of the neighborhood and blend in. We initially figured with transition this could possibly work. Then the best I could do was read the [proposed] development agreement against what the findings of fact said and see if there are any discrepancies. The findings of fact said the contractors yards must be 300 feet from any residents. The response to that was the contractor's yards would be a maximum of 40 feet from the residents on lots 3 through 6, Block 1, only. The blocks 6 through 10 are not all the residents in the area. Second, the findings of fact said that every building should be subject to conditional use. The developers agreement says no conditional use except on lots 6 through 9. Findings of fact #3 says all buildings shall go through the design review process for compatibility with the area. The developers agreement says no review, building permits only and the building permits are appropriate in the interest of the health and welfare and or safety of the inhabitants of the City. Subsection 9 emphasis is added because we don't live in the City. Therefore technically these agreements don't even apply to us. Number 4, requires stringent development guidelines. The developers agreements says no conditional use except on lots 6 through 10, Block 3, and the only restriction is the building height is limited to 40 feet adjoining the residences. Five, the findings of fact said this should not create noise exceeded by that of the surrounding neighborhood. The developers agreement did not have such restriction, except on lots 6 through 9, Block 3 adjoining the residences. The findings of fact said it should not create lots exceeding those of the surrounding residential neighborhood. We are rural, but there are no restrictions in the developers agreement, except that lights shall be up on posts . He [Applicant ] has promised on all lots that there will be an annual dust abatement of the yards, Exhibit C, subsection 13. Once a year. The findings of fact says the storage or production of hazardous materials is prohibited near residential but there are no such restrictions in the developer's agreement. It says adequate landscaping and buffering on FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • the east and west boundaries. All the developer's agreement says is, "As illustrated on the plat." The size or type of tree is not described. We testified last meeting we believed we had legal cause to ask for a 35 foot setback with full landscaping on a berm with a 6 foot masonry sound fence. That is on the western side. On the eastern side there is no landscaping of any type and only a 10 foot setback. In Number 11, the development must be designed to blend in with surrounding neighborhood. The developer's agreement says that all storage yards will be in the rear of the lots which is, of course, next to our housing. So we would ask that the first option be pursued. Turn this down and maybe we will get a better deal next time but we certainly are not going to get what blends with a residential area.. This is an industrial park, it is a chain link fence park. There are cranes parked behind a very minimal barrier. It is noise and it is dust. c. Ernestine Robinson testified that in response to Mr. Morrow's question at the last meeting whether there was an impervious layer of soil on the property to be developed. It is my understanding that soil testing was done to a depth of 3 in two places. During that time we have lived in our home we have dug post holes discovering each time that the soil was discontinuous. Since I already had concerns about the water table, toxic spills and etc. I decided to call the geosciences department at Boise State University for an opinion. I discussed the issue with Dr. Monty Wilson, a professor in the geosciences department. I would like to read you Dr. Wilson's letter. Monty Wilson stated: "Most of the soil types along the south side of Franklin Road near Meridian tend to have substantial amounts of hard pan. In some places, particularly along depressions this hard pan is discontinuous. And even where the hard pan is continuous there are fractures that penetrate completely through it. Further, more a variety of human activities such as excavation for building foundations, drilling wells or placement of septic tanks produce other breaks that may go partially or completely through the hard pan. In some spots the hard pan may well be-thick enough and solid enough so that it will act as a barrier to the downward migration of contaminated water or other liquid pollutants. It is also the fact however, that fluids tend to flow laterally along the top of the hard pan until it reaches a fractured zone, deep FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • post hole or any or one of the many breaks in the hard pan. Obviously such a discontinuity in the hard pan provides an avenue through which fluids can migrate downward and contaminate the underlying aquifer." Thus it is absolutely incorrect to say that the hard pan will keep the aquifer from becoming contaminated. A particular useful reference about the soils in the area of concern is the soil survey of Ada County published in 1980 by the USDA soil conservation service. It is signed by Monty Wilson. In light of Dr. Wilson's letter I believe we should again address this issue. I .feel it is relevant to the possible contamination of our precious water supply. If necessary I suggest that a study or survey be done to determine if the ground does in fact have the possibility of a high rate of absorption from spills due to chemicals and or other toxic materials or pollutants. d. Morgan Plant testified that anyone who thinks that the hard pan layer is continuous and solid has not dug very many holes. It is not continuous. It is not sealed. It is very impervious. Would you like to have your home there and allow an industrial park with noise, pollution, lights, activity 24 hours a day, in your backyard? You are asking these people along here to allow an industrial yard backing up to their domestic back yard. If this were yours would you allow it? The least you can do is to put in a 6 to an 8 foot masonry fence to keep the trash, the dust, the