Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackard Acres Sub No. 2 AZ PPMERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: ma ' "" ITEM NUMBER; 9 APPLICANT: PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION r� 1 ew FOR ANNEXATIO NTNG OF 35.23 ACRES 6g. N—CY- CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CIT`( 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: COM S OTHER: ro rcy of the City of Meridian. All Materials presented at public meetings shall become p Pe BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC (P.N.E.)/EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 5 TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on May 6, 1997, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Applicant appearing through its representative, Pat Tealey, the City Council of the City of Meridian having duly considered the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law approved and adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian, the evidence and testimony presented at the public hearing, and the matter makes the following Amended 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 said public hearing scheduled for May 6, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the May 6, 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. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 2. The property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The property is approximately 35.23 acres in size. 3 The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT, Rural Transitional, and is vacant land. The Applicant requests the property be zoned (R-4), Low Density Residential District. The Applicant has requested the annexation and this zoning, and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 4. The property is of agricultural use with two single family dwellings and outbuildings. The Applicant intends to develop a single -family residential subdivision known as Packard Subdivision No. 2. 5. The property is north of Fairview Avenue and west of Eagle _ Road, and borders existing subdivision developments, Chamberlain Estates, Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place and Carol's Subdivision. There exist a few small agricultural parcels ranging in size from three to five acres to the north and to the east of the property. 6. This application has been the subject of previous public hearings the first of which was on June 22, 1995. In addition, written comment of the public was received and made a part of the record of the previous public hearings on this application. The written comment of the public submitted and made part of the record of the previous public hearings previously held on this application include the following: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION (a) A letter dated June 20, 1995 from W. R. Johnson and Virginia L. Johnson, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and provides: 1. They are residents living immediately adjacent to the property; 2. The compliment the Applicant for providing larger size lots in that portion of their plan for the property which abuts their property; 3. The submit the following concerns and suggestions for consideration: a. The easterly portion of the plan for the property be redesigned to prevent Wingate Lane from being used by just anyone; b. A fence be erected between the property and Carol Subdivision to the east to prevent construction debris from blowing onto their property; and C. The Applicant complete hydrology studies now being consdered and recommended by the City's Public Works Department. 4. Wingate Lane is a private lane and should be reserved for the use of those residents presently living there. The construction of a limited use barrier or gate at the Applicant's expense may be a solution to the access to Wingate Lane; 5. There exist numerous shallow wells in their area, and nearby residents to the west in established subdivisions are on record as to complaints of poor water pressure. The application should be denied or at least tabled until the City of Meridian is certain as to no adverse effect will result on the water quality and supply from the development of the property; 6. The Applicant has made no effort to contact adjacent residents to discuss its development intentions; and 7. They request that the application be denied or tabled based their concerns. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION (b) A letter dated June 21, 1995 and a letter dated November 12, 1995 from residents of Wingate Lane, Meridian, Idaho, which letters are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and which set forth the concerns and objections to the application substantially similar to their testimony presented at the public hearings on this application; and (c) An undated letter from Vern Alleman received by the City of Meridian on June 22, 1995, which letter is incorporated herein as if set forth and which sets forth the concerns and objections to the application substantially similar to his testimony presented at the public hearings on this application. 7. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified substantially as follows at the March 11, 1997 public hearing on this application. The Applicant requests annexation and zoning of the property in conjunction with approval of a preliminary plat with a development agreement for the development of the property as a residential subdivision. The development agreement will bind the Applicant to certain items, which include fencing of the subdivision, pressurized irrigation, and sewer and water services. Although these foregoing items are not all the items to be addressed by the development agreement, the development agreement will assure the neighbors in the area that the Applicant will develop the property in a responsible manner. 8. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, further testified substantially as follows at the March 11, 1997 public hearing on this application. All of the utilities are available to the property, to -wit: water, electricity, gas, telephone, cable and other utilities. The road system of Packard Subdivision No. 1 joins the road system of the proposed development of this property, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION which permits the connection of the sewer to the south slough extension which is planned by the City of Meridian. 9. The Applicant had a neighborhood meeting on March 10, 1997 at which quite a few neighbors attended. There were discussions concerning the problems which had been voiced previously about the proposed development and some of the misconceptions which have been portrayed in the past. 10. The roadway system has been an issue and an expressed concern. Since the time the application was submitted, Dove Meadows Subdivision has been completed, which permits the connection of the proposed development to a public road system to the south. This access will be further enhanced by the development of Packard Subdivision No. 1, which will bring the public road system to the property's south boundary. Chamberlain Estates has also been improved, which provides a connection to the public road system to the west. 11. The Applicant has proposed buffering from adjacent subdivisions with larger lots. The R-4 zone imposes a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. Over 50% of the lots of the proposed development are approximately 10,000 square feet. Approximately 48% of the lots are between 10,000 and 8,000 square feet in size with 8,000 square feet being the minimum size. 12. After Packard Subdivision No. 1 was approved, the Applicant had an opportunity to purchase the Borup property which consists of 22 acres. The Applicant perceived the Borup property as a natural progression of Packard Subdivision No. 1, and the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION natural progression of development in the area. Thereafter, the Applicant had the opportunity to purchase the Brown property, which provided a solution to providing sewer service to the property. The Applicant will eliminate the lift station which is part of Packard Subdivision No. 1 and design the sewer for gravity flow along the south slough. 13. Another issue has been the use of Wingate Lane, which was a prime point of discussion at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood meeting. The Applicant has assured the neighbors that the road system of the proposed development of the property will not provide access to Wingate Lane. The road system of the proposed development will have two gates across the public road system, which will provide pedestrian and bicycle access. The two gates will also provide emergency access through break away bollards, which are specifically designed for such emergency access to either side of the area. 14. There has also been questions about irrigation. The Applicant will provide pressurized irrigation to each lot of the proposed development. The Applicant has entered into an agreement with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District who will own the system. The Applicant is presently constructing a pressurized irrigation system in Packard Subdivision No. 1 which will accommodate the Dove Meadows Subdivision, Wingate Subdivision, Packard Subdivision No. 1 and the proposed Packard Subdivision No. 2. At the cost of $85,000.00, the Applicant will provide the piping system, the pumps and the pump house. The system will be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION turned over to the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District who will own and operate it. 15. In response to questions from Commissioner Borup, the Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, responded affirmatively that the solutions to the issue concerning access to the Wingate Lane and the sewer service to the property were respectively based upon the recommendations of Ada County Highway District and of the City of Meridian's City Engineer. 16. The residents of Wingate Lane submitted a letter dated March 8, 1997 concerning this application, and the concerns and issues of such residents, which concerns and issues are substantially similar to their testimony presented at the public hearings on this application. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. - 17. There was testimony at the March 11, 1997 public hearing objecting to the application which was principally as follows: a. Dale Sharp testified substantially as follows. Mr. Sharp referred to the letter dated March 8, 1997 submitted by the residents of Wingate Lane and expressed the desire to have the Applicant address in writing the issues stated in the letter. Mr. Sharp questioned the sale of parts of the property, and whether the split of such parts of the property were legal. Mr. Sharp further testified that most of the lots which front his property are smaller lots. He believes the minimum lot size for the R-4 District is 8,000 square feet. The lots which border Carol Subdivision are larger lots, and he believes the lots which border his property should also be larger lots. He stated that the Applicant has indicated that increasing the lot size is difficult to do, but he does not think it would be difficult. The residents along Wingate Lane have been in the area for a long time; he believes longer than Carol Subdivision was developed. He objects to this proposed subdivision development on the property. It will unduly impact the educational system, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION impact traffic, the crime rate will increase, and their services will be impacted. b. Vern Alleman testified substantially as follows. At the present time, irrigation water for his property comes through the property. He understands the City requires the tiling of the ditches through the property. He is concerned about the time period in which the ditches through the property will be tiled. He desires that the ditches be tiled during the period of October 15th and March 15th; the irrigation off-season so as not to interfere with his crops. He is also concerned about the location of the irrigation ditches across the property, the size and grade of the pipe used to tile the ditches through the property and the placement of manholes. He requests that the location of or easement for the ditches through the property be recorded to avoid future problems and conflicts. He added as a matter of information that there is no agreement to allow the sewer to cross his property. In response to a question of Commissioner Borup, Mr. Alleman stated that the ditch crossing the property is the users' private ditch for delivery of irrigation water from the canal of Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. After the water passes the delivery point from the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's canal or the head gate, the delivery of the irrigation water becomes the problem of the users. The head gate is located east of the south part of Wingate Lane. In response to Commissioner Borup's clarification concerning an agreement for the sewer to cross Mr. Alleman's property, Mr. Alleman stated that it was fine that the Applicant had developed plans for the sewer so it would not have to cross his property. C. Albert Dauven testified substantially as follows. He shares the concerns expressed by Vern Alleman concerning the delivery of irrigation water. The irrigation water to his property comes further east than Mr. Alleman's water. His irrigation water comes from almost that portion of the property which was the Borup property. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has said that it can do nothing for the users to assure the delivery of the water through the ditches. The issue for the delivery of the water needs to be decided from the start of the process, since no agency governs the issue. One can ask the farmers along Ustick Road about the impact caused by contractors, and they would state that they have been inconvenienced by the contractors. So for protection, the issue of the delivery of water needs to be addressed. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, Mr Dauven stated that he wanted in writing that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION the irrigation water will be delivered to the farmers in the area, that the Applicant is not going to destroy the ditches across the property and replace six months later. Mr. Dauven, is speaking to the interruption of the flow of water during the irrigation season. With regard to access to Wingate Lane, he does not want children from the property entering the area where animals are pastured. He lives on the south slough and the animals create an attraction for kids. He has chased from his pastures kids from the Carol Subdivision probably three times a week. The animals are unpredictable. He does not want foot or bicycle traffic. They already have enough traffic, including persons riding motorcycles and snowmobiles in this area. People dump their trash, grass clippings and rocks over the bordering fence. He wants to be protected from these things, through the construction of a berm between the subdivision development on the property and Wingate Lane with a fence on top of the berm. Mr. Dauven further stated that if it is decided to put a road through on Wingate Lane, then maybe there should be an area or dead zone from the center line for no development to anticipate this roadway. He is not against the subdivision development, but he wants to see the development completed correctly. d. Don Bryan testified substantially as follows. He is a property owner on Locust Grove whom has been affected and impacted by a multitude of subdivisions in the area between Locust Grove, Fairview and Eagle Road. He has had a history of fighting water problems and the way developers develop. Some of the problems into which he has faced have managed to work out, both the pros and the cons of these developments. Because of the problems he has faced in the past, he desires to have addressed in this development to avoid problems for himself and other neighbors. The separation between agricultural areas and residential areas needs to be examined. He lives behind Fred Meyer on Fairview. He worked with the developer of that property. The developer erected a chain link fence along his property line; however, this fence .does not keep the kids away from his horses. He is in the process of posting his property with signs advising people to stay out. The vacant lot next to his property is a magnet for children, parents and dogs, and this creates a real problem. He does not know what the solution may be, but the problem needs to be examined. The issue of pressurized irrigation which the Applicant is putting into the development needs to be examined. The proposed development of this property connects with Packard Subdivision No. 1. The lateral ditches to my property from the main ditch runs along the two sides of Packard FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Subdivision No. 1. He wants the developer to state his plans for the ditches and to maintain the ditches until the property is developed. He does not know how the pressurized irrigation which the Applicant is installing will effect him or other property owners with regard to the delivery of irrigation water. He also has a concern about the flow of traffic. The traffic will apparently flow to Fairview which is beneficial to him as he lives on Locust Grove. Locust Grove is so busy he cannot access the road during peak hours. According to the Ada County Highway District traffic study, the development of the property will increase the traffic on Locust Grove by 950 vehicles per day. He questions whether Locust Grove can handle that amount of traffic until it is improved. Locust Grove is to be improved in 1998, but the improvements will probably not occur until the year 2000. In response to a question from Commissioner Borup, Mr. Bryan stated that the irrigation ditch which delivers water to his property is not affected by the proposed development of the property. e. Marc Peterson testified substantially as follows. With reference to the gates and pedestrian and bicycle access to Wingate Lane from the property, he does not agree with such access. His property is approximately 100 feet from the proposed location of the gates. He has horses and livestock on his property. He has electric fences along his property. He does not want people going up and down Wingate Lane. He is also concerned about the size of the lots. The Applicant has increased the lot sizes around Carol Subdivision, but have not increased the size of the lots directly across from his property. He believes that the size of the lots along Carol Subdivision and his property should be increased for the reason of future widening of the road and a buffer zone from the livestock. He likes the idea of a berm and fence between the property and his property. Of particular concern is that he saw the proposed subdivision plat for the first time on March 10, 1997. He was the last property owner to be approved by Ada County to have access on Wingate Lane. To have the access, he had to have a minimum five acre parcel of property. It appears that the Applicant is attempting to squeeze one more house in between his house and his neighbor's house. It appears to him that this Lot 14, Block 9 is land locked because it should not have access to Wingate Lane and it does not have access to the streets in the proposed subdivision. So he does not believe that Lot 14, Block 9 should be a buildable lot. He understands that the Applicant plans to split the lot FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION to put a lot in between the existing house on the lot and his house. f. Helen. Sharp testified substantially as follows. She cannot believe this development can be approved when there is a conflict between the proposed subdivision plat presented at this hearing and the one shown to the neighbors at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood meeting. She has spoken with Boise Planning and Zoning and there is to be no more building on Wingate Lane, which means that one cannot use Wingate Lane as a means of access to the property. She is also advised that the area is a buffer zone between Boise and Meridian. She was also advised that one cannot divide the .property if purchased after 1968. The Borup portion of the property has been sold to a young couple, which means it has not been zoned but there is a break. Her concern is that the process is not only zoning, but also planning. She would like to see some planning done in this area. Wingate Lane is a small one-half mile lane. Pictures have been presented previously, .--af--Wingate Lane, and the question is what benefit will the City of Meridian receive from this type of zoning. Meridian does not need many new houses right now. Realtors she has contacted say there are over 500 houses available, which does not include those houses which are to be built in new subdivisions. Her property abuts the property. A fence exists between her property and the property, over which people dump their grass clippings and other material. She requests that foresight be used rather than hindsight. She realizes that development is going to occur, but the development should be accomplished with planning. She does think that all of the issues have been addressed at this point. g. Dixie Roberts testified substantially as follows. She opposes the growth in the area in which the property is located. She moved out to the area for country living. The developers want to come and develop the area, and ruin it, so to speak, for the residents in the area. Her son tried to buy an acre from her tobuild on it. But, because of the zoning he could not build on the one acre parcel to be purchased from her. He was required to own five acres. One and a quarter acre have been sold since her son's attempt to purchase the one acre. Her primary concern is the availability of irrigation water, because her property is worthless without the water. She does not want a pump to irrigate her property, but wants to be able to irrigate her property the way she presently irrigates. The lay of the land allows for the irrigation of the property without a pump, and this is how the land should be irrigated. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Another issue is the number of children which will come with the development. She loves children. However, if the children enter upon her property where she has cows, the children may be injured. Although there is to be no access to Wingate Lane from the property, she is concerned about the traffic on Wingate Lane created by the proposed development of the property. h. Craig Thompson testified substantially as follows. He does not live adjacent to the property, but is concerned with what will happen in the future. The development should provide some type of blending effect. He does not know how to make the area look nice when there are five acre parcels of land next to a subdivision development with 8,000 to 10,000 square feet lots. He has a concern of children playing in the south slough. He questions how safety can be promoted with the number of people in the area. He questions why the proposed plat presented at the hearing is different from the one he saw previously. It bothers him that he is told one thing butfindsthe contrary to be true or that things are different. He thinks there are too many questions right now. The Applicant should respond to the questions and concerns presented. i. Helen Sharp further testified substantially as follows. A big issue is the crossing of Wingate Lane with the sewer line. In response to a question of clarification by Commissioner Borup, Helen Sharp stated that Wingate Lane is a dedicated private lane pursuant to a 1913 contract. She questions how the sewer line can cross this private lane. j. Vern Alleman further testified substantially as follows. He has livestock on his property. He desires a proper fence be constructed to protect against children entering the area in which livestock are pastured. 18. At the March 11, 1997 public hearing Dan Wood testified in favor of the application. Mr. Wood testified substantially as follows. The City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan provides for this area to be residential. The applicant proposing to development this into a residential area. The size of the lots in the proposed development of the property are larger than the lots of surrounding subdivisions. The proposed lot sizes meet or exceed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION the minimum requirements of the R-4 District. The Applicant is doing everything it can to help the neighbors. However, the Applicant, as the owner of the property, has rights. If it follows the requirements of the City of Meridian, Ada County and the state of Idaho, it should be able to develop the property as it desires. 19. At the March 11, 1997 public hearing, the Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, responded to the comments presented from the public substantially as follows.. With regard to irrigation water, the Applicant must see that the same quantity of water is delivered to the same place. Those neighboring land owners will receive- the same quantity of water at the same location. If these land owners desire an agency review of the Applicant's irrigation plans, the Applicant will gladly accept such review by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, whether it has jurisdiction, or the City of Meridian. The Applicant will not provide pressurized irrigation to the neighboring land owners, but will provide the irrigation water each is to receive. The Applicant does not intend to disrupt the delivery of irrigation water. The construction of the irrigation system will occur in the winter so as not to interrupt the delivery of the irrigation water. Situations do occur in which a contractor does not do what it is suppose to do or complete the work timely; however, the Applicant will do whatever it can, including entering into an agreement, to assure that the delivery of irrigation water is not disrupted. With regard to Wingate Lane, the Applicant does not plan to access Wingate Lane in any way. An additional lot along Wingate Lane was FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION discussed at the March 10, 1997 neighborhood meeting, but that additional lot is no longer part of the plan. Lot 14, Block 9 is one lot, and the Applicant does not plan to split it to create another lot. There exists a house on Lot 14, Block 9, but the owner of the house does not own the entire area of this lot represented on the proposed subdivision plat. In response to a question of Commissioner Borup, Mr. Tealey stated that it is correct that if the configuration of Lot 14 is changed, the proposed plat of the subdivision will have to change and be resubmitted for review. The Applicant does not plan and the Ada County Highway Districtdoesnot plan, based upon his conversations with it, to improve Wingate Lane. It is to remain as it is. Initially, the Applicant planned to make Wingate Lane an access to the property and to improve Wingate Lane by constructing curbs, gutters and sidewalks and install water and sewer lines. However, the Applicant was presented with so much opposition that it abandoned its attempts to improve it. The Applicant's present plans are to dead end an access road at the Alleman property, so that in the event the Alleman property is developed the road can be extended to Ustick Road. With regard to the development of Packard Subdivision No. 1, the Applicant is waiting for the approval of this application so it knows the plan for the location of the lift station. With regard to the sewer line crossing Wingate Lane, although the Applicant owns the property over which the easement exists for Wingate Lane, the Applicant cannot disrupt the use of the easement. However, the Applicant maintains that the easement FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION for Wingate Lane does not preclude the installation of utilities through the area of the easement. The Applicant believes it has the right to cross Wingate Lane with utilities. 