noise out. We get enough noise right now from the Masonry Products place over there. We hear their bull horns, we see their lights. Our back yard is lit up so that I don't hardly have to use a flash light if I want to check the water at night with the lights from Masonry Products. And that is quite further away than these people are living. e. Robert Smith testified that he affirms what Mr. Plant said. This is in our back yards but it is kind of in his front yard. We can see now what is going to happen to us right in our backyards so we really want to address this and get our concerns to you. As Mr. Plant said would you really want this to happen to you? We have lived there for 31 years. I have dug a lot of holes in Meridian. To attest to what Mr. Plant said, you can go down one span and you have good digging all the way and the next hole you can't get it down because of hard pan or rock. I know the first year that we lived in our home we did not have our yards in but we had excavated down into the hard pan layer and within about 3 weeks after the water came FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. in the ditch water began to flow right over the hard pan layer and flowed into where we had to dig around our home a drainage line to get rid of this water. It all came from the west, it did not come from the east. We are all downhill running into easterly direction. f. Gary Lee responded to the above comments stating that the landscape buffer required in your current ordinance allows for a mixture of uses. You allow for industrial in commercial zones next to residential zones. There are allowances in there for landscape buffers which we have addressed. The findings of fact as prepared for P & Z have not been approved by you, the final decision makers. We would expect that they would be revised in such a manner that would allow a development agreement to proceed. A couple of comments about the soils. I did have a chance to talk to Mr. Gado on the phone after he wrote this report. He did investigate not only his own test pits that they had excavated on the site, I think most of those were 10 to 12 feet deep, but also he acquired all of the well lots for the adjacent wells in the neighborhood. On those well logs it identifies the soil types as they are going through the strata. It identifies the links of the casing for each well and in his letter he had addressed that these wells were drilled and cased to depths that range from 70 to 130 feet. He also goes on to say that the colichi layer that Mrs. Robinson spoke about is a shallow layer. It is not continuous and I don't think anyone has represented that it is. It can be broken and most times it is broken through. Hut the water that they are taking into their wells comes from a deeper aquifer. If you read his letter he states that there are clay layers throughout that strata that attract the water source. That is of course the key in developing good domestic wells to have those barriers so you do have protected water. The key thing here is the gradient of water flow in this valley at those depths is northwest. It is flowing away from those domestic wells. So contamination from anything on the property west of their homes is very unlikely to flow easterly. The gradient is northwest in this valley. Some of the water that does move west is surface water coming from the irrigation of that pasture that we are proposing to develop and also coming from that concrete ditch that is leaking irrigation water. The water does go down that first 2 to 3 feet of top soil, lands on top of that colichi layer and it does slope back towards Locust Grove Road. That is the water they are getting. I certainly hope that water that -was coming off that pasture is not getting into their wells, it would be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • highly contaminated with fecal coliform and nitrates from that pasture operation. 31. The property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 32. The property requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and. in the Meridian Area of Impact. 33. The property can presently be physically serviced with City sewer and water. 34. The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Economic Development goal Statement. 1. Policies 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 1.8 The City of Meridian intends to establish a Design Review Ordinance which will foster compatible land use and design within the development, and with contiguous developments; and encourage -innovations in building techniques, so that the growing demands of the community are .met, while at the same time providing for the efficient use of such lands. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at pages 18 - 19. 35. .The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive. Plan under LAND USE, INDUSTRIAL POLICIES. 3.1 Industrial development. within the urban service planning area should receive the highest priority. 3.3 Access to industrial areas from collector and local streets will be discouraged. 3.4 Industrial uses adjacent to residential areas should not create noise, odor, air pollution, and visual pollution greater than levels normally associated with surrounding residential activities. 3.5 Industrial development should be encouraged to locate adjacent to existing industrial uses. 3.6 Industrial areas should be located within proximity to major utility, transportation and services facilities. 3.7 Industrial uses which require the storage or the production of explosive or hazardous materials should not be located near residential areas, and should conform to disposal, spill and storage measures as outlined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 3.8 Industrial uses which require the storage or production of explosive or toxic materials should be excluded from any area which has a potential of flooding from natural runoff or canal breakage. 3.9 Industrial uses should be located where discharge water can be properly treated or pre-treated to .eliminate adverse impacts upon the City sewer FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • treatment facility and irrigated lands that receive industrial runoff water. 