20. Mr. Sharp further testified at the March 11, 1997 public hearing that he would like to see a gate constructed to discourage people entering upon the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's maintenance road for the Stokesberry Lateral and his property. He would like to discourage traffic there, and a gate would stop people from entering the area. 21. In response the Applicant's representative stated at the March 11, 1997 publichearingthat the Applicant had not discussed such issue with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District; however, if it wanted a gate at the location the Applicant would construct a gate there. 22. Richard A. Scarr submitted a letter dated March 10, 1997 concerning this application, and his concerns and desired requirements for the development of the property. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 23. R.W. and Mary Lee Peckenschneider submitted a letter dated March 10, 1997 concerning this application, and their concerns and desired requirements for the development of the property. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 24. Floyd F. Reichert submitted a letter dated March 10, 1997 concerning this application, and his and his wife's support of the application and their desired requirements for the development of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION the property. This letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 25. U.S. West submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included that it requests a ten feet easement along front and rear property lines, and a five feet easement along all side lot lines. 26. Idaho Power submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included that it requires a permanent ten feet wide easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. 27. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the following. Its Finch Lateral courses through the north portion of the property. The right-of-way of the Finch Lateral is 80 feet: 40 feet from the center each way. Its Stokesberry Lateral courses through the south portion of the property. The right-of-way of the Stokesberry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each way. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION The Applicant must contact it for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. It requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. 28. The Central District Health Department submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the following. After written approval from the appropriate entities are submitted, it can approve this proposal for central sewage and central water. Plans for central sewage and central water must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. Street runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 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. The engineers and architects involved with the design of the project should obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION design a storm water management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. 29. Joint School District No. 2 submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments are summarized substantially as follows: (a) The proposed subdivision will create approximately 95 homes at a median value of $115,000.00; (b) The property is located within the attendance zone for Chief Joseph Elementary, Meridian Middle School and Eagle High School. It may have to bus children in the proposed subdivision to other schools due to overcrowding; (c) Before it could support this application, it needs land dedicated to it or at least made available at a minimum price for a school site in the area. The site would need water and sewer services available. It would also need to pass another bond issue for the construction of schools; and (d) It is in a difficult position and needs assistance to deal with the impact of growth on schools. 30. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included that open spaces will need to be kept clear of trash and weeds, and whether there will be only one way in and out to E. Quartz St., N. Simerly P1. and N. Devlin Way. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 31. The Ada County Highway District submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Its submitted comments included the following: a. The Applicant provide documentation to the District that the authorized users of the private road have subordinated their rights to use the road to the Highway District to the extent that public roads and utilities may cross the easement for the private road, or an opinion from a practicing attorney that such crossings can legally occur; b. The Applicant construct all internal streets to a 37 feet back-to-back street section with 5 feet sidewalks within a 50 feet right-of-way; C. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 feet to the back of the curb; d. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners association; e. A minimum radius of 100 feet be maintained on all curves having other than a 90 degree angle of deflection; f. E. Challis Street, as depicted on the drawing on file dated September 15, 1995, shall be dedicated but not constructed across Wingate Lane until the two properties south of the street crossing . are developed and construction has been approved by the Ada County Highway District Commission. The Applicant shall deposit the cost of construction of E. Challis Street across Wingate Lane and the cost of removal of the gates required in item g., immediately hereinbelow, to the Public Rights - of -Way Trust Fund; g. Provide and install two gates, one at each end of the unconstructed portion of E. Challis Street across Wingate Lane, which will allow the passage of pedestrians and bicycles, but not automobiles, along the unconstructed section of said street; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION h. The Applicant construct a 14 feet wide all weather road along the route of sanitary sewer line in all unplatted areas of the proposed subdivision, including the portion of E. Challis Street across Wingate Lane; i. The Applicant provide a legal and physical means of access from the Reichert parcel of property to the public street system; j. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined in the Ada County Highway Districts submitted comments or comments submitted hereafter shall be made in writing to the Development Services Supervisor; k. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from the Ada County Highway District for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage; 1. The Applicant shall submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by the Ada County Highway District prior to issuance of building permits or other required permits. The proposed drainage system shall retain all storm water on-site and shall conform to the requirements of the City of Meridian; M. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat when applicable; n. The Applicant shall locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property; o. The Applicant construct pedestrian ramps on the corner of all street intersections in compliance with Idaho Code Section 40-1335; p. The Applicant dedicate a 20 feet by 20 feet right- of-way triangle, or an appropriate curve to keep street improvements within the public right-of-way, at all intersections abutting and/or within the development prior to issuance of building permits or other required permits; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION q. The Applicant continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across the parcel of property; r. The Applicant continue the borrow ditch drainage abutting the parcel of property and culverts may be required; S. The Applicant provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system; t. If street improvements are proposed, the Applicant locate obstructions; such as utility facilities, irrigation and drainage ditches and appurtenances; outside of the public right-of-way, as may be required by the Ada County Highway District. The Applicant shall obtain authorization for relocations from the appropriate entity; U. The Applicant locate proposed sign(s) out of the public right-of-way and out of the clear -vision triangle of all street and driveway intersections; V. The Applicant install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as a cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public; W. The Applicant is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. The Applicant shall purchase street name signs, sign poles and mounting hardware from the Ada County Highway District's Traffic Operation Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff; X. The Applicant shall cause to be provided a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle, no obstructions higher than 36 inches above the top of the pavement will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 feet and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 feet. The Applicant shall provide notes on the plat and street construction of these restrictions; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Y- The Applicant shall submit three sets of street construction plans to the Ada County Highway District for review and appropriate action; Z. The Applicant shall provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by the Ada County Highway District; aa. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the Ada County Highway District's standards and policies; bb. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to Ada County Highway District shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor in compliance with Idaho Code Section 54-1215; CC. The Applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval which incorporates any required design changes prior to issuance of building permits or other required permits; and dd. The construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 32. The Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted comments and may hereafter submit comments. Her submitted comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. Her submitted comments included the following: a. The Meridian Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in the area of the property. With over 75 acres annexed or proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivision No. 1 and Packard Subdivision No. 2, open space appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the both subdivisions; b. The south slough is designated as a future pathway in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION City of Meridian's requirements. Any relocation of the south slough will negate its consideration as a "natural waterway" and will require tiling; C. Perimeter fencing shall be required prior to obtaining building permits. The south slough shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement to accommodate future pathways; d. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation; e. [At the time these comments are made,] no school capacity is available to serve this subdivision; f. No access is available to the property [at the time these comments are made]; g. She has had reports that apartments have been constructed on Lot 7, Block 2. In the event these reports are accurate, this lot does not conform to the R- 4 District zoning requirements. Additionally, it would appear that this proposed lot has already been split illegally; h. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating frontage, the line length plus one-half of the curve length -is used. Some lots of the proposed subdivision; such as Lots, 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7; will need arrows indicating the direction the house must face; i. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. The south slough area should be designated as a separate lot to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association; j. Phasing of the development of the project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat; k. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605 D.; 1. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian and the appropriate public agency prior to any construction activity taking place; M. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots within the proposed subdivision; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION n. Buffering of adjacent residential rural lots is required. While consideration has been given to some adjacent property owners, the lots in Block 6 do not show the same consideration; o. All ditches crossing or abutting the property are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a variance is granted; p. Driving lanes at culdesacs, "knuckles," at the north and the south ends of N. Malachite Avenue, with a 21 feet width, do not appear to be adequate; and q. Applicant is to address all of the foregoing comments, in writing, and submit such response to the City of Meridian's Clerk's office. 33. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, submitted general and site specific comments and he or the City Engineer may hereafter submit general and site specific comments. The submitted general and site specific comments of the Assistant to the City Engineers are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and such general and site specific comments hereafter submitted by the Assistant to the City Engineer or the City Engineer shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. The general and site specific comments submitted by the Assistant to the City Engineer included the following: General Comments: a. Any existing irrigation/ drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in the proposed project shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605 M. The ditches to be piped are to be shown on the preliminary plat of the proposed subdivision. 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 the proposed project; b. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation; C. The Applicant shall 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; d. The Applicant shall submit a copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for the City of Meridian's review; e. The Applicant shall provide 5 feet sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606 B.; f. Water service to the proposed development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by the City of Meridian's compute model; g. The Applicant shall submit a letter of approval from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. The Applicant shall make any necessary corrections to the preliminary plat map prior to resubmittal to the City of Meridian; h. The Applicant is to coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent; i. The Applicant shall indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the preliminary plat map, and/or any plans to reduce said boundaries; j. The Applicant shall submit a master street drainage plan, including the method of disposal and approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district; and k. The Applicant is to respond, in writing, to all of the comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer, and submit the responses with copies of the revised preliminary plat map to the City of Meridian's Clerk's office. Site Specific Comments: a. The legal description submitted with the application and the preliminary plat appears to meet the annexation criteria of the City of Meridian and Idaho State Tax Commission; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION b. Sanitary sewer service to the property shall be via an extension of the south slough sewer interceptor. [As of the date these comments are made], the south slough interceptor is at Locust Grove Road, approximately 1,800 feet west of the proposed development. The interceptor line would need to cross the length of the proposed "Chamberlain Estates" parcel and parcel owned by Vern Alleman. Without the extended interceptor line, the proposed development is not serviceable with the City of Meridian's municipal system. The Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through the 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 the centerline. [At the time these comments are made,] the preliminary plat submitted does not show how the proposed development will be served. Until the sewer line routing is proposed, this development should not be considered; C. Water service to this property could be via mains installed in N. Hickory Way as part of the first phase of the "Dove Meadows" project; however, [at the time these comments are made,] the approved preliminary plat of "Dove Meadows" [had] expired beyond the one year time frame established by the City of Meridian's ordinances for completing the second phase. This leaves a gap of approximately 300 feet between the existing water main and property that the Applicant controls (Packard Subdivision No. 1). The Applicant shall be responsible to construct the water mains to and through the proposed development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate the main sizing and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. [At the time these comments are made, ] the preliminary plat submitted does not show how the proposed development will be served. Until the water line routing is proposed, this development should not be considered; d. The subdivision designer is to coordinate E. Carnelian street stub alignment into the proposed "Chamberlain Estates" with Hubble Engineering, Inc.; e. The Applicant is to revise the preliminary plat map to show all adjacent land use and existing zoning of properties surrounding the proposed development, including existing or approved proposed streets and lots, and to include all proposed and existing utilities including pressurized irrigation, with proposed source, and addressing all other comments of the Assistant to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION City Engineer. The Applicant is to resubmit the preliminary plat with said revisions; f. The Applicant is to submit a master street grading and drainage plan including the method of disposal and the approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district; g. One hundred watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Meridian Public Works Department. All street lights shall be installed at the Applicant's expense. Typical locations of the street lights are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants; h. The minimum street frontage for Lot 17, Block 2 shall be eighty feet, measured at the arc for the curved portion per City of Meridian ordinance; i. Lots 1 and 6, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Hickory Way. Lots 3 and 4, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Malachite Ave. Lot 5, Block 6 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards E. Meadowgrass Street. Lot 7, Block 10 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Devlin. The Applicant is to indicate said house orientations on the preliminary plat and final plat maps; j. The Applicant is to provide a 50 feet radius paved temporary turn around at the westerly end of Quartz St.; k. The preliminary plat map contour lines need to be labeled and tied to an established benchmark; 1. The preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed and dated by the design engineer or land surveyor; M. The Applicant is to provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimension and purpose of the dedication or easements; n. Any proposal for a supplementary connection from the City of Meridian's water system to pressurized irrigation system being proposed will need to be reviewed closely due to the size of the area to be watered. The Applicant shall provide a statement as to the ownership of, and operation and maintenance for the pressurized irrigation system; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION o. The Applicant is to revise the preliminary plat map to show the extension of N. Wingate Ave. across the Reichert property. The Applicant shall make provisions in the design to accommodate access from this extension to the Sharp parcel; p. The width of the pavement in the 1190 degree Knuckle" turn outs need to be reviewed and approved by the Meridian Fire Department and Meridian Joint School District No. 2; and q. The correspondence between Larry Sale of the Ada County Highway District and Gary Smith, P.E., Meridian City Engineer, respectively dated October 2, 1995 and October 12, 1995 are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 34. The Applicant's represenative, Ted Hutchinson of Tealey's Land Surveying, responded to the general and site specific comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, by letter dated December 12, 1995. The responses contained in said letter of December 12, 1995 are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 35. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified substantially as follows at the May 6, 1997 public hearing on this application. This application was originally submitted in 1995. The Applicant has been going through this process for some two and one-half years, and it has finally come to City Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously on March 11, 1997 to prepare findings of fact.and conclusions of law to support an annexation of the property. The property is adjacent to and abutting the present city limits of the City of Meridian. The property is within the area of impact to the City of Meridian, and is included in the Urban Service Planning Area of the City of Meridian. The property is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Plan as single family residential. All services can be provided to this parcel as a condition of this annexation. The Applicant is requesting R-4 zoning of the property which is consistent with the zoning in the immediate area. 36. Vern Alleman testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. As a point of clarification, the plat for the property shows the irrigation district as Settlers Irrigation District. This designation cannot be correct because the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District delivers the irrigation water and collects the irrigation taxes. He is concerned about the delivery of the irrigation water to his property which flows through the property according to plat dated April 1997. He does not find on the plat map how the irrigation water is delivered to his property through the property, or any of the applicable specifications such as size of the pipe, grade or placement of manholes. He specifically requests that as a condition of the approval of the plat that such applicable information be set forth on the plat, and the specific time period of October 15 to March 15 be designated as the period for construction of the irrigation system for the continued delivery of irrigation water to his and surrounding the property. As a result of another development and the failure of the irrigation system to be completed on time, he suffered damage to his crops due to a lack of irrigation water. Additionally, the developer, who was to install the system for the delivery of irrigation water in accordance with specific requirements, attempted to cover the system before it was FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION inspected. An inspection was made of the system. However, if the inspection had not been made, the system would have been installed improperly. Based upon his experiences, he specifically requests that Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, the City Engineer and he have the opportunity to examine and approve the installation of the irrigation water delivery system. There were problems created with the delivery of irrigation water with the development of the property where Fred Meyer is located, which he understands was the result of improper installation of that system. He understands that his irrigation water delivery system should be depicted on the plat for future reference in the event there is an issue of access for the delivery of irrigation water. Otherwise there should be a recorded easement to avoid future problems concerning access to the property in the event there is a problem with the irrigation system. Livestock and children are not compatible. He specifically requests the installation of a six foot high chain link fence on the north side of the property, and the south side of his property to prevent children and dogs from entering upon his property where livestock are pastured. He also requests the erection of a fence between the property and his property to the west, which he understands to be a requirement of the City. 37. In response to a question of Councilman Rountree, Mr. Alleman testified he does not have any objections to the annexation of the property as long as the Applicant complies with the imposed requirements. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 38. Dale Sharp testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. The Applicant has stated that it intends to provide utility services across the private road known as Wingate Lane. The agreement concerning the existence and use of Wingate Lane has existed since 1913. Wingate Lane must be maintained as a private road. The Ada County Highway District has made some comments which concerns and affects Wingate Lane, for which it has no legal basis. Addressing the issue of whether Wingate Lane is a public road, Mr. Sharp read from a letter written by his attorney as follows: "It appears evident that there is no statutory basis pursuant to Idaho Code Section 40-202 and relevant Idaho case law, including Cox vs. Cox, 84 Idaho 513, 373 P.2d 929 (1962), to support the idea that the proposed crossroad being proposed to be built across the private road would in any way satisfy the test for being a public road, so that unless the County Highway District undertook some affirmative action to declare the road a public and/or record some as a public road in compliance with such statutes. Your private road . . . [inaudible] based upon the facts as represented to me it appears that there is no satisfaction of statutory or criteria to declare the private road a public road in any respect of the current." He wanted to raise this point so in the event the Applicant crosses Wingate Lane with utilities, sewer or whatever, there cannot be access for pedestrians, bicyclists or any other unauthorized user. There exists a question of liability arising from an increase in traffic. He requests that Wingate Lane be protected from such traffic, and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION there be no public access on the road. The residents along Wingate Lane need the construction of fences and a gate across the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District road. He has spoken with Bill Henson from Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District who said the District would be willing to work with the developer to construct a gate across the District's road. As part of the approval of Packard Subdivision No. 1, the Applicant was to build a lift station in that subdivision development. However, it is now moving that lift station to the property. The moving of the lift station from Packard Subdivision No. 1 to the property renders null and void Packard Subdivision No. 1 because the lift station has been eliminated. With regard to the delivery of irrigation water, he has a ditch that courses on the side of his property which comes in behind the subdivision to the west of his property and services property adjacent to Locust Grove. He also has a lateral which courses on the east side of his property which goes down through the Brown property, past Reichert's and Brown's subdivision and services Alleman's property. The developer has stated that it will tile those ditches and assure the delivery of irrigation water. He does not want construction workers or equipment on or using Wingate Lane. Wingate Lane is a private lane, and the landowners along Wingate Lane have collectively agreed that it will remain a private lane. In the event the sewer service lines or utilities cross Wingate Lane, he does not want such lines or utilities to impede access to Ustick Road, to the homes along Wingate Lane, or otherwise inconvenience those who live along Wingate Lane. He FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 32. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION desires fences to protect livestock in the area, as well as, barriers to prevent dumping of refuse and people entering upon his and other owners' property. People throw their grass clippings over the fence onto his property. Construction workers have discarded rocks and cement on his and adjacent property. He objects to the zoning of Packard Subdivision No. 2. He does not think the development of the property is needed. Plenty of houses exist and are available. The growth is not good for services the City of Meridian provides. The schools are overly impacted by the growth. The traffic on Locust Grove is a mess. The development of the property will create more traffic on Locust Grove. With regard to the sewer system with a lift station, as pointed out by Mr. Smith at the hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Applicant cannot develop the entire subdivision because a lift station will not provide the necessary service. He thinks there needs to be amore definite statement as to the development plans for the property to avoid future changes in the plans and development of the property. He is opposed to the application. 39. Dixie Roberts testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. She shares the concerns expressed by others. Her main concern is the delivery of irrigation water. Without irrigation water her land is worthless and she does not want the delivery system changed. She does not want the pump system installed. Her property is set up for regular flow irrigation. The use of Wingate Lane is also a concern to her. It is a private lane, which the users have invested money for its FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 33. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION maintenance. She does not want other people having access to Wingate Lane. Children also present a concern. She has livestock on her property, which is in close proximity of the property. She has a concern for the safety of the children. Her son attempted to purchase from her a parcel of property, the size of which was less than five acres, upon which he was to build a house. The Applicant is now allowed to sell its property, which is adjacent to her property, in parcels which are less than five acres. She does not know how this can occur. She is opposed to the application. 40. Al Dauven testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. He lives kitty corner from the property. The Applicant's representative stated that all the surrounding property is zoned R-4. He does not know how all the surrounding property can be zoned R-4 on the east and north sides of the property when those properties are five acre parcels. The development of the property as proposed will create lower income houses with a lot of children. His attorney says that if the application is approved without certain conditions, the City of Meridian is in jeopardy of lawsuits. The City of Meridian is not providing for parks in the area of the property. A park does not exist within a four mile radius of the property. Assuming that 95 houses are constructed on the property, many children will move into this R-4 residential zone. There exists a five acre parcel next to the property with a stream running through it. He has five to eight horses pastured on his property. He is not willing to be responsible for the children from the property who come onto his FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 34. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION property. One does not know what a horse or other animal may do. The horse could charge a child and trample him or her. This issue is a consideration to the approval of the application. He acknowledges that his property is in the City of Meridian's Area of City Impact, but the residents in this area need to be contacted concerning development of the area. In the plans for the area, there is a nice green path drawn across his property, the existence of which he does not agree. No one has spoken with him about this green path, and the City of Meridian has no right to place such path on his property. The Planning and Zoning Commission is nothing but a joke. Commissioners go to sleep during the presentation of testimony and it ignores the facts. These issues are considerations for this application. The prior subdivision developments abutted property which was being farmed and no livestock pastured on it. However, this property abuts land on which livestock is pastured. He does not understand how the Applicant could split and sell the Brown house which is approximately one-half acre in size, or how the Applicant split and sold the Borup house which is less than one-half acre in size. These are issues which need to be addressed. He is not permitted to split and sell a portion of his property. These issues need to be addressed, and there must be consideration given to the residents of the adjacent properties. The development of the property impacts his life, but he is not impacting the Applicant's development. The Applicant will make a profit by impacting him. The property should be developed as the people want it developed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 35. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION The children in the subdivisions are not supervised very well, and they go onto adjacent properties and into the slough. There was an incident earlier this year in which a three year old just about drown in the ditch right-of-way just above the location of the diversion for his ditch water. Had the child's father not been there, the child would have drown. He is a Meridian businessman so he likes the development, because the development provides him business for me, but development needs to follow the applicable rules. 41. Billy Jo Premoe testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. He wants to go on record as being in opposition to the application and the development of the property. His quality of life will change if the proposed subdivision is approved. He has lived in the area of the property for 14 years, and he is probably one of the new residents in this area. He appreciates the quality of life he has. When he purchased his property on Wingate Lane, he was assured that there would be no more building along Wingate Lane. The area is in agricultural use, and he recognizes the area is changing. The majority of the residents in the area desire to keep the area as it is and beg for the considerations to their needs. 42. Mark Peterson testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. He wants to go on record as being in opposition to the application and the proposed subdivision. His property is adjacent to two sides of the proposed subdivision. He too has livestock on his property. He emphasizes that if the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 36. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION application and proposed subdivision is approved, the residents of the subdivision cannot have access to Wingate Lane. The installation of a simple barricade is not sufficient to prevent access to Wingate Lane. It is easy for children on bicycles or people walking to go around such barricade and access Wingate Lane. He is uncertain whether the Applicant has shown the surrounding property owners a proper type of barricade which it proposes to prevent access to Wingate Lane. 43. Don Brian testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. He has two concerns with the application and the proposed development of the property. His number one concern is the increase of traffic to result from the development of the property. If he does not leave his house before 7:00 a.m., he cannot get onto Locust Grove, because the traffic is bumper to bumper all day long. With regard to the consideration of this application, the City of Meridian has information concerning an Ada County District traffic study and the results of the study which date back to October 1995 when this application was first before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ada County Highway District determined that the proposed subdivision will generate approximately 950 additional trips per day on Locust Grove Road. This information dates back to January 1994. The Ada County Highway District made a traffic count of 2,794 vehicles on Locust Grove Road as of October 2, 1996, and the vehicle trips per day on Locust Grove Road were 10,026. Accordingly, a substantial difference exists between the prior study of Ada County Highway FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 37. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION District and the present traffic conditions concerning the traffic impact from this proposed development of the property. He acknowledges the position that the upkeep and development of the roadways is the responsibility of the Ada County Highway District. However, according to the Ada County Highway District, the construction date for improving and widening Locust Grove Road is in the year 2001. Consequently, the new subdivision developments create an increase in traffic, but improvements to accommodate the increase in the traffic will not occur until 2001 assuming the Locust Grove Road project is not delayed. He wanted to bring up this issue of increased traffic to determine whether other traffic studies have been completed, what solutions exist to address the traffic issue, and how it affects the approval of the application and proposed subdivision on the property. His second concern pertains to fencing and livestock. --The issue of separation of the rural and agricultural land with livestock, and the residential land. He has first hand experience with the combination of the two areas. The residents along Wingate Lane have horses, and there needs to be fencing which separates the residents of the subdivision and the livestock and prevents the residents from entering upon the property where the livestock are pastured. The residents in the developed subdivisions think they have a petting zoo behind Fred Meyer. As a result he had to post his property. As a condition of the approval of the annexation and the proposed subdivision development, there should exist a requirement for a FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 38. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION separation between the residential area and the pastures for the animals, such as a solid fence. 44. Floyd Reichert testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. He wants to go on record as being in favor of the application and the proposed subdivision. His property is adjacent to the east side of the property by the old Kirkpatrick property and Brown property on the north side. The expressed concerns to the application and proposed subdivision can probably be alleviated by tiling the irrigation ditches. When he first purchased his property along Wingate Lane, he had difficulty obtaining a building permit due to the access to his property. He was given an easement for the access as part of the deed to his property. Subsequently, the other residents along Wingate Lane have had no problem receiving approval for the construction of their houses, but now they desire to deny other people access to Wingate Lane. He has a problem with the livestock of the residents along Wingate Lane. The livestock go through the fences and rip up his flower beds and yard. If one looks at the community's interest as a whole, he believes the Applicant's development proposal is a worth while project to address the traffic problems on Fairview, Eagle Road and Locust Grove. The traffic on Ustick is bad and will only get worse. It [Wingate Lane] should be used for access through that mile section to eliminate some of the traffic problems. With regard to utilities, the utilities are under it [Wingate Lane], so public utilities lay in the right of way of Wingate Lane. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 39. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 45. Helen Sharp testified at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. The ordinances must be observed and followed. She has been advised that a buffer zone between Ada County and Meridian exists, and this buffer zone is located in the area where she lives on Wingate Lane. As a resident on Wingate Lane she desires the buffer zone to continue, and she, therefore, opposes the proposed zoning change. With regard to the applicable ordinances, Mr. and Mrs. Kirkpatrick requested to split off one acre of their property because of the work required to maintain it. They were not allowed to split their property because of the buffer zone. As a result, they were not able to do what they desired and had to sell all their property. She realizes that comprehensive plans are created and every time something is rezoned it is changed, but such changes occur when requested by a few people at the expense of those opposed. At -one corner of the property or section is a large farm and a church. At the opposite corner of the property on Locust Grove and Ustick is 20 acres of farm land, the owner of which does not propose to sell it or have it developed. She owns five acres in the area of the property, and has lived there since 1968 with the idea that one cannot split the property. Portions of the property have been split and sold by the Applicant. The splitting of the property is prohibited by ordinance, so does one abide by the ordinance or does the one with the loudest voice, such as a developer, get what is desired contrary to the ordinance. With regard to lift stations, are lift stations appropriate for the City of Meridian? If [gravity] sewer FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 40. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION is not available, the developer and the development of the property should wait until it is available. She recognizes that the City of Meridian and the entire Treasure Valley is experiencing tremendous growth. She believes more planning is needed. Development of property for the sake of development is not an answer. Livestock do occasionally escape from their pasture. She has presented pictures of the area in which the property is located, and she prefers the rural type of area rather than a mass of houses. According to realtors she has spoken with, there presently exists an abundance of houses, which does not include the houses to be constructed. Presently, there exists over 600 vacant and available houses. She believes there is no demand for the construction of additional houses. Maybe such demand will occur in the future and it is at that time she may be willing to give up her five acres for development. Potential buyers of houses in the proposed subdivision need to be advised of the lift station and the monthly or quarterly charge for the operation of the lift station. Further, when the [gravity] sewer is available the lift station will be eliminated and the residents will have to connect to the sewer. With regard to the requirement of connecting to the sewer system, the proposed development would bring the sewer within 300 feet of her property which may create the requirement to connect her property to the sewer system. The City Engineer attempted to advise the Planning and Zoning Commission that the issues concerning the sewer were not resolved, yet it was passed onto the City Council with the idea that the City Council would decide what FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 41. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION needs to be done. Additionally, Mr. and Mrs. Premoe tried to build a 20 x 40 shop on their property, but they were unable to because the size of their property was less than five acres. She recognizes that Wingate Lane is to have only four houses constructed along it, but there are many more houses. However, if a developer can rezone property and build upon it, property owners should be able to build a shop on their property. 46. The Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, responded to the comments of the public at the May 6, 1997 hearing substantially as follows. The sensitive issue appears to be Wingate Lane. The Applicant proposes no access to Wingate Lane whatsoever from the proposed subdivision. The Applicant owns the property on which Wingate Lane runs, and the residents along Wingate Lane have an easement for access. The Applicant will enter into a development agreement which will address many of the expressed concerns, such as fencing and irrigation issues. The Applicant will fence the entire property as part of the proposed subdivision. As the phases of the proposed subdivision are approved and built, the Applicant will provide for delivery of irrigation water to each parcel of property that receives irrigation through the ditch on the property. The Applicant will pipe the irrigation water, and will provide an easement for that pipe in the recorded subdivision plat on each phase. Wingate Lane will remain private with no access from the proposed subdivision. There was some mention of the Ada County Highway District traffic study. The Applicant conferred with the Ada County Highway District two months ago. Ada County FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 42. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Highway District advised the Applicant that a new traffic study is not needed, and that they have updated figures concerning traffic. The information and data supplied as part of the traffic study have not changed. The updated traffic figures from Ada County Highway District showed that the level of service for Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road will not suffer. These studies are not the Applicant's studies, but studies of the Ada County Highway District. The commuter traffic will shift from Locust Grove as a result of the construction of Hickory, which is a collector road that ends in the middle of the subdivision. Mr. Alleman alluded to the delivery of irrigation water and the problems that he has had with developers in the past. The Applicant will sign a development agreement guaranteeing him access to his irrigation water and that the Applicant shall provide easements through the plats as the subdivision phases are developed. The period for construction will be such to avoid interruption to the delivery of irrigation water. With regard to the traffic problems on Locust Grove, Ustick and surrounding roads, each of the lots in the subdivision will be assessed an impact fee to fund the construction of improvements on these surrounding roads to improve the flow traffic. 47. In response to questions of Councilman Morrow, Gary Smith, the City Engineer, commented substantially as follows. On or about April 25th he received some prints for the sewer system for the development of the property from engineer David Marks of Tealey's Land Surveying. On these prints, Mr. Marks outlined the revised location of a lift station to the northwest corner of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 43. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Packard Subdivision No. 2 from the northwest corner of Packard Subdivision No. 1. The relocation of the lift station would require the installation of some eight inch diameter lines from the northwest corner of Packard Subdivision No. 1 to the location of the lift station. The sewage then from Packard Subdivision No. 1, the proposed Packard Subdivision No. 2 and the proposed elementary school site to the east of Packard Subdivision No. 1 would flow to the northwest corner of the proposed Packard Subdivision No. 2. The sewage would then be pumped into Chamberlain Estates Subdivision which would then gravity flow into the south slough that has been built. This sewer system plan and the flow of the sewage is referred to by the Applicant as option 2. Option 1, which is shown on the [original] plan, provides for the sewer to cross Vern Alleman's property with a gravity sewer interceptor line which is an extension of -the south slough. The Applicant has spoken with Mr. Alleman over the past several years concerning an easement for the sewer line. Mr. Alleman has offered to discuss the grant of the easement subject to approximately 19 different conditions. These conditions were set forth in writing in a letter to the Applicant, a copy of which he received from Mr. Tealey for his file. At this point in time, Mr. Alleman has not consented to an easement for a gravity sewer line. However, he has spoken with Mr. Alleman recently, and he does not believe that the grant of the easement presents an insurmountable situation. However, there exist two proposals for sewering the property. The gravity sewer line to the lift station in the northwest corner of the proposed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 44. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Packard Subdivision No. 2 is less than the minimum grade for an eight inch sewer line. There is approximately 1,500 feet of line that would be at 3/10 percent slope. Mr. Marks from Tealey's Land Surveying said this grade could be increased by raising the elevation of the sewer line in Packard Subdivision No. 1. He does not know to what extent, but there apparently exists an option to increase the grade of the sewer line in Packard Subdivision No. 1. He does not think this is a significant problem. He [Mr. Marks] has estimated the velocities in the lengths of sewer lines at 3/10 percent slope at about one and one-half feet per second. This velocity is slightly less than the two feet per second minimum at which was looked for in an eight inch line. It appears that the sewer lines will be less than 4/10 percent even if the lift station is not constructed. However, these details need to be worked out. The one positive point of the relocation of the lift station from Packard Subdivision No. 1 to Packard Subdivision No. 2 is that the sewage will be pumped into the service area for the south slough. In Packard Subdivision No. 1, the sewage was pumped into another service area which is not the drainage area for Packard Subdivision No.l. The relocation of the lift station places the sewage into the south slough drainage basin. 48. In response to a further question of Councilman Morrow, Gary Smith, commented substantially as follows. The resolution for the sewering of the property is not a detailed resolution. However, he thinks there are two viable alternatives. One alternative would require the agreement of an adjacent property FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 45. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION owner for the grant of an easement for the sewer line. He does not think the grant of this easement presents an insurmountable situation, but it comes to the negotiations between the Applicant and Mr. Alleman. The other alternative is the installation of a lift station, which, from an engineering standpoint, is possible. He has not seen any details of what will occur in Packard Subdivision No. 1 as compared to that which has been approved and that which is presently under construction. He assumes that the Applicant is able to connect to the facilities being constructed in Packard Subdivision No. 1, and extend the sewer line to the north and to the west to extend the sewer lines to the northwest corner of proposed Packard Subdivision No. 2. 49. In response to questions of Councilman Morrow, Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, commented substantially as follows. She has received notarized consents to the application from property owners whose property is included as part of the application. 50. In response to a question from Mayor Corrie, Gary Smith, the City Engineer, stated that the lift station is an interim lift station. 51. With regard to the map of the proposed lift station and its presentation, the Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified substantially as follows. The map depicts the location of Packard Subdivision No. 1 and the lift station in the subdivision, which is presently an approved temporary lift station right now in this position. With regard to Packard Subdivision No. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 46. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 2, if the property is annexed and Packard Subdivision No. 2 is approved, the lift station will be moved to the area depicted on the map. The map depicts the area in which the south slough is located and the location of the last manhole of the south slough. There is 230 feet between the last manhole of the south slough and the Applicant's property. If the Applicant is granted an easement, which is option number 1, the Applicant will construct and install a gravity flow sewer line for the sewage to flow into the south slough and eliminate all of the lift stations. If the Applicant cannot come to an agreement with Mr. Alleman, it proposes locating the lift station to a location depicted on the map until Mr. Alleman sells his land, develops it himself, or the City of Meridian obtains some type of easement for construction of the south slough sewer interceptor. At such time the lift station will be eliminated, and the sewer system flows by gravity to the south slough interceptor. The 40 acres as depicted is Packard Subdivision No. 1, and to the east is the new elementary school which will receive sewer service through Packard Subdivision No. 1. The sewage would eventually flow into the south slough. 52. In response to questions of Councilman Morrow, the Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified substantially as follows. The elevation of the sewer in Packard Subdivision No. 1 can still be raised. The Applicant has not yet commenced construction of the sewer. The Applicant has had a pre- construction meeting. When it first proposed Packard Subdivision No. 1, the Applicant designed the sewer to provide ample coverage FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 47. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION of what would be developed in the southeast corner. The Applicant can raise the depth of the sewer lines a little bit in order to provide the necessary sewer flows and velocities for the flow of sewage into the south slough. As Mr. Smith stated, the velocity in the eight inch sewer line is just a little under what is needed to make it flow. It will flow but not at a sufficient velocity, which will cause more maintenance of the sewer line than would be required .for a sewer at 4/10 percent slope. . The Applicant can alleviate that problem by raising the level of the sewer in Packard Subdivision No. 1. As he previously stated, the Applicant is waiting to commence construction of Packard Subdivision No. 1 until it determines whether it has a project on the property. The sewer in Packard Subdivision No. 1 was not only for that property, but also for the school district. So, the Applicant kept the depth of the sewer line as low as it could. The raising of the sewer line to facilitate gravity flow does not include the school district. The raising of the sewer line elevation possibly removes the little bit of safety margin that would typically exist. There needs to be some flexibility in where the school is placed on the site, its height, or the amount of fill put on the site for the school. 