3.10 Industrial uses should be located where adequate water supply and water pressure are available for fire protection. 3.11 Zoning and development within each of the Industrial Review Areas should be analyzed to ascertain if there are potential problems or conflicts which would hinder the development of these areas by private industrial and business interests. 3.12 All industrial proposals that pertain to the Industrial Review Areas shall be reviewed and monitored by the City Council or designated commissions or committees, so that approved uses are compatible with surrounding planned uses and preserve the integrity of the review areas. Eastern-Eagle Road Light Industrial. Review Area. 3.13 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and promote the development of an overpass at the intersection of Locust Grove Road and I-84 by the Idaho Department of Transportation 3.14 The character, site improvements and type of light industrial developments should be harmonized with the residential uses in this area. 3.15 The City of Meridian shall encourage the development of a Technological park and compatible light industrial uses within the proximity of the Idaho Foreign Trade Zone. 3.16U Land uses within the Eastern Light Industrial Review area must be clean, quiet, and free of hazardous or objectionable elements. 3.17U It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage and promote light industrial .development in the Eastern Light Industrial Review Area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 24 - 25. 36. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under TRANSPORTATION, Franklin Road, East of Meridian Road, and Eagle Road, North of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • Overland Road, are designated as Principal Arterials. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 43. 37. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under COMMUNITY DESIGN, Entryway Corridor, Franklin Road (East and West entrances) and Eagle Road (North and South entrances) are designated gateway arterials. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 72. The COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN provides the following statements under COMMUNITY DESIGN relative to entrance corridors: Entrance Corridors Goal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically-pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. 4. Policies 4.1U Jointly plan entryway corridors to Meridian with Nampa and Boise. 4.2U Support ACHD corridor development standards for the entryways to the City. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business or residential development on entrance corridors. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 73. 38. The property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map at page 4 of the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN as MIXED/PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT. 39. The requested zoning of Light Industrial (I-L) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 14. as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • jI-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light Industrial District is to provide for light industrial development and opportunities for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; to encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale establishments which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke or glare and that are operated entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited for industrial development because of location, topography, existing facilities and relationship to other land uses. This district must also be in such proximity to insure connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. Uses incompatible. with light industry are not permitted, and strip development is prohibited. 40. Proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicants' property. 2. The City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-222 and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. The Planning and Zoning commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Idaho Code Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it may take judicial notice. 4. All notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. 5. The Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. The land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present city limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. The annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • 8. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. See Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d. 1075 (1983). 9. The development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways; and 11-9-606 14., which requires pressurized irrigation. 10. The Applicants stated that it intends to develop an upper end light-industrial business park subdivision of 18 building lots and five common- lots. Any uses would have to comply with the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision and Development Ordinance, and the other Meridian Ordinances. 11. The City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, and has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan. Thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the use. It is concluded that upon annexation, as conditions of annexation, the City may impose restrictions that are not otherwise contained in the current Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances. 12. It is concluded that the City could annex the property and zone it (I-L) Light Industrial, but once the property was zoned (I-L) Light Industrial, the Applicants could place many different FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • uses on the property without additional approval from the City other than building permits, which limits the control that the City should have over the development and the uses of the property due to the mandates of the Comprehensive Plan. 13. It is concluded, due to the statements and objections of the owners of lots and homes on Locust Grove Road which abut the subdivision proposed by the Applicant (back-to-back) and which lots directly abutting the subdivision but not corner to corner, that as - a condition of annexation and zoning, any use or development of lots within the proposed subdivision of the Applicant directly abutting, back-to-back but not corner to corner, the mentioned homes and lots, shall only be allowed under the conditional use process. It is further concluded that the lots in the Applicant's proposed subdivision which do not directly abut, back-to-back, those lots with homes on them which lots front on Locust Grove Road shall not be required to obtain conditional use permits for proposed uses, but shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit if a conditional use is required for such use under the Zoning Ordinance or the Applicant has agreed to obtain a conditional use permit for that classification of use. The Applicant has stated and represented that even though some uses are allowed under the Light Industrial Zone such uses will not be allowed as uses within the subdivision, even though allowed in the zone to which the Applicant's property is zoned pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. It is further concluded that the Applicant and the Planning and Zoning Department of the City shall establish, by FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • written agreement, which uses shall be allowed pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, which uses shall be allowed only by means of a conditional use permit, and those uses that shall not be allowed. 14. Even though the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN provides under LAND USE, Eastern-Eagle Road Light Industrial Review Area, in 3.14 and 3.16U, at page 25, that the character, site improvements and type of light industrial developments should be harmonized with the residential uses in the area, that land uses in the Eastern Light Industrial Review area must be clean, quiet, and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, and that the City should have control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it has been held that a city comprehensive plan is a guide only and is not similar to a zoning ordinance; that the City Council understands the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis and understands the Comprehensive Plan's direction for development of the area; that the duty of the Council, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns, but also the Comprehensive Plan is just that, a plan and not a controlling ordinance; that this statement that the comprehensive plan is not controlling is supported by Balzer v. Kootenai County Bd of Commis, 110 Idaho 37, 714 P.2d 6 (1986). 14A. It is further concluded that this Application has been difficult for the Council to decide because of opposition to the Application, which could dictate that the Application should be denied but the Meridian Comprehensive Plan which shows the land as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • being in an area shown as a Mixed/Planned Development Area, which would indicate that the Application should be approved; that the Council understands the objections and sympathizes with them on an individual basis but also understands the Comprehensive Plan's direction for development of the area; but the duty of the Council, however, is not to be controlled by the interests of individual property owners and their concerns and the Comprehensive Plan is just that, a plan and not a controlling ordinance; that this - statement that the comprehensive plan is not controlling is supported by the above stated case of Balzer v. Kootenai County Bd of Commis . 14B. It is further concluded that the duty of the Council is to assess the applications on the basis of the overall good of the City and its citizens; that it is with this duty and background that .the Council has undertaken to make these Findings and Conclusions. 15. It is concluded that the property should be annexed and zoned (I-L) Light Industrial, but only capable of being developed as set forth in paragraph 12. 16. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (I-L) Light Industrial, the Applicants shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following:. a. Inclusion into the development the requirements of 11-9-605; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • b. Payment by the Applicants, or if required, any successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City; c. Addressing the property access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses and traffic study; d. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City; e. Appropriate berming and landscaping; f. Submission and approval of any required plats; g. Submission and approval of individual building, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans of the property; h. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the surrounding residential development and other development; i. Establishing the 35 foot landscaped setback mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same; j. Addressing the comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer and Planning and Zoning Administrator; k. The sewer and water requirements; 1. Traffic plans and access into and out of any development; and m. Any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing. 17. Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance provides in part as follows: If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. ~ ~ adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. It is concluded, however, that it is more appropriate for a development agreement to be entered into when plans for development of the property are determined, and therefore as a condition of annexation a development agreement must be entered into prior to development of the property or issuance of final plat approval. 18. It is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian, and it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned on meeting the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and if they are not met the land may be de-annexed. 