53. In response to a question from Councilman Corrie, Gary Smith, the City Engineer, stated that the flow of the sewage into the south slough from Packard Subdivision No. 1 and Packard Subdivision No. 2 is the proper direction. 54. In response to a question from Councilman Rountree, the Applicant's representative, Pat Tealey, testified that the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 48. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Applicant had reviewed and is in general agreement with the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law adopted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 55. There were no other comments by the public regarding this application. 56. The property is adjacent and abutting the present city limits of the City of Meridian. 57. The Applicant is the owner of the majority of the property which is the subject of this application. Robert Cassell and Willa J. Cassell are the record owners of a portion of the property which is the subject of this application. Robert Cassell and Willa J. Cassell have consented to this application of the Applicant, have consented to be bound by the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law approved and adopted for this application, have consented to be bound by the ordinance annexing their property into the City of Meridian, if annexed, and have agreed to pay any and all applicable fees associated with the annexation of the property. Robert E. Coburn and Michelle L. Chesworth are the record owners of a portion of the property which is the subject of this application. Robert E. Coburn and Michelle L. Chesworth have consented to this application of the Applicant, have consented to be bound by the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law approved and adopted for this application, have consented to be bound by the ordinance annexing their property into the City of Meridian, if annexed, and have agreed to pay any and all applicable fees associated with the annexation of the property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 49. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 58. The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 59. The entire parcel of the property is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 60. The property is in an area designated on the Generalized Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family residential area. In the Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per acre. 61. In the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, Rural Areas, Section 6.3 provides that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. See COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 29. 62. The City of Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase. There exist pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. 63. The property can be physically serviced with City of Meridian water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines, and constructs and installs the necessary equipment and facilities. 64. The R-4, Low Density Residential District is described in the Zoning and Development Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows: (R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only single- family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential Development and public schools. The purpose of the (r-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 50. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non- residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System of the City of Meridian. 65. Pursuant to the Zoning and Development Ordinance, 11-2- 411 D 1., all new single-family detached housing in the (R-4) Low Density Residential District shall be constructed to contain at least 1,400 square feet of living space of which the garage is not included in determining the square footage of living space. 66. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, 112. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES 2.1U Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single- family, multi -family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities." COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 23. 67. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, RURAL AREAS, section 6.3 c.: Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings units per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided in accordance with Ada County Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances Policy. Development density below three dwelling units per acre may be allowed by conditional use permit if a cost/benefit analysis indicates positive impacts to the City of Meridian. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 29. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 51. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 68. The following pertinent statement is made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under LAND USE, RURAL AREAS, section 6.4 c.: Residential development is allowed in the rural areas provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, when Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 30. 69. The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan under HOUSING, Housing Policies: 1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes and multi -family arrangements) and choices between ownership and rental dwelling units for all income groups in a variety of locations suitable for residential development. 1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background, shall be encouraged. 1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF MERIDIAN at page 67. 70. The City of Meridian has experienced an influx in its population which influx is reasonably anticipated to continue. The property borders upon city limits of the City of Meridian, and economic conditions are making the continuation of farming in the area difficult. 71. With regard to this application, Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, made specific comments concerning the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 52. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION need of parks in the area of the property, the lack of capacity in the area schools and that the annexation should be conditioned upon a development agreement. 72. In 1992, the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which included amending Idaho Code Section 67-6513. Section 67-6513 provides in part: Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service, delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the proposed subdivision. 73. The City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in its population, and the impact such increase has upon its ability to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian is further concerned about the impact and burden placed upon the schools of Meridian School District No. 2 resulting from the influx of its population. The City of Meridian knows the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the costs of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, and parks and recreation services. The City of Meridian further knows the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 74. Pursuant to the instruction, guidance and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City of Meridian may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 53. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION if possible, would be retroactive to apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare and safety of its citizens. 75. Section 11-9-605 C of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides, "Right-of-way for. pedestrian walkways in the middle of the long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping area; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide." 76. Section 11-9-605 G of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides in part: Planting strips . . . shall conform to the following: 1. Planting Strips - Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement; . . . . 77. Section 11-9-605 A of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides in part: Public sites and open spaces shall conform to the following: 1. Natural Features - Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision; 78. Section 11-9-605 K of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 54. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined largely by natural features and, to a lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility,easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi -improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural values, especially waterways, drainageways and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities. Subdivision plats or development plans shall show the location of any lineal open space corridors. 79. Section 11-9-605 L of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobiles) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada county [sic] Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 80. Section 11-9-605 M of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides in part: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 55. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. 81. Proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. 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 City Council of the City of Meridian 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. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 56. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION 5. The City 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. 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 the annexed land, if annexed, shall meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian including, but not limited to: Section 11-9-616 which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M, which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems. 10. The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian. 11. Section 11-2-417 D of the Zoning and Development 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 57. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the 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 to enter into a development agreement for the development of the property, 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. 12. As a condition of annexation and the zoning of (R-4) Low Density Residential District, the Applicant shall enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D. The development agreement shall address,. but not limited to, the following matters: a. Inclusion into the development the requirements of 11-9-605; b. Payment by the Applicant, 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 fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, and parks and recreation 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 developmental plans of the property; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 58. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION h. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the surrounding residential development and other development; i. Addressing and complying with the present comments of and the comments hereafter made by the Planning and Zoning Administrator; j. Addressing and complying with the present general and site specific comments of and the comments hereafter made by the City Engineer and the Assistant to the City Engineer; k. Addressing and complying with the comments and requirements of the Ada County Highway District; 1. Addressing and complying with the comments and requirements of other governmental agencies submitting comments; M. Addressing the sewer and water requirements, specifically including a resolution to the physical means of providing sewer service to the property by either: (1) A grant of an easement through an adjacent parcel of property for the construction, installation and maintenance of a gravity sewer interceptor line as an extension of the south slough sewer trunk line, or (2) The construction, installation and maintenance of a temporary lift station on the property at the location as represented by the Applicant's representative, and the construction of the sewer in Packard Subdivision No. 1 to provide the necessary flow velocity of sewage to accommodate sewer service for the property and elementary school site adjacent to the property; n. Traffic plans and access into and out of any development, specifically including protecting the integrity of Wingate Lane as a private road and protecting it from unauthorized use, and erecting appropriate signage to designate Wingate Lane as a private lane with no access to or from the property; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 59. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION o. Erection or construction of non-combustible fencing around the property to protect the integrity of the surrounding adjacent properties, specifically including the area along Wingate Lane, as rural and agricultural in nature, and to provide a buffer between said surrounding adjacent property and the property; and p. Any other items or matters deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing. 13. As the property is in an area marked as a single-family residential area, the annexation and zoning. application is in conformance with the Rural Area policies. 14. The development of the property as an (R-4) Low Density Residential District, as requested by the Applicant, would be compatible to the development in the surrounding area. 15. It is therefore concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interest of the City of Meridian, and it is concluded that the annexation shall be conditioned upon meeting the requirements of these Amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and if they are not met the land may be de - annexed. 16. The requirements of the Meridian City Engineer, Meridian Planning and Zoning Administrator, Ada County Highway District, Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental agencies shall be met and, if necessary, addressed in a development agreement. 17. 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. As further conditions of annexation, the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 60. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Applicant shall not cause the interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water through ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property during the designated irrigation season; the Applicant shall maintain, including cleaning on a regular basis, the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property so as to permit the free and proper flow of irrigation water through said ditches, canals and waterways; the Applicant ghall plan, comence and perform the construction and work of tiling the ditches, canals and waterways on the property outside the designated irrigation season so as to avoid the interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water through ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property; and the Applicant may meet the requirement of tiling the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property in stages or phases of its development of the property; provided, however, in the event the Applicant causes, whether directly or indirectly, an interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water though ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property during the designated irrigation season, or the Applicant fails to maintain, including cleaning on a regular basis, the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property so as to impede the free and proper flow of irrigation water through said ditches, canals and waterways, the Applicant shall be required to and shall iuLmediately cause all ditches, canalis and waterways coursing FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 61. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION Applicant shall not cause the interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water through ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property during the designated irrigation season; the Applicant shall maintain, including cleaning on a regular basis, the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property so as to permit the free and proper flow of irrigation water through said ditches, canals and waterways; the Applicant shall plan, commence and perform the construction and work of tiling the ditches, canals and waterways on the property outside the designated irrigation season so as to avoid the interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water through ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property; and the Applicant may meet the requirement of tiling the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property in stages or phases of its development of the property; provided, however, in the event the Applicant causes, whether directly or indirectly, an interruption or disruption of the delivery of irrigation water to property which receives irrigation water through ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property during the designated irrigation season, or the Applicant fails to maintain, including cleaning on a regular basis, the ditches, canals and waterways coursing through the property so as to impede the free and proper flow of irrigation water through said ditches, canals and waterways, the Applicant shall be required to and shall immediately cause all ditches, canals and waterways coursing FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 61. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION through the property to be tiled. If the Applicant fails to meet said further conditions of annexation, the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 18. Pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 19. 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 of which shall be at the Applicant's, or its successor's, or successors' cost and expense. Said water and sewer requirements shall be performed on or before the time that the Applicant or its successor, or successors, desire to use the property or place a user on the property. 20. These conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant and its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives. 21. With compliance of the conditions and requirements contained herein, the annexation and zoning of the property as (R= 4) Low Density Residential District would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 22. 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 62. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL OF AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER MORROW VOTED COMMISSIONER BENTLEY VOTED COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED COMMISSIONER TOLSMA VOTED MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DECISION The City Council of City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application be approved for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these Amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including that the Applicant or its successors in interest, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Amended 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: "Y'� DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 63. P.N.E./EDMONDS' CONSTRUCTION • 0 AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 764 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL TOWNSHIP I3 NORTH B RANGEAS R 1 PORTION EAST, BOISE MERIDIIANT l SECTION ON 5 ADA 5 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: 19 7 0 5 t G 0 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described 4 A parcel of land situated in Gov't Lot 3, NW4 and the NE�4 f� of Section 5, T. 3N., R. 1E., B.M., Ada Cou ,,, djo:D _ � J r C more particularly described as follows: Commencingat the North I$ corner of said 1�6cti/on -5 thence alng the North line of said Section North 8944'57" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence along a line 335.00 feet West of and parallel to the North- South center of Section line of said Section 5 South 0°27'32" West 876.63 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough said point being THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0°27'32" West 404.43 feet to a point on the North line of the NEk SE'h NWk of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the NEh SE4 NA of said Section 5 South 89°32'43" East 335.00 feet to a point on the North- South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0°27'32" West 391.14 feet to a point on a line that lies 935.00 feet North of the East-West center of section line; thence along a line 935.00 feet North of and parallel to the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 1 0 0 South 89°40'20" East 569.25 feet to a point; thence along a line 569.25 feet East of and parallel to the North- South center of section line South 0°27132" West 935.00 feet to a point on the East- West center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 North 89°40'20" West 569.25 feet to the center of section of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27132" East 663.07 feet to a point marking the Southeast corner of the A SE4 NW's of said Section 5; thence along the South line of the Nh SEh NA of said Section 5 North 89°35'39" West 995.09 feet to a point marking the Southwest corner of the Eh NWS SEh NW's Of said Section 5; thence along the West line of the Eh NWh SEh NW's of said Section 5 North 0°26'23" East 663.92 feet to the Northwest corner of the Eh NW's SE4 NA of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the Eh NWh SEh NW h of said Section 5 South 89032'43" East 4.31 feet to a point on a line that lies 991.00 feet West of the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along a line 991.00 feet West of and parallel to the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0027'32" East 680.84 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough; thence along the centerline of the South Slough the following courses and distances South 85059155" East 132.90 feet (Formerly South 86°30126" East 135.83 feet) to a point; thence South 58005124" East 99.48 feet (Formerly South 58°35155" East) to a point; thence South 30°47'28" East 189.47 feet (Formerly South 31017159" East) to a point; thence South 75055125" East 191.49 feet (Formerly South 76025126" East) to a point; thence South 86007'49" East 154.36 feet (Formerly South 86°38120" East) to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 2 0 Said parcel contains 35.23 acres, more or less. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4 Residential; that the reason for the R-4 zoning is to allow development for a single family residential subdivision to be known as Packard Subdivision No. 2; 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; that all ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled including those that are property boundaries or only partially located on the property. 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, particularly as stated in the Conclusions of Law, paragraph 22. 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, 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. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 3 0 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. PASSED by the City Council and approved b the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of fie-, 1996. Sicl� APPROVED: ATTEST: CITY CLERK -- WILLIAW G. BERG, JR. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 4 STATE OF IDAHO,) • ss. County of Ada, ) 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 Amended Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 5 TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE"; passed as Amended Ordinance No. 764, by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the jsday of fie, 1997, as the same appears in my office. �J-&.Gj DATED this _� day of -jun , 1997. 1igiilllt/f�lf,• J J✓ r ? 'pityy?l e City of Me idi n Ida County, Idaho BEAL giy T 181 • ��"• STATE OF IDAHO,) �'�f>>��n�►i�us�a`��� ss. County of Ada, ) l ►.. On this %5� day of ", 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.- �,� G E L . �+ •.. m OSAR SEAL P f ^ Opp✓ °fl� ,, Notary Public for Idaho Residing at Meridian, Idaho My; commission expires: oY t>.,�q ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 5 X1.91°44'S'1�W. ��-4J.l�4 Co J 'M Pt, i tom• oF 00 faEGINNtN(� S.�o749 ` •E• w w l54, 3G�' �N cU c- ro� r ® 5 67743' F. 3a5.o a' i 764 � � �AG�d32•D i2-- .- a a N. Bit°36'3x` w. RAS. oq 1 e �1=r b N S B4'�2o"F 564.25 pec . 5'T, 3N., G? (E�, {•j, Nj, -------------- --- s n 20 a a t Meridian City Council August 5, 1997 Page 2 anyone is here waiting for that one only then I want to let you know about it. We will take it as we come down the line and the Council can make the recommendation for table at that point. ITEM #1: CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT: Corrie: Is there a representative from Packard Subdivision No. 2? Tealey: My name is Pat Tealey I am here representing the developer's of Packard Subdivision No. 2. We have read through the conditions that were supplied to us in a letter dated July 24, 1997. And have responded back to staff to address their comments and agree with all of the conditions placed on the plat. If there are any questions based on our letter back to them I would be glad to answer them. Corrie: Council, questions? Rountree: I have none, other than maybe for Gary. The response to the conditions set forth by Shari and Bruce for this subdivision have you reviewed those are they satisfactory? Smith: Yes they are. Bentley: I have a question for Mr. Smith, on item 15 on the site specific, I wasn't here for the discussion of that. Can you tell me we that refers about? Smith: I believe that was a comment that Shari Stiles brought up concerning the existing dwelling unit that was occupied by the owner of a portion of this property being platted by the name of Brown, there is an existing house on Brown property and it is my understanding from what Shari Stiles has said that there are two dwelling units on that lot. She has raised the issue of the right for those two dwelling units to be existing on that lot. That is all I know about it. Tealey: If I can maybe I could shed a little bit of light on it. The original owners the Brown's built the residence and then a shop. On the end of the shop they had living quarters for their daughter. It is essentially a one bedroom built onto the end of a shop out there. The shop is out there (inaudible). It was approved from what we have been told it was approved through the County before the City of Meridian annexed it. I believe Shari is just asking for some direction whether or not this is to make the Council aware that this is a non -conforming use on this lot. The lot itself I believe is over '/ acre. It is this lot right here, you can see on your preliminary plat this is the residence and this is shop and then the north end of the shop there is a, they originally built the place for their daughter to live. It sits on an acre and a half and that is how big the lot will be when it is platted. Meridian City Council* August 5, 1997 Page 3 Bentley: Do you have any plans to do anything with that at this time or is it going to remain Tealey: We don't own it. I think Shari was just bringing it up for your attention and whether or not there was any action that the Council wanted to take on maybe approving this non -conforming use or somehow enforcing the zoning code or City ordinance. Morrow: Follow up Mr. Mayor, did you ever own this particular lot? Was the action taken prior to your ownership? Tealey: Again I am just representing the owner and what I have been told by the owner this action took place, the split .was taking place at the real estate closing. In other words we bought the remainder, the developer bought the remainder of the land and at that same closing the people that own it now bought that other portion, the acre and a half. Morrow. So then the split was a one time split under the rules of Ada County because at that juncture the ground was not within the city limits of the City of Meridian is that correct? Tealey: That is correct but I believe that even the zone for the county at the was for a larger lot than an acre and a half. We are trying to legalize the lot now and making it a part of the plat so that it would conform to the zone that (inaudible). Bentley: So we have annexed that as part of this plat. Tealey: There is a letter from the owners in the packet that went to the City Attorney agreeing to the annexation and platting. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Gary, yesterday or the day before I gave you a copy of a letter that had been sent to you addressing some issues with respect to this preliminary plat in terms of Bruce's and Shari's issues. Where those issues addressed at that time or will they need to be addressed at the final plat stage? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow I think that the fencing issue is addressed and perhaps the type of fencing has not been addressed. But the, let me back up, the type of fencing had been addressed as a six foot high non-combustible fence perimeter fence to be installed prior to applying for building permits. Except where the City has expressly agreed in writing that such fencing is not required. It is my understanding from the copy of the letters that I saw that the property owners in Carol Subdivision were requesting a screening fence. The comment in our item 14 under site specific is it referring to a 6 foot non-combustible fence. A development agreement is required on this. I believe that the ditch along the East boundary of this subdivision is used by other than Carol Subdivision lot owners, I can't say that for certain but the ditch would be Meridian City Council August 5, 1997 Page 4 piped. Unless there are open ditches on Carol Subdivision that would need to be burned the fence would not need to be non-combustible for that reason. Not having been out to the site Councilman I can't tell you for sure what exists there. Morrow: In any event I guess my point there is that if there is discrepancy between what the plat says, between what the conditions of approval say by the time that we get to the final plat approval those things will have been resolved. I understand that the plat does call out for some cedar fencing. I want to make sure that the non-combustible areas and the screen fencing are in fact compatible or at least we would make sure that we solve that issue with some consistency based on (inaudible) at the final plat time. Smith: If you are going to approve, I guess presented tonight where they show chain I along part of the perimeter is that what requirement? if the fence plan is approved as has been nk fence along part of it and cedar fence you want to hold the applicant to that Morrow: I guess my answer to that would be is I want to make sure it is doable I don't want to see us approving cedar fence along a ditch that is on the western boundary of Carol the Eastern boundary of Packard only to find out that it is a situation where the ditch is maintained by burning it so that we burn up the fence. I understand, I am sensitive to the fact that the homeowners of Carol Subdivision wish to have a fence that is screenable. Meaning the cedar fencing but I want to make sure that we don't create a conflict there that there is not a resolution to. Smith: So it would be a, then the decision would be make at staff level whatever the condition is in the field? Morrow. I think, it has to be at least from my perspective. It seems to me like that ought to be an issue that the staff can work out the developers and or their representative Mr. Tealey can work out so that everybody clearly understands what it is we are doing. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Council, you have your conditions on the preliminary plat, what is your pleasure? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the conditions for Packard Subdivision No. 2 subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fencing issues and the location of the types of fencing that are to be put up. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the conditions subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fence issues, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1997 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JULY 15,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 15,1997: (APPROVED) 1. CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT: (APROVED) 2. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2, 1997) 3. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 - COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 19, 1997) 4. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 - TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 19, 1997) 5. TABLED JULY 15, 1997: FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS SUBDIVISION NO. 6, 37 LOTS BY RAMON & MARILYN YORGASON: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 19, 1997) 6. ORDINANCE #765 - SAUNDERS REZONE: (APPROVED) 7. ORDINANCE #766 - HANSEN ANNEXATION: (APPROVED) 8. FINAL PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDIVISION, 23 LOTS AND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY KEVIN HOWELL CONSTRUCTION: (APPROVED) 9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR DAKOTA RIDGE SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR BENITON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) Meridian City Council July 15, 1997 Page 2 ITEM #1: TABLED JULY 1, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Corrie: Is there a representative from Packard Subdivision here this evening. If you would like to kind of give us a little background here. Tealey: I am Pat Tealey, representing the developer Sigmont and Edmonds for Packard Subdivision No. 2. 1 thought I would start with just a little chronology of what has happened in the past month so everybody can understand what we have been going through and what we have been trying to do to solve the problems. On May 27th we had written a letter to Shari concerning the original comments about the subdivision that were part of her original 16 comments. This was her letter in November 13, 1995. We had originally commented but somehow the letter was misplaced by either us or the staff. We indicated in that letter rather than discuss who did what it was best just to make the comments and get over that hump. We then had a meeting on Tuesday June 3rd for City Council. The discussion was deferred because comments, staff believed that the comments had not been answered. The meeting was deferred to June 17th. On June 17th the staff called I the afternoon and said most likely the meeting would be cancelled because there was a problem with the annexation, the wrong description had been used to advertise the annexation in the paper. The annexation was we had requested was for 35 acres somehow a description was used that comprises only a half acre of that 35 acre parcel. We then faxed over a copy of the annexation description to Mr. Crookston the City Attorney and I believe that has been readvertised. That description again was originally written in 1995 as part of our annexation package. We met, that night we did meet with the Council and the Council directed the staff to set up a meeting between us and the staff and the neighbors requested that they could attend. At that time the Council indicated that the neighbors could be there to observe not to participate. We called on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of that week and on Friday, late Friday the staff called and scheduled the meeting for June 26 only giving us essentially 3 days to make comments after that meeting. At that meeting on the 26 we went over our letter, we were sitting at that table right over there. We had the preliminary plat out, I redlined all the concerns that staff had. We went through every comment, one by one specifically. I took down any concerns that were noted by staff and went back to the office to then fix up the drawing to address those. It should be noted I think in the comment, the comments from the City of Meridian by staff the 17th article in that original letter is applicant is to address all comments in writing and submit to the City Clerk. We have addressed those comments in writing, there was never any mention in the fact that we should modify our preliminary plat. I think that has been a sticky point between us and interpretation. Hopefully we solved it at that May 27th meeting. We came out of there with 5 concerns according to the notes that I kept at that meeting. We wanted some details of the fences, where they were and what they were. In other words non-combustible fences as opposed to 6 foot cedar fences and how they would relate to the surrounding land uses. The non-combustible chain link fences against rural uses and the cedar fences against residential uses. That was supplied in the fence detail plan that was submitted that next Monday. There was then talk about a Meridian City Council* 10 July 15, 1997 Page 3 turn around in phase one, this wasn't part of the original 17 items, 16 items. However we agreed that this was needed and it shows up on the plat, the preliminary plat of revised preliminary plat of Packard No. 2. There was some concern about the lot configuration in Block 6, the property that is adjacent to the Sharp's and the Reichert's. We went back and looked over, there is a question about whether or not we could count the square footage of the Stokesbury Lateral in the calculation of the lot areas. Meridian City code indicates that minimum lot size shall be determined exclusive of land that is used for streets, highways, alleys, roads, right of way, irrigation easement unless the water is conveyed through pipe or tile. We indicated that we were piping this and felt that we could then use that square footage in the inclusion of the calculation of the square footage of the lot. This later proved evidently that foot note I the City code is not, we can't use it. The staff has made an interpretation I believe on two prior subdivisions that for some reason they won't allow that square footage to be calculated even if it is piped. We wanted to have some contact and discussion with the City Council on that item and as a result we didn't agree with what the staff wrote in the comments. The fourth item that was of concern at that meeting were Gary Smith the City Engineer wanted us to provide sewer profile. Well that was also not part of the original letter of the staff. We agreed to do this, it was a short time period to provide this but Gary agreed to work with us and review those things on Tuesday the day before the meeting. As I stated before we got the corrected legal description to the City Attorney for the annexation. We have no idea where the '/ acre subdivision came from or excuse me'/ acre description came from for that annexation. It wasn't checked by the City of Meridian and when they did do it the day before the meeting they found out that it was wrong and we have gone and corrected that. Then at our Tuesday July 1St meeting we were ready to deliver the sewer profiles to Gary Smith at noon and I got a call from staff at 1:30 that said Gary Smith was sick for the day and that he would not be able to review the sewer profiles and the meeting would have to be cancelled. I called, that was called into my office. I then called Shari to confirm this and asked if Gary was the only one that could review it and we agreed that in fact that he had requested them and was probably the only one that could review it. So the meeting that night was cancelled. We then waited for the July 15th meeting however on July 8th after not hearing anything from staff again I wrote a letter and asked for a response. The letter essentially said that we had our meeting, we have gone over these items, we understand that we have addressed. If you have any more comments or discussion on this please let us know. On Friday at 5:10 after working hours we received a fax from City staff indicating there were in fact 16 conditions that they were concerned about. We have been scrambling since then essentially addressing it since Monday trying to address these 16 items. They are different from the original 16 conditions. They are legitimate concerns and we feel that we should address them. We addressed them in writing as requested at the bottom of the letter that the applicant needs to give a written response to these comments prior to approval of the preliminary plat. We did provide that in writing to the staff. Again we have modified some of the preliminary plat to take care of some of the new concerns that have arisen. As I understand it this property is annexed and zoned. There is a subdivision that will take place on this property. Whether it be this one or some other one that somebody else might come in with. I think Meridian City Council• • July 15, 1997 Page 4 we are down to the nitty gritty, there are very few things that are left on this. We are willing to work with both staff and the surrounding neighbors to make this a good subdivision for anybody and I believe it is a good subdivision. We have addressed all of the concerns I believe of staff. There may be some differences between us as far as interpretation again they asked for it in writing and I gave it in writing. There have been some modifications to the preliminary plat which were asked for as part of that meeting that we had. But I believe we are real close to having this thing done. Essentially every two weeks that this is postponed or deferred it cost our client quite a bit of money. It wouldn't be bad if it were just two weeks, essentially this has been a period of over two years. We would like to tonight call an end to discussion on this and make a decision one way or the other and move on. As I stated we are very close on this, the items that are of discussion are very minor. I believe that we can come to an agreement tonight. How would you like me to proceed? Morrow. I guess from my perspective Mr. Tealey obviously if you have a new set of requirements that were faxed to you at 5:10 or whatever Friday evening and we just now within the last 30 to 45 minutes have the response would you please review your responses from your letter dated as of today the 15 or 16 responses verbally to bring us back up to speed here? Tealey: What I will do is I will read the staff comment and then I will read my answer if there is any discussion I assume it will take place at that time. Item #1 of the July 11th letter is that "the Stokesbury Lateral easement needs to be designated as a separate lot even though tiled. Downstream water users need to have ready access to weir structures at all times and cannot expect to enter back yards of people to get their irrigation water. As Nampa Meridian Irrigation District also uses the adjacent access road on a daily basis it is not appropriate to enclose the access road along rear lot lines." My response is, "the Stokesbury lateral will be designated as a separate lot. We are piping the lateral and as such its easement area should qualify for square footage requirements. We will provide access for downstream water users and of course will not impair Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's access to their ditch. If the City of Meridian will not use the easement for lot areas the lots will still satisfy frontage and area requirements. We will obtain a letter from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for lot encroachment." What this refers to is a discussion that we had today after learning that could be a solution to it yesterday was a discussion with Bill Henson of Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. He had promised us a letter for tonight's meeting but it has not arrived. I would assume that we could somehow condition the plat that if we can't get that letter we have to wipe out a lot. I am confident we can get it, he promised it to us. This would only concern lot 1 of block 6 which is the problem area in front of the Sharp's and Reichert's, all the other lots will qualify. This is the Stokesbury lateral easement here it is down as a 40 foot strip, we have designated it as lot 1 and then renumbered all of the other lots. The lot in question is this one down here this lot 2, as of right now it has 70 feet of frontage and 7,000 square feet. However according to staff both Shari and Bruce if we can obtain this letter for the 10 foot they call it an encroachment letter we can satisfy the frontage requirement and the area requirement. The second item Meridian City Council • July 15, 1997 Page 5 from staff, "The full easement for Stokesbury Lateral has never been depicted on the plat. Lot 1, block 6 will not meet minimum square footage requirement exclusive of this easement." Our response to it was Lot 1, block 6 will meet the square footage requirements per City of Meridian code 2-410 A footnote 8 which is the one that says you can, you have to exclude those easements unless you pipe them. That is what I was relying on, however, given the fact that we can get this letter from Nampa Meridian we don't need to rely upon that part of the code. The third item, "what accommodations will be made for downstream water users to access clean outs of the ditch?" My answer, "downstream water users will have direct access or specific easements for access to all clean outs. This arrangement has been standard practice in other subdivisions such as Dove Meadows and Packard No. 1. Once the ditch is piped the need for access to the system will be greatly reduced. See the irrigation plans for easements and access." On our irrigation plan we have noted that we have ten foot easements for the irrigation system and there was one irrigation box to Mr. Alleman that was over in the middle of these lots here on the Dixie Roberts Property. We thought that we could always, he could work on an agreement with Dixie Roberts to walk back there if there ever was a problem. None of these boxes are to divert or control water, they are maintenance boxes. In other words it is nothing that you will have to go to on a daily basis to divert water to his property. We will however move this box back as far as we could and then provide a ten foot easement here. We will fence it off for him so he can get out on Wingate Lane out of his truck walk down that ten foot easement to get to this box if he so desires. All the other boxes are accessible either street frontage or Wingate Lane's frontage. The fourth item and is one that may prove to be a sticking point. I don't know how this is going to come out. "Property owners to the west of Wingate Lane have furnished a 15 foot wide easement for the private roadway. Meridian Fire Department needs a minimum access with 20 feet. Properties to the east of Wingate Lane should provide an additional 5 feet for the road right of way." My answer was, "we do not feel that we need to dedicate the additional five feet. We have been denied any access or use of Wingate Lane and feel we do not need to solve their problem." In other words there is a 15 foot strip for Wingate Lane that comes all the way from Ustick Road to a '/ mile south to the center of the section. No matter what happens in our subdivision even if we were to give them that additional five feet which we don't feel we have to there would still be a 15 foot strip for over'/ of that road. Wingate Lane starts here at Ustick, it is 15 feet down to here, it is 15 feet all the way down here to the center of the section. There has been 15 feet dedicated by us as part, we own the land that underlies this 15 foot easement and then this 15 foot has been dedicated out of the Reichert and Sharp Parcel. They need the 20 feet to be able to have emergency access down to the Sharp and Reichert Parcel. We have provided a road stub out to the Reichert Parcel so that actually they can get there by pavement much faster then coming down this'/ mile. We feel that is their problem to solve. We have been told repeatedly that we will not touch Wingate Lane, we have been denied access or any use of it even though we own the land underneath it. I just don't feel that this is an issue that needs to be solved by the developer. Item #4, "the line shown for fence construction coincide exactly with the proposed irrigation plan, fences may not be constructed on top of irrigation lines." thought that was a very simply explanation, I would assume that the first time we go to Meridian City Council July 15, 1997 Page 6 drive a post through a pipe we will realize that hey you can't build a fence there. We will not build the fences on top of the irrigation lines. Number 6, "it has been brought to our attention that the subdivision boundary as described in the legal description submitted for annexation does not appear to follow the established and monumented boundary along the south slough. It was our understanding that this line was established and monumented when the original parcel was split and that the monuments are still existing. Please explain the reason for not recognizing and using the existing monumentation." I believe Mr. Alleman came in and made a comparison between his legal description and the one we supplied for annexation and saw a difference. That was the reason for this item. My response was that the property was surveyed from a legal description supplied by Stuart Title Company and is similar to the adjoining parcel. The boundaries are identical according to the legal description, there is no conflict here whatsoever. I explained this to Bruce this afternoon. Seven, although the applicant's representative stated that there are two accesses to this site only one presently exists. There is no access from Hickory Avenue at this time as only the first phase of Packard Subdivision No. 1 has received final plat approval. Construction equipment for phase on Packard Subdivision No. 2 cannot have primary access across Wingate Lane. My response was that, "the access to Packard No. 2 will be provided for by Hickory Lane as part of Phase 2 of Packard No. 1. Right now we are constructing phase 1 of Packard No. 1 and phase 2 will bring the access road up to this first phase and that will be used for the access. Further state that the condition should read that the phase 1 of Packard No. 2 which is this phase right there will not be allowed until Hickory is constructed or built in conjunction with that first phase. Item #8, house orientation designation needs to be added to the plat on those lots that do not conform to the minimum frontage requirements. My comment there was "as requested in your prior letter item #8". On further review staff had requested and I may have misread the original letter that the lots she was interested in were lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, block 7, 1 missed the last part of it the etc. There were about 3 or 4 lots that needed to be corrected and (inaudible). They meet the frontage requirements and they area requirements. The 9th item, Lot 7, block 2 contains the non -conforming uses there is more than one building being used as a dwelling unit on the lot. This separate unit was not built by us it was built by the Brown's the former owners and as we understand and have been told by the Brown's that is was approved when it was in the County. It was built by the Brown's so a family member could stay there. What it is is a shop out in the back, I don't know if you have been out there with a living unit on the end of it. I also said refer to item 7 of a prior letter that I had written. Which essentially says that we don't own it, we didn't build it, if there is a conflict with the City ordinance I would assume that the City would take care of that situation. Item #10, the Borup property was illegally split by the developer with their full knowledge. The response to the Brown property will be "legalized" by this subdivision it will be known as Lot 14, block 9. 1 tem #11, "The City Attorney needs to further explore the legality of crossing Wingate Lane with public utilities and right of ways. The response is that "the crossing of Wingate lane should be left to discussion between the respective lawyers for the Wingate Lane uses and the developer. It seems that the Wingate Lane users are whining to the City to fight their battles. Wingate Lane users have an easement for ingress and egress and it is not an exclusive easement." In other words Meridian City Councio July 15, 1997 Page 7 an exclusive easement would bind that piece of property to only one use and that is the one stated in the easement. This is not an exclusive easement. And as such does not preclude other uses which would not interfere with their rights. We have an opinion from our lawyer, I can submit it to you. Again, this has been the pressing question all along and I believe that if the adjacent owners wish to pursue this they should use the right venue and not use the City to create a conflict that would then preclude this subdivision. Number 12, "proposed phasing sewer easements will have to be dedicated and phased (inaudible) to access the lift station with gravel accesses built in accordance with City standards." I said "the access roads for the sewer will be built in accordance with City standards." This refers to the fact that this lift station down here that was in Packard No. 1 can be eliminated and moved to the northwest corner of this subdivision. That was the reason for the sewer profiles and us putting together a sewer plan through the subdivision. If we have to build this the City will require gravel roads be over the top of this for access and maintenance. This statement I have agreed to that. Number 13, "the lift station maintenance agreement and detailed conditions of approval need to be fully worked out prior to submittal of the final plat on any phase." This condition really doesn't concern this preliminary plat however I stated "if the lift station agreements are needed they will be worked out as part of the final plat application." I am saying as needed because we may well be able to connect that thing to gravity sewer and eliminate the need for the lift station. If things can be worked out with the adjacent land owner. Fourteen, "a turn around is needed on the east side of Wingate Lane on East Challis Street. A turn around will be provided and shown on the revised preliminary plat I believe if you look at the preliminary plat you can see the 50 foot radius on the original, I believe it was lot 10. It will be built in accordance to the Ada County Highway District specifications. Number 15 is fairly lengthy, but it is an important one. It will be the last one, "the applicant's representative indicates that adequate buffering has been provided where they believe full development potential of the adjacent properties has occurred." What I am referring to there is the adjacent development being Carol Subdivision and the 5 acre lots along Wingate. None of these lots along Wingate will be allowed to be subdivided any further because of the access problem with Wingate. Unless somehow this becomes a public road. Many of these lots on the east side of Wingate are built on illegal parcels. They will not be allowed to subdivide their land or rebuild on there the way I understand it. Unless this road situation is cured and that means a public road and we all know that will never happen as discussions have taken place. In the case of Dixie Roberts property as her only access is Wingate Lane further subdivision will not be possible and adequate buffering with transitional lots in accordance with the comprehensive plan as needed. Dixie Roberts property is this parcel right in here. We have provided buffering here with 14,000 (inaudible) 3 14,000 square foot lots, a 12,800 square foot lot, 11,000 and right over here in the adjacent corner we do have four 8,000 square foot lots which are the minimum lot size in the R-8 zone. We feel we have buffered her as requested. It also means that because the Sharp's have been vocal in their opposition to the project the applicant has intentionally provided the smallest lots adjacent to their property. I was a little upset at this when I first heard it. It seems to be fairly judgmental and certainly doesn't represent the facts. The applicant when he submitted this preliminary plat in 1995 had no conversations whatsoever with the Meridian City Councio • July 15, 1997 Page 8 Sharp's as a matter of fact I have a copy of the original subdivision has we had proposed it. At that time we had foolishly thought that we could use Wingate Lane as a public access and that is why we had the road in this place. And this was before we even knew who the Sharp's were, had not heard any testimony whatsoever and once we found out that Wingate Lane could not be used we switched the road over here and put some lots along their frontage and that was our and that is what is represented here on this application in 1995. This was before any public hearings, before we had a chance to talk to the Sharp's or anything. In my comment I say "it was never the intention to place smaller lots adjacent to the Sharp property to spite them. The plat was drawn and submitted prior to any testimony by the Sharp's. We resent this implication by the staff has absolutely no basis. The other part of the comment here is Lot 1, Block 6 cannot meet minimum square footage requirements and the fact that an additional 5 feet of road easement should be provided. Larger lots need to be incorporated at this location. The comprehensive plan does not differentiate between existing rural residential lots and existing rural residential lots that may someday be further developed. My response to the second part of this comment is that "we believe we have provided the transition from R-8 and R-8 is the surrounding subdivisions, Kearny Place No. 3, Chateau Meadows Estates East No. 8 and Chamberlain Estates Subdivision." You will notice that Kearny Place and Chateau Meadows are adjacent to the Sharp property, these have 7,000 to 7,500 square foot lots adjacent to them. No problem. Chamberlain Estates comes in adjacent to us which is a total agricultural use with an R- 8 zone no problem. As a matter of fact it is against the Alleman property over here in the corner, no problem. Yet when we try to do the same thing there is a problem. I then finish by saying, "I thank you for your attention to this matter, please call at your earliest convenience." Now I think we have addressed them. In my mind I have, if my discussion here tonight raises some questions I would be glad to answer them. I am sure staff has some comments and we would like to proceed from there. Morrow. Mr. Tealey I have a question with respect to item 15, if memory serves me correctly when we were dealing with Packard No. 1 in its initial presentation to us at the City there was some issues with a first concept by which we as a Council suggested that the buffering would create a transition from Carol Subdivision which are estates. We required the lots to be larger buffering them and that change was made. I think our sense of direction was that you were to transition from Carol Subdivision over to Chamberlain basin subdivision which was R-8 and make an orderly transition between the two. Does this plat that you propose today continue that same theme that does in Packard No. 1 ? Tealey: Yes I believe it does, we have, I will just quickly go over this. We have 95 lots on 35 acres, we are getting 2.7 lots per acre in this zone that allows 4 per acre. The minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet. We have 34 lots that are in the 8,000 to 9,000 square feet which represents approximately 35 percent of it. Fifteen lots in the 9,000 to 10,000 and 46 lots 10,000+ which represents nearly 505 of the project. I believe we provided that transition. Meridian City Council* July 15, 1997 Page 9 Morrow. A follow up question please with respect to those lots sizes and your CC&R's what are you doing in terms of square footage of those homes? Tealey: I haven't been part of that discussion I really don't know, you would probably have to ask the owner and developer. (Inaudible) Tealey: The developer has indicated that 1600 square foot minimums. Morrow: Thank you Corrie: Thank you Pat, questions from staff? Morrow. Yes, I would like to hear a response from staff in terms of the issues raised by Mr. Tealey. Corrie: Shari, do you want to start or Gary do you want to start? Stiles: Is there something specifically? Corrie: I guess I had one if I may Council, on this item #1, using the easement, is there a possibility that on those lots that they can fence that easement since it is part of their lot they can fence or it is put in the development that they wouldn't be able to put fences in that easement area? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council the City has permitted that to be included as part of lots when the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District does not have an easement existing there. If it is just like a user ditch where they do not have control of it is and it is included in the back of the lots. However since they do have an existing 40 foot easement there the City has required that be fenced outside the lots unless they can obtain an encroachment agreement with Nampa Meridian and that is what they have indicated (inaudible). Rountree: I just ask Shari or Gary are there any of the responses that are not addressing the issues that you brought up? Stiles: I guess the only item I still have a question on since I did receive a plan that showed the fencing and the irrigation the fencing was exactly on the property line as was all the irrigation piping shown. So I guess if the public works department is satisfied that they will meet the requirements for access as part of their review of the development plans that will be up to them to review. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, follow up question for Gary, Gary you were working in terms of where are we going with this either lift station or gravity flow. When we last met and last Meridian City Council* • July 15, 1997 Page 10 discussed this I believe 30 days ago you were working towards a potential solution that would allow the gravity flow to take place, is that still out there? Smith: I think the major stumbling block at this point is a request by Vern Alleman that his property not be annexed by the City without his approval. I haven't received any kind of confirmation that this is possible. He wants a letter from the City of Meridian so stating. Morrow: I think that my preliminary response to that would be is that this Council cannot make that kind of a deal binding future councils. As you well know from time to time for sake for fire and police issues we have enclave annexations that clean those things up and allow those two life safety departments to conduct their jobs as they are supposed to do it. I would not be willing as a councilman to put either citizens of that area or the fire and police department in a position where the City in a liability position by virtue of agreeing to something that doesn't make good sense from our standpoint as a City. Now the practical matter there is that until the ground was a legitimate enclave and as you well know, we are due for one of those clean ups now or overdue and will probably do so within the next few months. It is a substantial amount of time before that becomes a legitimate enclave that would be susceptible to a if you will a forced annexation. Smith: That is his requirements or one of this requirements to submit to an easement for crossing his property. Morrow. That being the case let's move away from the gravity flow and because that is not likely to happen and go to the issue of the lift station. It seems to me if memory serves because we are going back some distance here that the maintenance of that lift station was to be done by the developer, the owners association. Do I have the right lift station in mind? Smith: That is correct. Morrow. The changing of this based on our prior conversation was the reason for the profile and the sewer because we talked about we had some height issues and some fall issues that we were trying to get resolved, was that satisfactorily resolved with this profile? Smith: The profile that they submitted to me shows that it can gravity at the minimum grades from the interceptor from the lift station location back to Packard No. Subdivision. There were some modifications that were made in Packard No. 1 field changes to raise the grade of some sewers to allow it to gravity flow all the way through. So from the stand point of requiring the profiles I think we aborted a problem in the future by not being able to gravity Packard No. 1 to the interceptor. Secondarily the profile requirement although I have mandated that it me submitted and part of the preliminary plat submittal it has always been a requirement of a preliminary plat as far Meridian City Council* • July 15, 1997 Page 11 as the ordinance is concerned. It is not a new ordinance requirement it is simply a requirement that I have required to be done because we have had some problems in some past subdivisions of sewers fitting the ground. Morrow: My question is that I don't disagree with your actions there and I don't disagree with the ordinance. Smith: That did prove to be a benefit it did prove that Packard No. 1 can gravity all the way to the interceptor on the south slough. Morrow. I think that is a wise decision, I think that probably in fairness to the applicant whether they were notified should have been maybe sooner or not that is a secondary issue in my mind. What is important here is that we now have confirmation that the system works and it works fine. We also have confirmation that if it is going to be the lift station which it appears it will be at this juncture that the development agreement is such that they maintain it until gravity becomes available to hook on is that correct? Smith: That is correct, I have an agreement in my packet tonight for your consideration for this lift station maintenance agreement so that they can submit their plans onto DEQ for the extension of the gravity line through Packard no. 2. Morrow. And that is part of the Department Reports, your department reports? Smith: Yes Morrow. I have another follow up question with respect to the and where did the issue in terms of 15 and 20 feet come from. Apparently, it is my understanding by prior testimony this has been a lane since the early 1900's. So why do we see an issue here from the Fire Department that they want 20 feet as opposed to the 15 feet that exists for that time frame? Smith: I don't have an answer for that Councilman, I will let Shari Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council this issue came up when the fire Marshall and Fire Chief were reviewing the plat to check actually it was the fencing plan that was submitted because of the gates that were involved whether they would be adequate for their use. It has always been their requirement that if there was a roadway that it should have a minimum of 20 feet. The only problem would be if the Sharp's decided to fence on their side of their property on the easement line there would only be 15 feet there. Morrow: Does that no describe the rest of that lane though with the exception of this small parcel. If property owners on each side of the lane decided to fence the lane it would be 15 feet (End of Tape) property owners have that same option and choose to fence then it is a 15 foot lane. So my question is that how do we justify trying to take Meridian City Council• July 15, 1997 Page 12 another 5 feet from the other side when they have already dedicated the 15 feet and from a practical standpoint you can't get there from here is my point. Stiles: That was just a comment that was brought up by the Fire Department. Morrow: Thank you Mr. Mayor, those would be my questions for now. Corrie: Any further discussion by the Council? Hearing none I will entertain a motion for preliminary for Packard Subdivision No. 2. Morrow. Mr. Mayor I think what I would like to do as a point of discussion with the rest of the Councilmen is to move to approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 and I don't want to have that motion talked about subject to staff conditions. At this juncture it seems to me that we are all over the board with the potential conditions. I think that what I would like to do is to maybe move to approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 and then see a clean up of exactly what the conditions are at this point and have the staff present at our next meeting or prior to our next meeting a write up of what the conditions of approval are. It seems to me that we have an original sixteen conditions of approval and now we have 16 more. Some of them are valid, some are not valid. So I think that what I would like to see here is a new menu of conditions of approval. Rountree: By new do you mean a new listing? Morrow. Well a joining of the two lists that we have and eliminate the stuff that has little or no relevance to this issue before us and get down to the heart of what really the conditions of approval ought to be. Those are the technical issues in terms of addressing how this plat is to be constructed. Rountree: I think that would be a good point to clarify that for everybody. Corrie: Before we get into discussion is this a motion? Morrow: No I am discussing my thoughts as to how we go. I don't want to be making a motion and stumbling all over the place. Corrie: Comments? Tolsma: I think Walt is right I think we need to get everything clarified, who is doing what. Morrow. That being the case I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction subject to a new listing of relevant conditions to the technical issues of this subdivision and that new listing of those issues to be presented to this Council at our August 5th meeting. Meridian City Councip July 15, 1997 Page 13 Rountree: Second Corrie: Okay, Council you have heard the motion to approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 subject to the new conditions set forth and brought back to City Council at the meeting of August 5th, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REZONE OF 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-8 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: Tolsma: Mr. Mayor I have to step down on this I have a conflict. Corrie: Mr. Tolsma is stepping down for a conflict of interest. Morrow. Mr. Rountree you thoughts since it is just the two of us? Rountree: I didn't have any specifics on the findings of fact. Morrow. I have no problem with them, I move to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared for us by the City Attorney. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as adopted by the Council, any further discussion? Roll call vote ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Absent, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma- Abstain, Corrie —Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow. Mr. Mayor, the City Council here by recommends that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City Council for the zoning amendment requested under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicant or its successors, interests, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement. That the property only be developed as a planned unit development under the conditional use process. That if the applicant is not agreeable to these findings of fact and conclusions of law and it not agreeable with entering into a development agreement and developing the property only as a planned unit development under the conditional use permit process the application for the zoning amendment shall be denied. 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL 0 AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1997 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JUNE 30,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JULY 1, 1997: (APPROVED) 1. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS) 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REZONE OF 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-8 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE TO R-8 BY LARRY & KAY HANSON: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) 4. FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS SUBDIVISION NO. 6, 37 LOTS BY RAMON AND MARILYN YORGASON: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 5. FINAL PLAT FOR HONOR PARK SUBDIVISION NO. 3,23 LOTS BY WILLIAM HON: (APPROVE FINAL PLAT WITH CONDITIONS) 6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DAKOTA RIDGE SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: (APPROVED) 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DEVLIN PLACE SUBDIVISION BY D.W. INC.: (APPROVED) 8. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCHEN INC. - BRET JONES: (APPROVED FINDNGS; APPROVE DECISION) 9. DEPARTMENT REPORT: A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER: 1. CHANGE ORDER: WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ROADWAY REHABILITATION: (APPROVED) 2. BID RESULTS: EMERGENCY GENERATOR PROCUREMENT PROJECT: (APPROVED) 3. WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ELECTRICAL MODIFICATIONS & WELL NO. 14 GENERATOR INSTALLATION: (APPROVED) Meridian City Council July 1, 1997 Page 8 (Inaudible) Crookston: It includes three separate pieces of property. (Inaudible) Sharp: I am interested in which properties they have got because when you are reading the descriptions because on that one 22 acres it is the PNE that owns it, there is the Browns that own it and the Castles and on the other side there is the Borup property the PNE and also the people that bought that, that couple that bought that house that was at one time the Borup's. So the way we are looking, when I went down to check the titles there actually was more than just the three pieces. So I would like to see a copy and have it checked with the records the public records to make sure they are all included in that. According to the facts and findings they have one and they were all to be included in the annexation. Corrie: One more opportunity, would anyone like to have the complete ordinance read at this time? Hearing none. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #764 with the suspension of rules. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to adopt amended Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Corrie — Yea, Tolsma — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2: Corrie: I am going to ask the Council with their approval that we table that one until the next meeting. The reason being that the agenda that was put our Friday did not have that on the original agenda it was changed on Tuesday and it hasn't had a chance to have everybody knowing about the change. I think that Morrow. Were there those of the public that were informed that is was on the agenda for tonight and so therefore they did not have an opportunity to show up? Tolsma: Yes Meridian City Council July 1, 1997 Page 9 Corrie: Council, whatever you would like to do. Rountree: I don't either, but I do have a question, was the meeting held and the issues resolved? Stiles: Yes there was a meeting held, I have received some additional information. would like to discuss that information at the next meeting. Corrie: At the next meeting of this meeting Shari? Stiles: The next meeting. Corrie: Any further discussion by Council? I will entertain a motion for table to the next meeting which would be the 15th of July. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we table item #7 until July 15. Morrow: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow to table item 7 until the July 15th meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF FRONTAGE AND SIDE STREET SETBACK BY A'a LLC: Corrie: Council, you have the findings of fact and conclusions of law on that one, any discussion or comments? Morrow. I move that we hereby adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as written, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision. � s MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1997 — 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JUNE 16,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JUNE 17,1997: (APPROVED) 1. TABLED JUNE 3,1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 2. TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 — COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 3. TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 — TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 4. TABLED JUNE 17,1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 5. TABLED JUNE 17, 1997: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE TO R-15 BY LARRY & KAY HANSEN: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 6. AMENDED ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION: (APPROVED) 7. TABLED JUNE 17, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (TABLED UNTIL JULY 15, 1997) 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF FRONT AND SIDE STREET SETBACK BY A'a LLC: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIES BY STEVEN BAINBRIDGE: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) Meridian City Council July 1, 1997 Page 7 Rountree: I just want confirmation from Shari that there are no additional issues with this property. If we were to pursue and a PUD. Stiles: I don't have any as far as the rezone. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, that being the case I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law. Crookston: I just want to reference that this is not a rezone this is an annexation and zoning. Corrie: Mr. Morrow you may proceed. Morrow. The motion would be that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for a request of annexation and zoning of approximately one acre to R-8 by Larry and Kay Hanson with a Planned Unit Development. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to instruct the City Attorney to draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law with a PUD on the annexation, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: AMENDED ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION: Corrie: Gary, did you have time to read this amended ordinance? Smith: I believe that my assistant Bruce Freckleton reviewed that and said it was okay. We started a process of sending a legal description to Wayne for inclusion into the ordinances that is stamped as approved and signed off by Bruce. I think you got that right Wayne for this ordinance? Crookston: That is correct but we did not get the legal description until yesterday at approximately 1:00. But Bruce and I have done that and he has reviewed the legal description and he says that it is fine. Corrie: AMENDED ORDINANCE #764, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NW %, SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have Amended Ordinance #764 read in its entirety? Meridian City Council* July 1, 1997 Page 8 (Inaudible) Crookston: It includes three separate pieces of property. (Inaudible) Sharp: I am interested in which properties they have got because when you are reading the descriptions because on that one 22 acres it is the PNE that owns it, there is the Browns that own it and the Castles and on the other side there is the Borup property the PNE and also the people that bought that, that couple that bought that house that was at one time the Borup's. So the way we are looking, when I went down to check the titles there actually was more than just the three pieces. So I would like to see a copy and have it checked with the records the public records to make sure they are all included in that. According to the facts and findings they have one and they were all to be included in the annexation. Corrie: One more opportunity, would anyone like to have the complete ordinance read at this time? Hearing none. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #764 with the suspension of rules. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to adopt amended Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Corrie — Yea, Tolsma — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2: Corrie: I am going to ask the Council with their approval that we table that one until the next meeting. The reason being that the agenda that was put our Friday did not have that on the original agenda it was changed on Tuesday and it hasn't had a chance to have everybody knowing about the change. I think that Morrow. Were there those of the public that were informed that is was on the agenda for tonight and so therefore they did not have an opportunity to show up? Tolsma: Yes 0 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1997 — 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JUNE 16,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JUNE 17,1997: (APPROVED) TABLED JUNE 3,1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 2. TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 — COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 3. TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 — TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 5, 1997) 4. TABLED JUNE 17,1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 5. TABLED JUNE 17,1997: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE TO R-15 BY LARRY & KAY HANSEN: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW), 6. AMENDED ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION: (APPROVED) 7. TABLED JUNE 17, 1997: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (TABLED UNTIL JULY 15, 1997) 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF FRONT AND SIDE STREET SETBACK BY A'a LLC: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIES BY STEVEN BAINBRIDGE: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION) Meridian City Council* • June 17, 1997 Page 3 ITEM #1: TABLED JUNE 3,1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 to R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: Morrow: You have in your packets a letter from Mr. Saunders requesting a table until the July 15t meeting, is there a discussion or motion to table to the July 1st meeting? Rountree: Mr. President I would move that item 1 on our agenda be tabled until our regularly scheduled meeting July 1st and item 2 as well because it is connected to the resolve of item #1. Tolsma: Second Morrow. Moved and seconded to table Item #1 the request for the rezone of approximately 9.42 acres from R-4 to R-15 by Lorin Saunders and Item #2 the request for annexation and zoning of approximately 1 acre to R-15 by Lary and Kay Hanson, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Morrow. Some guidance here Counselor, the public hearings are all completed in terms of this process. What the Council has been waiting for is a resolution of conflict between staff and the developer's representative with respect to a written response to questions that the staff has raised. The proper procedure here would be my question is the proper procedure now is do we simply ask Staff if that resolution has taken place and we press on or do we have a presentation by Mr. Tealey in terms of those responses and stand for question. If so is there an opportunity for neighbors or members of the public to ask questions concerning that? Crookston: I believe that the proper procedure would be for you and the Council to ask the staff if they have received their responses. If they have then I would move to the point of asking Mr. Tealey if he has any comments. If they have not received those then it is up to the Council as to whether or not they want to proceed further at this time or whether they want to table. it until staff receives their responses. Morrow. Thank you Tolsma: Mr. President, being as how we just received these things today and I haven't had a chance to look at them and I know the other councilmen haven't had a chance to look at them I am in favor of leaving it lay until the next scheduled meeting. They should have been in here last Thursday so we would have a chance to look at this thing. That Meridian City Council* Is June 17, 1997 Page 4 means we have not had a chance to review it, we (inaudible) to make the decision or are we going to make the decision ourselves? Morrow. It is a fair question, comments Mr. Rountree? Rountree: We did receive the information from Mr. Tealy related to the response of the comments earlier. I guess I would have a question for staff if those resolve that particular part of the issue. The other component of this is that we wanted to see a preliminary plat that reflected the conditions of the findings of fact and conclusions and the two Councilman on either side have received that but I haven't. For some reason it wasn't in my box this evening. I might have left it sitting in there somewhere too, but don't have it. Morrow: Mr. Rountree's first question was have you received in writing the response to the comments requested as you had asked some time ago. And it was Mr. Tealey's belief if memory serves me that he had submitted answers to those some time ago also. Stiles: I have received their revised comments, still have been able to find the original comments in the file. However I would like to note that the previous version was marked draft was not signed and did not address the items that I talked about. The latest letter dated May 27, 1997 although they are responses I am not satisfied with those responses and I think Council needs to review those responses carefully and look at the revised plat. Because we did just get that plat in your boxes yesterday. We do have a technical problem with this project as well. The annexation ordinance that was passed only included one of the lots that were split off. For some reason it does not include the entire parcel or two parcels for, that were propose to be annexed. So we do need to have an amended ordinance on the entire property prior to acting on this. I am still pretty concerned about the accesses and the Wingate lane situation. I think before we are able to prepare adequate development agreements for this I would like a little more detail on how that is working out. Also they have that shown on a preliminary plat exactly where those fences are going to be. Morrow. Does that answer your question? Rountree: I had a question about the annexation ordinance, was that a result of the inadequate property description or do you know? Stiles: I believe what happened is it has been so long since the original description was provided and then some additional legal descriptions were provided or warranty deeds when the parcels that had been split off they gave new notarized consents and had legal descriptions with them. Well I think that was taken and put in the annexation ordinance inadvertently. Bruce Freckleton didn't get a chance to review that until today. The actual ordinance that was prepared. Meridian City Council* • June 17, 1997 Page 5 Morrow: Any further questions? Mr. Crookston then is Ms. Stiles point correct that the annexation ordinance being flawed action could not proceed on the preliminary plat this evening anyway? Crookston: That is correct, if the preliminary plat includes any land that has not annexed excuse me any land that would not be annexed because it was not included in the annexation ordinance. I draw the ordinances and the descriptions were taken from the descriptions that I had. Morrow. Thank you, your pleasure Council? Rountree: Well I would have a questions for Mr. Tealy related to the ordinance. Does that encompass the preliminary plat that we just received or is that less than. Tealey: We supplied adequate descriptions to the City for the annexation. Whether inadvertently they were left portions of it were left out I don't know I haven't seen that ordinance I have no idea what they used for a description. The descriptions we supplied were adequate. Rountree: Well my opinion we don't have enough information to act on this this evening. I guess what I would like to see done is that staff, council, and Mr. Tealey get together and resolve these issues once and for all so we don't continue to keep coming back at this and maybe he feels that he has done that. Tealey: Can I make just one comment? Rountree: If you let me get through here. Which will be real quick. It seems to me coming back and forth on these issues is not productive for anyone. If we can't reach an agreement and get a subdivision that we feel comfortable putting together a development agreement on then possibly as Mr. Tolsma indicated we make a decision to put an end to this or get it moving forward. Coming back and forth like this in my opinion is not productive for the neighbors, the developer or us. I would move to table to our next regularly scheduled meeting July 1St with a meeting that is arbitrated if it has to be to get these issues resolved. So we get answers, the developer knows what the questions are with the City and the City what the answers and they are provided so we can have sufficient information from which to make a decision. Morrow. Let me ask you this, do you wish at this time to, it seems to me in order to do that we set up or have one of the staff set up a meeting and have some mandatory attendance by members of our staff with some instructions from us to be prepared to come to resolution. Meaning bring all of their information and be prepared to act on that day certain and that meeting and Mr. Tealey (inaudible) and the folk that he represents or has in terms of the information that he has be at that same meeting. So (inaudible) did you wish to put that in the form of a motion? Meridian City Council. June 17, 1997 Page 6 Rountree: Certainly, I a sense you stated so I won't restate it so I will move that. Tolsma: Second Morrow. It has been moved and seconded to table the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction for the final time to July 1. In the interim there be a mandatory meeting set between members of our staff representative from PNE/Edmonds to iron out the technical issues and for each to come to the meeting prepared with the information that has been missing or to resolve the conflict over what is missing and what isn't missing, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow. Mr. Tealey. Ms. Stiles will notify you of the date and the time of that meeting, please be prepared with anything that you need to resolve the final issues. In the interim Mr. Crookston, for our next meeting you will have prepared a corrected. annexation ordinance so that we can correct flaw and proceed forward. Crookston: As soon as I get the legal description for the corrected (Inaudible) Morrow. It will be up to Mr. Tealey to review and respond to the City and if the problem is within the City then we will find out where it is and resolve it from within the city. Tealey: The motion is exactly what I was going to ask for, the only communication we get between the staff and ourselves is at these meetings and we just can't come together on it because we don't know what the questions are going to be. Thank you for mandating the meeting. (Inaudible) Morrow. Well I think you can certainly be there to observe, it is not a meeting where there is testimony taken. It is a technical meeting in terms of ironing out the issues such as legal descriptions and those types of things. Then at our next meeting we will bring it off the table and then deal with that as a Mayor and a Council at that time. (Inaudible) Morrow: It will be a meeting that you cannot participate in but you can observe because it is not a publicly noticed meeting. ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST BY WINNIE ARD: 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL of AGENDA TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997 — 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD MAY 27,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JUNE 3,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JUNE 3,1997: (APPROVED) TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS (TABLED UNTIL JULY 1, 1997) 2. TABLED JUNE 3, 1997: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE TO R-15 BY LARRY & KAY HANSEN: (TABLED UNTIL JULY 1, 1997) 3. TABLED JUNE 3,1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION (TABLED UNTIL JULY 1, 1997) 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST BY WINNIE ARD: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE VARIANCE) 5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR REDUCTION OF FRONT AND SIDE STREET SETBACK BY A'a LLC: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIES BY STEVE LYONS AND STEVEN BAINBRIDGE: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE NEW FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 7. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST BAKERY & ESPRESSO — 815 E. 1ST STREET: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION — WITH AMENDMENTS) 8. REQUEST FOR A BEER LICENSE FOR THE CIGARETTE STORE BY BOB CUNNINGHAM: (APPROVED) 9. REQUEST FOR HOOK UP TO CITY SEWER FOR 1695 S. LOCUST GROVE BY AUSTIN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT: (APPROVE WITH DOUBLE FEES) 10. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER: s Interoffice Memo Datec April 28,1998 To: Will Berg, Jr. — City Clerk cc file Fm= GARY D. SMITH, PE RE Packard Subdivision — Off-site Sewer Line Extension Here is an original signature Line of Credit for construction of the off-site sewer line to serve the Packard Subdivision. This is a combination line of credit and guarantee to the City of Meridian that the project will or can be completed. I have talked with Tammy Wheeler at this bank and she tells me the loan will close this Friday, May 1, at Pioneer Title. 1 am releasing building permits on the basis of this document, with the statement on the permit that "no occupancy permit will be issued prior to completion of the off-site sewer by the developer." If, for some reason, the loan does not close I will cease to issue building permits. Regards, ary. GDS 1 a 0 CITY OF MERIDIAN PHONE MESSAGE MEMO Talked with67:M rnq Date Zd Time 3•,SS p.m. (initials) Of S49rh Bank Phone No. 373 " 3/k / Re 0-79s /m e/z Ute. Lean V__,' placed call Party called I returned call My I message reply Party's message Aivny�wyt" / 510 d d . vao r �C aa�a iy Den. / Crtn.�Tia� t vt� rt l 357, 70 Action or follow-up necessary G�re�Gt, ✓vv4l�%�vQ-�a- �G �7' d��t-�'�1. �� �4���� Project No. Project title Place in File Copy to n... �!� 1 oaf - At Tammy Nakamura Wheeler Vice President and Business Banking Officer Boise Business Banking Center WESTERN 161 N. Capitol Boulevard /� N ���/ B.A Boise, Idaho 83702 (208)373-3161 A division of Mobile: (208) 867-2013 Washington Mutual Bank Fax: (208) 373-3165 j J wEsTmv BAIL, A division of Wasliiugton Mutual April 27, 1998 Boise • Business Banking Center Walter T. Sigmont, Jr. and Ruth A. Sigmont Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc. Wirt Edmonds and Frances D. Edmonds Edmonds Construction, Inc. Packard Subdivision Dear Ted and Wirt, 161 N. Capitol Blvd. (208) 373-3151 Boise, ID 83702 Fax: (208) 373-3165 RECEIVED The following is our commitment letter for the non -revolving credit line to finance the development of the sewer extension in Packard Subdivision . We would appreciate your business and would enjoy the opportunity to work with you during this upcoming year as your bank. THE CREDIT FACILITY I. CREDIT LINE BORROWER: Walter T. Sigmont, Jr. and Ruth A. Sigmont Pacific Northwest Electric, Inc. Wirt Edmonds and Frances D. Edmonds Edmonds Construction, Inc. AMOUNT: $185,000 MATURITY: 1 year AMORTIZATION• Interest due monthly. All proceeds from lot releases will be sent to Western Bank. PRICING: Western Bank Prime Rate as such rate changes plus 1.5%, fully floating. Fee - 1% or $1,850 INTEREST RATE CALCULATION: 365 day year and an actual day month. COLLATERAL: Deed of Trust EXPENSES: Borrower shall be responsible for payment of all costs and expenses incurred by Bank in the documenting or servicing of this Loan including but not limited to: recording and filing fees, etc. APR 2 8 1998 MEFMAN CITY ENGIEER Printed on Recycled Paper FDIC Insured ieNoea The terms and conditions of this commitment are not limited to the above terms and conditions. Those matters which are not covered or made clear in the above outline are subject to mutual agreement of the parties, as a condition of funding. This commitment is conditional on the preparation, execution and delivery of legal documentation in form and substance satisfactory to us and our counsel, incorporating substantially the terms and conditions outlined or referred to above, other matters that are a part of the Bank's concern as a lender, and the absence of a material adverse change in the financial condition or the operation of the Borrower since the date of the Borrower's financial statement. Very truly yours, Western Bank, a division of Washington Mutual Bank Tammy N. Wheeler Vice President and Business Banking Officer *The proceeds from this loan will be held in reserve and delivered in cashier check form directly to Superior Construction & Excavating, Inc. If the work is not completed in full by Superior Construction & Excavating then the reserved funds will be paid directly to City of Meridian for completion of the sewer addition for Packard Subdivision. The previously mentioned borrowers arI in agreement of this procedure. / n Walter T. Sigmont—Jr. U' ,-- % TUE 12:01 SUPHKIOK MSTKIX: IUN t M NU. 884 SUM F. U2 POr �'Conf uc# v qx enc..:. .: X.. idleittp-83i1Ei0 Q(f>ae (08) 884-'4011 • Fats (248j 884'5080 ' Pacific Nom Elad(c Ombatd , Bojs - Idaho 83705 ,: Propasaf Pot : • PACKARDSUDDIMON SEWM EXrENTION - D�1T 7ma 27ti1998 r ••1#emi. � DESCRiPTIQN OF WORK iYr'Y . U!M UN • .1�dnb9 1T 1'O'r11I. C� : VRICE OF LINE TB�AIi 19" PVC 349 LF IS31.00 St0. .00 1 C PVC 3024 LF st6.30 . SSO,iW.ZO 3.' 4" ENC 1349 LF 99.50 S12,i06.OD 4 $ERVIC85 31 BA M;00 $1,354.00 S• M�►1dI10i.5 14 EA =100MSL AN -00 , T LOM MANUOL4. 2 • EA VA00.00 $4.OddAO , 4"C900 620' LF S3A4 ' 54,960.00 �.. -PRBSSM CLMN-OUT E ESA Si.450.00 $11430.0,0 9 - P'UW STATMN OOMisTU8T8. AS � PLAN& - ! 1.S $x,190.00 i4t1.104.00 ,'•. ,OVJN$R TO%uFpLy pOwm TO 1►mE3Kuw ::is 12" UMp 100 LF •,$14X0 slAwi 0. :11 t4' GRAVEL MAMWANMROAD 1 1.S 517.100.00 ',t ALL•LAIt 1�U►TS$IAI!•Ta RMWAII+[ Ol'F StY'S • ' ''- labor dt Mckdob - 0�0� fa xmrftm wm tine *bore cuss. ani 'O.,, 13E O. '[ HUNDRED' SEYBN 2a104 Sl asalislt:4.Xe:arsutped to bi ti' gsta8�ei1. • A>r worlc to ih.'e+ompl!t #th 4 rrosfa�aaliice i�#hlser scooiitbtp b� Srd ' j pwdc::. Ate! ltirstieat,or deviitia r. sant Am h�Pecidcado>�.livotvfn9 t�itti costa, will aa.dceogied e� low.wrltt3at ! grdrrr; iiad ir111.'be tut a cEhsfp OW and qibgrt t1tC'e�a;te. AII tt�rerhxtna cvatl�sautaRaa �fttka: noddwya'or• iidspii:bcyood odraottuvL 7* ii'Aot itavd ww to tit mow. .. . ,-�iti�h��'I9tod:Si�aat'or�' j •• :.Th* ibave puce:. WmUkt000r and 6"tim are wd 4#wy aid snktmby seetp" Yetm sathoillted 6'l0 , tbo,work = Ved94& Paypmnt Kill be made u "aluod above, indAgi by the 10th of amb moilm •ACC8rm. 8ipsstvrss 0 9 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: AUGUST 8. 1995 APPLICANT: PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA 1 TEM NUMBER: 2 & 3 AGENCY 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: MINUTES FROM 741-95 P & ZETING k �v SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS I1 AH Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 • Meridian Planning & Zon;ng Commission July 11, 1995 Page 2 CORPORATE PARK PHASE 5 BY RON NAHAS: Johnson: We have a letter that the applicant desires this to be pushed forward, we need to do this to a date certain. The date requested is 8-8-95 which is our next regularly scheduled meeting. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we put this item on table until our next regularly scheduled meeting August 8. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we table item #1 until our August meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED JUNE 22, 1995: ACCESSORY USE PERMIT TO SELL AN OCCASIONAL FIREARM BY JIM COMBE: Johnson: We have a letter from Mr. Combe asking to withdraw this request and withdraw his application. Does that take any kind of action Wayne? Crookston: No, you need a motion to take it off the table and then a motion to withdraw it. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we take item 2 off the table and withdraw per the request of the applicant. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we take this item off the table and approve the request by the applicant to withdraw his application, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 22, 1995: PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: At this point I will step down because 1 have an apparent conflict of interest. Rountree: I need to check with the City Attorney, is it optional to take more testimony. We held it open to receive the testimony of ACHD which we have done and staff comments. • 0 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 3 Crookston: If those were the only things that is was left open for that is all you can do. Rountree: That is my recollection, if you would check please. (Inaudible) Rountree: We don't we have staff comments. How about I just ask, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to add to their previous testimony or would like to testify on this particular item? Sharp: A couple of things that 1 wanted to clarify is that on this annexation I wanted to know just what responsibility the City of Meridian might have once that was granted. Would they really be required at that time then to make sure that sewer and water etc. the services would have to be provided? Rountree: Gary, would you answer that please? Smith: I don't know from a technical standpoint if a property is annexed if the City is required to provide services or not. In the past it has been the developer, the applicant that has been required to bring services to their property. In this particular case I had some real concerns as to how they are going to get the services to the property because we have not seen any plans that show how that is to be done. Sharp: So you are saying that this has not been resolved? Smith: I haven't seen any plans as to how the sewer is to be provided to the property. The water reportedly is to come through the number 1 parcel which is to be accessed through an undeveloped portion of Dove Meadows Subdivision for water. 1 haven't seen any plans for that I understand my assistant has talked to the applicants engineer about it, but I have not seen any plans. Sharp: I was also interested too in the first plat that we had seen there was no real, there were 2 accesses according to what the Highway Department told me when I called and I talked to 2 people down there, Mr. Joe Rosenlund and Dave Wynkoop, the attorney. Who said they have to have 2 accesses has that been shown that they do have that? If not then I am wondering why they would go ahead an annex at this time. Rountree: My recollection on the preliminary plats as proposed indicate accesses but they do not tie into existing streets at this point in time. As far as why they would request annexation at this time I think that is the developers prerogative to request it. The City will take action on their request. • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 4 Sharp: Then you are telling me that this board will not? Rountree: No, I am saying that the City will take action on the request. Sharp: I am just wanting to make sure that certain things are clarified before they asked you as a board collectively to make a decision on this. Rountree: We might ask them to clarify those issues yes. Crookston: Mrs. Sharp, with regard to the sewer and water. There would be no building permits issued until they had that available. Sharp: Okay, in other words it has to be one thing before the other? Crookston: That is correct. Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Hutchinson: I am Ted Hutchinson of Tealy's Land Surveying, office address is 109 South Fourth Street in Boise. We have this display from the last hearing which shows how all of this ties together with regard to the number of access points into this development. We will access through Dove Meadows as indicated. We do have an existing easement that was recorded in 1994 that grants as temporary easement access into this parcel with the caveat in the easement that once a public road is dedicated that the temporary easement would go away. So we do have the right to access this property. We will do a public road, we will get Mr. Leader to dedicate the road right of way which will complete that and remove the necessity of that easement. So this connection right here will be accomplished which will provide primary access into at least Packard No. 1 subdivision. We also provide an access into Wingate Place Subdivision which has access out through Chateau Drive to Locust Grove Road. With regard to the second phase or Packard Subdivision No. 2 it will access Packard 1 with its 2 primary points. We also have a proposed stub for future development which will extend east to Eagle Road. This is Chamberlain Estates No. 1 which has been approved in phase 1 1 believe they have asked for a time extension on their final plat for this. Once this is in this will provide the next access out to Locust Grove Road. Then we are also providing a stub street to the west in the event that or when Chamberlain Estates No. 2 is completed and Mr. Alleman's parcel is completed there will be connection there. We are also providing a collector with a stub to the north so that if Mr. Alleman ever decides that its a time frame to sell then we have that access as well. So we have provided those accesses. We are aware that no building permits could be issues until the services are extended. We are proposing and we have spoken with City staff about this. I talked to Gary's assistant yesterday about the proposal for the extension 0 0 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 5 of sewer across Mr. Alleman's property and there was some concern last time about an all weather road required by the City. Gary's assistant was saying that if this distance is short enough than a manhole at either end would work and they could get by without having the all surface road. This distance is about 300, little over 300 feet so it would. be possible to put a manhole on either end of this and not have the all weather surface so that they could still access into that for the provision of sewer. The developer's do want to get the sewer to this as soon as possible because we are proposing a temporary lift station in phase 1. The temporary lift station will be there until we can get sewer so it hinges on how soon this connection up here can be made so that the sewer can be extended and it would be natural for the development to come this way and then further extend the sewer so that any temporary lift station will be taken off line and there would no longer be any maintenance required for that. The water will come out of Dove Meadows. I spoke with Bill Stuart at the water department, he told us where the line needs to be. He said there is a 10 inch line at this point in Dove Meadows, we will extend that as a 10 inch line so that it comes clear through and then leave a 10 inch line up into our project so it will be brought in sewer and water. Again we are aware that the Highway District's position on the number of building permits that should or would be allowed until there is an access to Ustick and we are willing to live with those constraints. We recognize that this area as I think you can see, the entire section is getting pretty close to being ready to completely develop out. I have another exhibit that I will submit tonight and basically this would help located those persons who have testified in the past on this. I think you have heard testimony from Peterson's, Dauvin's, Thompson's, Ms. Roberts has testified, Mr. Alleman has testified, the Sharp's are right here, Mr. Reichert has testified as well, he is right here. This shows what the development is that has been approved or is proposed in this section. Again this section is building out quite quickly. Fred Meyers is proposed down here in this corner at Locust Grove and Fairview, there is a commercial center that is proposed here at the comer of Hickory Avenue and Fairview Avenue. I believe Mr. Leader is still looking at his options of coming back with the next phase of Dove Meadows. So all of this will be in place before too long. This is just a logical extension of the existing development that is occurring in that section. We do have access points, one thing I didn't mention on that other is Wingate Place No. 2 which has been tabled I believe at the developer's request that will further add to the access points which will complete some of the traffic issues that are involved with this particular development. But again this one was prepared basically to give you a good idea of where the people that testified live in relationship to this particular project. Are there any questions that I might answer from the Commission? Hepper: What is the number of lots in Packard No. 2 that Ada County Highway District says can be developed without a second access? Hutchinson: I don't know that I have that specific number yet. I have a meeting with them on Friday morning and I will have specifics on that number at that time. Meridian Plannng & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 6 Hepper: My other question was do we have the input from the Highway District yet on Wingate Lane? Hutchinson: As soon as I got the traffic study from the engineer that was submitted to your City Engineer. So that report is available, the Highway District has reviewed that and they are ready to prepare their comments. But I haven't got that number yet. Rountree: Any other questions? If you not forget, please leave those with us. Anyone else wish to provide any new testimony on this particular item. Seeing none I will close the hearing. We need to have some kind of an action. ACHD's meeting is Friday. Hepper: Gary, do you still need to meet with the developer or his representative on sewer and water routing? Smith: Yes Commissioner, we don't have any information on how they are going to get there other than what we have been told verbally, no plans have been submitted. Rountree: Those are addressed in your comments? Smith: Yes Hepper: I would move that we table this until our next scheduled meeting and give the developer time to meet with the City Engineer and also to get the ACHD recommendations. That would be August 8. Shearer: Second Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to table this item until August 8, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED JUNE 22,1995: PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Rountree: The public hearing is still open for the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2, anyone wishing to provide additional comments on that particular. Is it the same relative to the annexation? Sharp: What I did do is I did call the public library to ask on how they define easement and how that is going to be pertinent to this preliminary plat. The thing that we are hearing JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTIAKE, Secretary Chairman Johnson and Planning and Zoning Commission City of Meridian 33 Idaho Street Meridian ID 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision No.2 Dear Chairman Johnson and Commission: 1 AUG 0 3 1995 CITY � mr.tw,Aw,, August 1, 1995 We are unable to complete our review of Packard Subdivision No. 2 until additional information is supplied regarding street access to this project and projected traffic volumes on approved, but as yet unconstructed street in abutting subdivisions. We have made a request for the additional information. We ask that you defer action on this item until the traffic analysis has been completed and acted on by the Highway District. We will send a response to you as soon as one is available. Please contact me at 345-7662, if you have additional questions. Sincerely, cc: Mayor Kingsford dinator Shari Stiles, Meridian Planning Administrator Pat Dobie, Dobie Engineering Ted Hutchinson, Tealey's Land Surveying Chron Project file ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat - Packard No. 2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road, City of Meridian Packard No. 2 is a 95 -lot residential subdivision on 35.23 -acres. The site is located south of Ustick Road approximately 1/4 -mile east of Locust Grove Road, north of Packard Subdivision No. 1. This development is estimated to generate 950 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development: Locust Grove Road - Minor arterial with bike lane designation - Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94 Ustick Road - Minor arterial with bike route designation - Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92 Issues to be addressed: 1. Right-of-way requirements 2. Road improvements 3. Access width and locations 4. Limited number of lots allowed to develop until additional access to an arterial is constructed 5. Review of submitted traffic study ACHD Commission Date - July 19, 1995 - 12:00 p.m. �T R-4 • RT RT - - ---- -To-,q.