19. The requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Administrator, Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental agencies shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. 20. All ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 21. Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 22. The ,Applicants will be required to connect the property to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. • • 23. The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Development Ordinance and the development agreement, and it shall only be developed under the conditional use process. 24. These conditions shall run .with the land and bind the Applicants and their successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives. 25. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of the property as (I-L) Light Industrial would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 26. If these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall not be annexed or if already annexed, it shall be de-annexed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 32. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW C~~ Cort~trCiL The Meridian -P~a~-i-:ag and--Zoning-Cou~u-~ssinn- of the City ~~~1-1- of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. ROLL CALL C~ u NC'/L h? ~~ J'~ZOP i2UGrJ VOTE D CUGlt~C/G dj?~rp~ -9SLt~H- P~Cj1lT~.Ey VOTED (~J/C.i~C~L~1/~~ CCOY /~OUit/ Ti°FF VOTED - Ct~Gf/l/C(G /~r~itf N--~&ER }-~U~,f~in/~ VOTED DECISION AND RECOI~IIrIENDATION The City Council hereby decides that the property set forth in the application be annexed and zoned Light Industrial but capable of development only as allowed and set forth herein and ate e~.~lea- under the conditions set forth in these'~Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that .the Applicant or its successors in interest, assigns, and/or successors enter into a development agreement; that if the Applicants are not agreeable with these u ~arr~~.decG Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and are not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 33. MR. JON BARNES -- PROPERTIES WEST, INC. 04/01/97 09:17 $208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE • ~.i u MEMORANDUM @001/002 RECEIVED APk - 1 1997 qTY 0~ M~:.BID~P1 Meridian City Council Meeting, 4-1-96 Memo To: Mayor Robert Corrie, Council Members, Will Berg, and Wayne Crookston From: ~~. Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. - .DUB Engineers, Inc. Subj®ct: New Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Properties West, Inc. Annexation and Medimont Subdivision Preliminary Plat DATE: April 1, 1996 Sent By Fax 70: 887-4813 (City) and 888-3969 (City Attorney) Copy To: Jon Barnes, Properties West, Inc., Fax No.: 375-6518 Gentlemen: I have reviewed the revised Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Properties West -Medimont Subdivision that you will be considering this evening. 1 am having difficulty understanding two of the 26 Conclusions of Law, it appears they may be conflicting. Item No. 13 States: " .....any use or development of lots within the proposed subdivisions of the Applicant directly abutting, back-to-back but not~corner to corner, the mentioned homes and lots ,shall only be allowed under the conditional use process. It is further concluded that the lots in the Applicant's proposed subdivision which do not directly abut, back-to-back, those lots with homes on them which lots front on Locust Grove Road shall not be~ required to obtain conditional use permits for proposed uses, but shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit if a conditional use is required for such use under the APR 01 '97 09 19 208 323 9336 PAGE.01 04/01/97 09:17 x`208 323 9336 J-U-B ENG. BOISE Zoning Ordinance or~ Applicant has agreed to obtain a ~ditional user permit for that classification of use." Item No. 23 States: "The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Development Ordinance and the development agreement, and it shall only be developed under the conditional use process." It appears that Item No. 13 says a CUP is required for those lots along the easterly border that front on Locust Grove Road and that all other lots do not require an automatic CUP unless the Zoning Ordinance requures it or it is required in the Development Agreement. However, Item 23 reads like all lots will require a CUP. Should the last part of Item No. 23 be struck? Or will the City demand CUP's on all lots for all uses? Hopefully, you will discuss this issue this evening. If you have any questions, please call me at 376-7330. Or we can discuss these items tonight. Thank You. APR 01 '9? 09 20 ~ 002/002 208 323 9336 PAGE. 02 Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 Page 14 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the findings of fact and conclusions as amended, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow. Mr. Mayor, the Meridian City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application should be approved for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions as amended. That if the applicant is not agreeable to these findings of fact and conclusions as amended or is not agreeable with entering into the development agreement and adopting covenants conditions, restrictions, deed restrictions the property should not be annexed. There shall be no development or use whatever of the property set forth in the application for any other than in a part of a mixed planned development. All uses of the land must be approved under the conditional use permit process. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma on the decision as stated, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare an annexation ordinance. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to have the City Attorney prepare an ordinance, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO I-L BY PROPERTIES WEST INC.: Corrie: Council do you have those findings in front of you? I have a question, I believe the counselor you had some changes, did we get those? Crookston: Mr. Mayor and Council the changes were basically the same as they were for Murasko. Corrie: I guess they are not in this one. Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 . Page 15 Crookston: You should have new ones. Most of it is in paragraph 22 in the conclusions. Rountree: It looks the same to me as previous. Morrow. So what was the verbiage supposed to be? Crookston: It is basically the same as Murasko. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I will read item 22 as it should be. The current one says the applicant shall be required to connect to the property to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and .sewer mains .will serve the property. The desired amendment is the applicant shall be required to connect the property to Meridian water and sewer, extend the water and sewer lines to serve the property and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the property. All such things that the applicants or their successors (Inaudible). The previously mentioned water and sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that the applicants or their successors desire to use the property or place a user on the property. Corrie: Is everybody following what we have done here? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would offer another change in condition 23 to be consistent with the language in condition #13. That we add for consideration last part of that sentence that it shall only be developed under the conditional use process as described in condition number 13. Morrow. So you are adding as described in condition #13. Corrie: Any other corrections or revisions? I will entertain a motion at this point. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law as amended. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made, by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Planning and Zoning Commission as amended, any further discussion? Bentley: Mr. Mayor, 1 have one question to ask of Shari and that is on the buffering issue. Is it not design by ordinance that they cannot use utility areas as part of the buffering? Stiles: Councilman Bentley and Mayor and Council yes that is correct, the specific ordinance excludes any of the utilities as part of the planting strip. Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 Page 16 Bentley: And in this property are there utility easements? Stiles: Yes Bentley: Is that not part of the plan for the buffering? Stiles: In the proposed plat they show a 20 foot utility irrigation and drainage easement and they are also showing that as their landscape lot. The easement that has been granted to Idaho Power Company many years ago basically includes about the whole section. It is not defined, so at the time that they develop this property they will have to go back to Idaho Power and develop and exact easement for those utility poles. The utility poles shows, it looks like they are about right on the property line itself. So I would think that they would need five to ten feet on either side of those poles as an easement. Bentley: And then the buffering would go beyond that? Stiles: I would be required to be beyond that utility easement. Bentley: Thank you Tolsma: I have a question for Ms. Stiles. Page 30, item E, appropriate berming and landscaping who deems what is appropriate. Stiles: I believe you do Mr. Tolsma. For those lots adjacent to the existing residential those would all have to come in as a conditional use permit and I guess that is when it would be determined if it was appropriate for those adjacent residential properties. That is the only, and the use that they are proposing. Tolsma: Is that a landscape agreement for that then, that is when we deem what is appropriate for that? Stiles: I guess it wouldn't be resolved really for those particular lots until they did come in with a conditional use permit application and that conditional use was granted. As far as the rest of it, if you are proposing that the rest of it not be under the conditional use permit it will just be through our normal review of the application when it comes in for a building permit. Tolsma: Well the question I was asking was what is, who determines what is appropriate (inaudible) Stiles: That is not a very good word, appropriate, it is very hard to define and it depends on who is looking at it. Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 Page 17 Tolsma: Who interprets what is appropriate? Stiles: It is kind of Tolsma: (Inaudible) is this part of the deal? It is not going to be done piece meal per lot it is going to be done all (inaudible). Stiles: I believe they proposed that the landscape strip along Franklin will be done and the planting strip adjacent to the residential properties will be done at one time. Tolsma: And this will be part of the development agreement then? Stiles: Yes, we haven't finalized anything on the development agreement it needs quite a bit more refinement before I would feet comfortable with it. But I think it is possible (inaudible) Corrie: Will that landscaping be done before any building permits are issued? Stiles: I wouldn't guarantee that but I believe that was their representation when they came in. Morrow. I offer, the development agreement if this is a phased project like any phased project then the landscaping issues are done as the phases are completed prior to lot sales that is part of the platting process or development agreement or whatever. So if the whole subdivision was going to be developed for sale at once then with the exception of the things that were conditional use permitted then all of the other landscaping would be going in at the development time. It would be operation at that time. So does that answer your question and that would be spelled out in the development agreement that we would be drafting up or amending. Stiles: If Council would choose to have that language typically a plat can be recorded and lots sold prior to any improvements being made. But there would be no building permits issued. Morrow: And that is the method by which we make sure all of those improvements are in. This is not different a commercial subdivision is no different than how we do a residential subdivision. And that is the method by which we handle that in a residential subdivision. So the answer to Mr. Tolsma's question is the landscaping per phase would be completed prior to building permits being issued. Stiles: In residential subdivisions we have issued building permits prior to all of the landscaping being done particularly when the timing of the season (inaudible) Morrow. And those can be bonded around is that correct? Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 Page 18 Stiles: Right Morrow. So we have a procedure for handling that. Corrie: Any further discussion? Crookston: I had changed these findings, I had a fax today from Gary Lee and I changed that and I changed the findings of fact and conclusions of law. I thought that my secretary had printed them, these are not the way that I changed them. Bentley: Are they the way we changed them? Crookston: They should be yes, but quite frankly I would have to sit down and read them to make sure. Morrow: So what are you proposing? Crookston: I would propose that you table the matter and look at them corrected as they should be corrected. What the changes, some of the changing was as far as the conditional uses, it was not a standard requirement throughout the entire subdivision and property that the applicant obtain a conditional use permit for every use that they were going to have on the property. It was to be and this was the Council's decision was that the conditional uses would be required for any lots that were adjacent to residences along Locust Grove Road but it had to be a back to back, when I say adjacent it had to be back to back, corner to corner to count and that type of thing. Thirteen then is in conflict with paragraph 23. Why don't we go forward. Corrie: Are you comfortable with your (inaudible) Crookston: Yes I am now, I was looking through this and I was not paying attention to the motion. I apologize. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, we had a motion to approve of the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the City Council as amended,.roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Vote on the decision? Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I move that the City Council hereby decide that the property set forth in the application be annexed and zoned light industrial capable of development only as allowed and set .forth herein these amended findings of fact and conclusions under the conditions. Including the applicant or its successors, interest assigns enter Meridian City Council April 1, 1997 Page 19 into a development agreement and that if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions of law as amended are not agreeable with entering into the development the property should not be annexed. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree on the decision as read, any further discussion? Hearing none, atl those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we .instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for annexation. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we have the City Attorney draw up an ordinance, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM MARCH 18,1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION BY PROPERTIES WEST INC: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the representative of the subdivision to come forward. Gary Lee, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: I believe the continuation this evening was coupled to the annexation request on item 3. At this point I would welcome any questions that the Council may have concerning the preliminary plat as submitted. Corrie: Any questions? Rountree: Jus# an observation, it appears to me that some of the conditions of annexation are going to impact your plat as presented. I would suggest that we either continue the hearing or Lee: Are you talking about the utility easements? Rountree: Yes Meridian City Council April 15, 1997 Page 2 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: ORDINANCE #754 -ANNEXATION/ZONING TO I-UMURASKO: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF -THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE SE '/4 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance is the Michael and Michelle Murasko property. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have the Ordinance #754 read in its entirety? Entertain a motion on ordinance #754. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve ordinance #754 with suspension of rules. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma that we accept Ordinance #754 with suspension of rules, roll call vote? ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: ORDINANCE #755 -ANNEXATION/ZONING TO I-UPROPERTIES WEST: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN THE NE %4 OF SECTION 18, T.3N., R.1 E., B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. This is an ordinance for Mr. John Bames Properties West Inc. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have Ordinance #755 read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #755 with suspension of rules. Morrow. Second Corrie: Motion by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow that we adopt Ordinance #755 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM APRIL 1, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MEDIMONT SUBDIVISION BY PROPERTIES WEST: ,~ ORDINANCE NO I~~ • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of said City to annex to the said City real property which is described in Section 1 below: a '~ f) 2 ~ ~ r J- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and ~Co~c of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: ~~ ~~.,~ -- . Section 1. That the real property described~~~'~"- ~~ A portion of land within the NE 1/4 of Sect~.9?1., 3N., R. lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more pa" ~~ ~~, _. iFaHl~a~l ' ' ~ ` ~ '! i ~i as follows : y ~ • Commencing at a found brass cap at the sectic~-~~corher ~- common to Sections 7, 8, 17 and 18 of T. 3N. , R. lE. , B.M., at the center line intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road; thence Westerly along the center line of said Franklin Road and the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, South 89°46'18" West 480.70 feet, the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said center line and said section line South 02°14'38" East 187.40 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 00°58'43" West 494.50 feet to a set 5/8" rebar. with crap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South 19°08'17" East 135.59 feet to a set 5/8" rebar with cap P.E./L.S. 3260; thence South O1°25'43" West 520.56 feet to a found iron pin on the North 1/16 line of said Section 18; ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Page 1 • thence South 89°39'40" West 888.27 feet along the said 1 / 16 line of said Section 18 to the NE 1 / 16 corner of said section, from which a found 5/8" rebar bears North 00°29'39" East 0.25 feet; thence North 00°29'39" East 1,332.11 feet along said East 1/16 line to a point on the Northerly boundary of said Section and the center line. of said Franklin Road; thence North 89°46'18" East 846.40 feet. along said Northerly boundary and center line of Franklin Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be zoned I-L Light Industrial; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the - conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for annexation and zoning; that owners of lots in the subdivision to which this land is to be subdivided into and which lot, or lots, abuts a lot, or land, as back to back neighbors and which abutting lot or land has frontage on South Locust Grove Road (hereafter referred to as Locust Grove. Lots), the. owner of the lot in the subdivision in which this land is subdivided into, must obtain a conditional use permit for any use that is desired to be placed on their lot; but the owners of other lots that do ~ not abut Locust Grove Lots do not need to obtain a conditional use permit unless the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit for that type of use; also, pursuant to representation of the Applicant agreement the following uses shall not be allowed on the land annexed, to-wit: Asphalt and/or concrete operations, Automobile wrecking yards and/or storage, Fuel yards, Junk yards, Mobile home manufacturing, railroad yards and/or shops, recycling shops, or Solid waste transfer stations. ANNE7CATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON :,. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. page 2 • Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de- annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land. b. That the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan adopted January 4, 1994. c. That the development shall be aesthetically maintained with a 35-foot setback for landscaping along Franklin and any portion of the land that fronts Locust Grove Road. d. That, as a condition of annexation, the Applicant shall enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2- 416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address the following, among other items: 1. Inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, and M, of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. 2. The Applicant and owners of the property, and if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any impact development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City. e. That the development of the land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements. f. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. g. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property shall be subject to de-annexation. h. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de- annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land. ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Page 3 • • b. That the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan adopted January 4, 1994, but the City may impose restrictions that are not contained in the current Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances. c. That, as a condition of annexation, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address inclusion into the project of the requirements of 11-9-605 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and other matters; that the property may be de-annexed if the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement are not satisfied. d. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, 11-9-605 M. which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways, and 11-9-606 B 14. which pertains to pressurized irrigation. e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. f. That the Applicant shall meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet. the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. Section 3. That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval as required by law. ANNSBATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, ITC. Page 4 • PASSED by the City Council and approved by the l-s~-~. City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this ~- 1997. APPROVED: ATTEST: .. W3Z,SIAM G. BERG, JR. , STATE OF IDAHO,) : Ss. County of Ada, ) Mayor of the day of April, R -- ROBERT D. CORRIE ,. SEAL ITY CLERK ~ ~~~y~'!~ ~T igt •, ~~ ~i "~ ~ ~~ I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LAND WITHIN THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO• AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE;" passed as Ordinance No. ~~ ,~y the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the ~_ day of April, 1997, as the same appears in my office. DATED, this ~ ~ d.ay of April, 1997. ~~ ~ ~~E ~ "r City Clerk, City o M ridian r ~ Ada County, Idaho ~J~L %'O„!, T 1St • ~` ~~~~: Q~~ I~1111/Ir tEli11\\\ ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Page 5 STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) On this ~~ f ~ day of April, 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. f ~..• G E l . '~.~ SEAL ;' Q, ~'• J' %, I~~"I,®~"'Ii1j,~1 GZ 1? ublic for Ida at Meridian, ssion Expires Idah T ANNSBATION ORDINANCE - I-L MR. JON L. BARNES - PROPERTIES WEST, INC. Page 6 p p. M ~1.4.~ ` !8 "E. 84G, go ~ 3. BR' '/p` w. 480.70' .~°g • '= s~ o~ilMaNc~ Na. 76s ~ +~rrc-5 WEsT. ~2 / a /I(v~lti 8 N N \ '~ e ~~~i N ~~ a 41 -~. $ sale : 1" ~' ~, -. .~ 3 ~~`` h n 0 s.8~t•~'QO" w, 888.2' h -~ ~:• -- .• -~ ~, ~~ a n ~~ ~~ a