--r--=- -- - 1 RT en�,P1.�,NNtit� A R1 _ i RT RT r . CAPOl• it RT RTIRT -8 R 1---- cswm5..�.� 1 R7 5�b _L_ _! , lueavisii0ns= �R1 RT i ... 7� ' • RT ..t • • Ne IRT -- RT L-0 RT r RT R RT C-3 RT El i 1RI P 1 BUSR.Ess 17 YALE R - -- - --- -- AT__ CEN -TEP z PhWSE _ Rt • 1 RT PT 'SO' RIGHT OF WAY Typwa STRUT somom -�- . 1- 30 AUG 12 19 4 29 PO 25 24 12 22 21 20 le 1-7 37 10 38 32 24 39 Wol 40 42 0 26 Ir 28 14 13 410- 4W i0i 4TIST17 14� jj .7,; 14p. FORM 'P, 77 J> m A10 o (p Z CD m cm� ;Z1 t; M, z it z -4 61 PREUMINARY PLAT OF PACURD SUBDMSION N, 2 TIALErt LAND SUAVCM IE- 6 IZ CT Facts V is 0 Vingate >r 10-15 homes. Several residents are opposed to improving Wingate Lane to public road standards and having a public road cross the private road. C. The site plan proposes 5 stub streets, none of which connect to existing streets. 1. The Hickory Way stub (to the south) will connect to Packard Subdivision No.l when constructed. 2. The Devlin Avenue stub (to the south) will eventually connect to Kearney Place Subdivision when Kearny Place Subdivision and the intervening property is developed. 3. The Carnelian Street stub (to the west) will connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No.1 when constructed. 4. The Quartz Street stub (to the west) will eventually connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No.2 when Chamberlain is constructed and when the intervening property is developed. 5. The Devlin Way stub (to the north) will eventually connect to Ustick Road as residential collector. D. Packard Subdivision No.1 abuts the southern most boundary of the proposed subdivision. Packard Subdivision No. 1 connects to Fairview Avenue via Hickory Avenue, which is a 41 - Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Page 2 • foot back-to-back street. With the development of approved development, Hickory Avenue will react, 7,500 VDT. E. It is difficult for staff to anticipate which street applicant has direct control over the scheduling stated above, additional traffic should not be Estates No.1 is the only other parcel that - expected to develop in the near future, evel insignificant value until the subdivis' is co, : E served by a sewer pump station nno, n Packard No.2 is to be served b er fr,` the include a street coihection Until this subdivi proposed 95 lots, F. This applicati " is schedi Commission n June 22 , Standard • No.1 and surrounding mimutrt volume of ill be constructed first. The or Packard No. 1, but as i Hi c venue. Chamberlain relic ry plat approval and can be e street connection would be of wer service. Packard No.1 is additional lots in Packard No.2. west corner of the site, which may D public streets with sufficient capacity to serve the this subdivision be denied. public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar da,L of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff Submitting Karen Gallagher Date of Commission Approval Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Page 3 AUG -08-1995 13:56 TEALEY'S SURVEYING 9TEALEIf'S LAND SURVEYINCS 109 South 4th street Boise, Macro 83102 (208) 385-0636 Fax: (208) 385-0696 AUG 0 8 1995 transmittal to: I Shari Stiles f= L8874813 from; I `aced Hutchinson date: LAu9—ust-8, 1995 re: I Packard Subdivision #2 pages: 3 NOTES: Shari: P.N.E./Edmonds Construction request that Packard Subdivision #2 be tabled by the Planning and Zoning Commission until we receive final comments from the Ada County Highway Disnict (see August 1, 1995 letter A.C.H.D. to Chairman Johnson). We are working with the District to find answers regarding the traffic to be generated by this subdivision. Please forward this request to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me. Ted AUG 08 195 13:50 PAGE.01 P. RUG -08-1995 13:56 TERLEY'S SURVEYING P.02 August 8, 1995 TO LEY'S LAND tog south 41' Str Boise, Idaho 83702 RVEYING (2085-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision #2 Dear Members of the Commission: This letter formally asks that your consideration of Packard Subdivision #2 be deferred until we receive final action and comments from the Ada County Highway District. The District is examining additional information regarding the tragic to be generated by this subdivision. Thank you for considering this request. Respectfully, Patrick A_ Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying Ted Hutchinson cc: P.N.E. Edmonds Construction Packard Subdivisim 02 Projed 1408 AUG 08 '95 13:50 PAGE. 02 0 Gcip-G JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary Chairman Johnson and Planning and Zoning Commission City of Meridian 33 Idaho Street Meridian ID 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision No.2 Dear Chairman Johnson and Commission: • August 1, 1995 We are unable to complete our review of Packard Subdivision No. 2 until additional information is supplied regarding street access to this project and projected traffic volumes on approved, but as yet unconstructed street in abutting subdivisions. We have made a request for the additional information. We ask that you defer action on this item until the traffic analysis has been completed and acted on by the Highway District. We will send a response to you as soon as one is available. Please contact me at 345-7662, if you have additional questions. Sincerely, cc: Mayor Kingsford dinator Shari Stiles, Meridian Planning Administrator Pat Dobie, Dobie Engineering Ted Hutchinson, Tealey's Land Surveying Chron Project file ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 • Phone (208) 345-7680 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission August 8, 1995 Page 3 Shearer: I do have a question, since we have already done this main subdivision and this Eight Mile Lateral has been in effect decisions made on how it would be handled is there any need for them to get a variance to do the other phase of the subdivision which is what we are talking about now? As I recall there was a variance before to not tile Eight Mile through this. It would seem kind of strange to either tile this portion and not the other portion or to have them have to come back for a variance for something that is already basically got a variance for, at least a portion of the subdivision. We can get bogged down enough with paperwork without. Johnson: Well, it is a new plat though is it not? What do you think Shari on that, have you been listening to the question? Stiles: Mr. Chairman, that was the only reason for the comment, this had originally come in as a PUD with no mention of tiling of ditches or anything like that. It is just the fact that it is a new plat that causes the compliance with all the ordinances in effect at the time of this subdivision. I suppose that would be a call the Council can also make since they are the ones that would act on the variance. Johnson: Thank you, any other questions? Thank you very much, this is a public hearing, is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission on this application? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing at this time. What is your pleasure? Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we pass the preliminary plat for the subject application onto the City Council with a favorable recommendation. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we pass a favorable recommendation onto the City Council regarding the plat, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED JULY 11, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: We have a request from them to defer this until final action and comments from Ada County Highway District are received and we do not have those yet. It is my understanding they meet tomorrow. We should have them for our next meeting. Karen Gallagher says no, that was in your initial correspondence, has something changed since them. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission August 8, 1995 Page 4 Gallagher: (Inaudible) Johnson: You are expecting that from? Gallagher: (Inaudible) Johnson: And they are doing it for the developer? So we are waiting for a traffic study as well is that what you are saying? Gallagher: (Inaudible) Johnson: So you are not even going to bring it on your agenda for tomorrow as originally anticipated. Gallagher: Correct Johnson: Do you have any time frame for that since we meet once a month (inaudible) to our September meeting which I believe is September 12, (inaudible). Karen would you come up to the microphone please? Gallagher: We are waiting for additional information that we have requested in the traffic study concerning some abutting streets and the traffic numbers that are currently being handled in what can be accommodated to phase this development in. We have notified the applicant and Dobey engineering of this and are simply waiting for them to get information back. That was at least last week if not 2 weeks ago that we notified them that we needed additional information. It would be difficult for me to give you a time frame since I don't know what their schedule is. Johnson: Thank you very much, I would suggest at this point that we table it again to a date certain. We do have (inaudible). Shearer: I move we table this until the next regular meeting. Johnson: Which is September 12. Rountree: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table item #2 until September 12 meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission August 8, 1995 Page 5 ITEM #3: TABLED JULY 11, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This is the same thing. Alidjani: I make a motion we table that item until September 12. Shearer: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we also table item #3 which is a preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 until September 12, 1995, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED JULY 11, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH SUBDIVISION BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: Is the applicant or his representative here and would they like to address the Commission? Forrey: Thank you Mr. Chairman, my name is Wayne Forrey and I represent Greg Johnson and Westpark Company and Gem Park II Partnership. The Planning and Zoning Commission prepared findings of fact and conclusions of law which were adopted at your last Johnson: Excuse me, does he have to be sworn? Crookston: I am just looking for that Mr. Chairman. No, he does not have to be sworn. Forrey: In those findings of fact and conclusions of law you asked that the annexation request be forwarded onto City Council and that the Council would make a determination whether or not the project could be annexed and if so then it would come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for some decision on the preliminary plat and Conditional Use Permit. We are before the Meridian City Council on August 15th. We haven't been there yet, so I would ask that you continue to table both of these items on tonight's agenda so we have the neighborhood meetings which are scheduled this week and the City Council meeting scheduled next week and then we would like to come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Forrey, anyone have any questions or comments regarding that, if not we will entertain a motion. w OFFICIALS 46 r HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. WA T W. MO ROW JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. P A Z COMMISSION SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor Phone (208) 888-4433 " FAX (208) 887-4813 , JIM JOHNSONa C h Chairman MON ON, C a KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 JIM SHEARER WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: July 11, 1995 To: Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (Annexation/Zoning and Preliminary Plat - By PNE/Edmonds Const.) I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage 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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for our review. 5. Provide 5 foot wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 6. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. 7. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. Make any necessary corrections to the Preliminary Plat map prior to resubmittal to the City. C:\WPWIN6D\GENERAL\PACKARD2.P&Z Mayor, Council and P&Z July 11, 1995 Page 2 8. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 9. Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat Map, and/or any plans to reduce said boundaries. 10. Submit a master street drainage plan, including the method of disposal & approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district. 11. Respond in writing, to the each of the comments contained in this memorandum, and submit with three copies of the revised Preliminary Plat Map to the Public Works Department. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS 1. The legal description submitted with this application and Preliminary Plat appear to meet the annexation criteria of the City of Meridian and Idaho State Tax Commission. 2. Sanitary Sewer service to this site shall be via an extension of the South Slough Sewer Interceptor. At this time the South Slough Interceptor is at Locust Grove Rd., approximately 1800 feet west of this proposed development. The interceptor line would need to cross the length of the proposed "Chamberlin Estates" parcel and one that is owned by Vern Allemen. Without the extended interceptor line, this proposed development is not serviceable with our municipal system. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through 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 the centerline. This Preliminary submittal does not show how the proposed development will be served. Until that sewer line routing is proposed this development should not be considered. 3. Water service to this site could be via mains installed in N. Hickory Way as part of the first phase of the "Dove Meadows" project, however the approved Preliminary Plat of "Dove Meadows" has expired beyond the one year time frame established in City Ordinance for completing the second phase. This leaves a gap of approximately 300 feet between the existing water main and property that this developer controls, (Packard Subdivision No. 1) Applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and through this proposed development. The subdivision designer to coordinate the main sizing and routing with the Meridian Public Works Department. This Preliminary submittal does not show how the proposed development will be served. Until that sewer line routing is proposed this development should not be considered. C:\V P M6MGENERAL\PACKARD2-P&Z Mayor, Council and P&Z July 11, 1995 Page 3 4. Subdivision designer to coordinate E. Carnelian street stub alignment into the proposed "Chamberlin Estates" with Hubble Engineering, Inc. 5. Revise the Preliminary Plat Map to show all adjacent land use and existing zoning of properties surrounding the proposed development, including existing or approved proposed streets and lots, revise the Preliminary Plat to include all proposed and existing utilities including pressurized irrigation, with proposed source, and addressing all other comments contained herein. Resubmit the Preliminary Plat with the revisions. 6. Submit a master street grading and drainage plan including method of disposal & approval from the affected irrigation/drainage district. 7. 100 watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Meridian Public Works Department. All street lights shall be installed, at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 8. The minimum street frontage for Lot 17, Block 2 shall be eighty (80) feet, measured at the arc for the curved portion, per City Ordinance. 9. Lots 1 & 6, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Hickory Way, Lots 3 & 4, Block 7 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Malachite Ave., Lot 5, Block 6 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards E. Meadowgrass Street and Lot 7, Block 10 shall have a limitation on house orientation towards N. Devlin Way. Please indicate this with an arrow on the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat Maps. 10. Provide a 50 foot radius paved temp. turn around at the westerly end of E. Quartz St. 11. The Preliminary Plat map contour lines need to be labeled and tied to an established Benchmark. 12. The Preliminary' Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Design Engineer or Land Surveyor. 13. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimension and purpose of such. 14. 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. Applicant shall provide a statement as to the ownership of and operation and maintenance for the pressurized irrigation system. C:\WPWN60\GENERAL\PACKARD2. P&Z Mayor, Council and P&Z July 11, 1995 Page 4 15. Revise the Preliminary Plat map to show the extension of N. Wingate Ave. across the Reichert Property. Provisions shall be made in the design to accommodate access from this extension to the Sharp parcel. 16. The width of the pavement in the "90° Knuckle" turn outs need to be reviewed and approved by the Meridian Fire Dept. and Meridian School Dist. C: \ WPW IN60\GENERAL\PACKARD2. P&2 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 22.1995 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 4 AGENCY 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: F�7LIlti ZiirJ SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS "REVIEWED" SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS im All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their line in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. C: \WPWIN60\GENERAL\PACKARD2. P&Z � OFFICIALS HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Wat r Wo s Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. P & Z COMMISSION DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chairman SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 8884433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: June 19, 1995 To: Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning ' From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (Annexation/Zoning and Preliminary Plat - By PNE/Edmonds Const.) I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their line in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. C: \WPWIN60\GENERAL\PACKARD2. P&Z TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council FROM: Shari L. Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: June 22, 1995 SUBJECT: Annexation and Zoning with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction 1. Applicant should schedule meetings with surrounding property owners to keep them informed and gather input on neighborhood concerns. There has been a lot of animosity expressed about the attitude of the developers toward adjacent property owners. 2. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. With over 75 acres proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. 1 and 2, open space appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the subdivisions. 3. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway. Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and City requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its classification as a "natural waterway" and will require tiling. 4. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. The South Slough shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement. 5. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 6. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 7. No access is available to this site at this time. The Dove Meadows plat has expired, and the timing of Chamberlain Estates is unknown at this time. Utilization of Wingate Lane is a major concern. There seems to be a lot of confusion and differing opinions about the ownership of the lane. 8. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating frontage, the line length plus one-half of the curve length is used. Some lots will need arrows indicating the direction the house must face (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7, etc.). 9. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. • • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON JANICE RYD. GITH,P.E.ity Engiurerneer GARY D. SMITH, P.. City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN OOR IEW ROBERT D. MORROW WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. P & Z COMMISSION DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chairman SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 8884433 • FAX (208) 8874813 CHARLIE ROUNTREE WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 TIM HEPPER GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council FROM: Shari L. Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: June 22, 1995 SUBJECT: Annexation and Zoning with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction 1. Applicant should schedule meetings with surrounding property owners to keep them informed and gather input on neighborhood concerns. There has been a lot of animosity expressed about the attitude of the developers toward adjacent property owners. 2. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. With over 75 acres proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. 1 and 2, open space appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the subdivisions. 3. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway. Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and City requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its classification as a "natural waterway" and will require tiling. 4. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. The South Slough shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement. 5. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 6. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 7. No access is available to this site at this time. The Dove Meadows plat has expired, and the timing of Chamberlain Estates is unknown at this time. Utilization of Wingate Lane is a major concern. There seems to be a lot of confusion and differing opinions about the ownership of the lane. 8. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating frontage, the line length plus one-half of the curve length is used. Some lots will need arrows indicating the direction the house must face (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7, etc.). 9. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. • P&Z Commission, Mayor and Council June 22, 1995 Page 2 10. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat. 11. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.D. 12. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian and the appropriate public agency prior to any construction activity taking place. 13. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots within this subdivision. OFFICIALS 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, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P 3 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY i C 6 A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (108) 888A433 a FAX (206) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAXYERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER 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: June 13, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road. East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P2 _CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C _MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) _ BUREAU OF RECLAMA RELIM & FINAL PLAT) _CITY FILES , _OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: RECEIVED J U N - 1 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN g ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY D TRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat - Packard No. 2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Wingate Lane s/o Ustick Road, City of Meridian Packard No. 2 is a 95 -lot residential subdivision on 35.23 -acres. The site is located south of Ustick Road approximately 1/4 -mile east of Locust Grove Road, north of Packard Subdivision No. 1. This development is estimated to generate 950 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development: Locust Grove Road - Minor arterial with bike lane designation - Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94 Ustick Road - Minor arterial with bike route designation - Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92 Issues to be addressed: 1. Right-of-way requirements 2. Road improvements 3. Access width and locations 4. Limited number of lots allowed to develop until additional access to an arterial is constructed ACHD Commission Date - June 14, 1995 - 7:00 p.m. MM RT IRT PLhNNIt1C� ASSN• -, 199 RT I , RT p,OK1%0.0 Svs L 0 - m rHRT C-3 R6 RT - - - R1 vA.L.E RE RT ' ; I o^ RT • �T RT _ter -- L -AT !--, I� RT . RT RT R � �uegN5Y0n ` RT • ''•• RT • • • • N ; .,•. •., ..; .. RT L -O RT ' W RT g;;511E55 '= ! - -- -- - -- CEAiEFl r� a PKSE i; exceeding 1,000 vehicles trips per day on local roads and how far Devlin Way should be constructed as a residential collector road from Ustick Road. D. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on June 22 . 1995. E. Staff recommends that the District withhold action on this project until a traffic study id submitted and reviewed by the District. Site Specific Requirements: 1. Submit a traffic study that determine how many lots and associated phases can be developed on each of the adjoining local streets without reaching 1,000 vehicles trips per day on local roads and how far Devlin Way should be constructed as a residential collector road from Ustick Road. Approval of this project is withheld at this time. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Page 3 Facts and Findings: A. General Information RT - Existing zoning R-4 - Requested zoning upon annexation 95 - Lots 35.2 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Locust Grove Road Minor arterial with bike lane designation Traffic count 2,794 on 1-18-94 Ustick Road Minor arterial with bike route designation Traffic count 1,791 on 8-18-92 B. Packard Subdivision No.1 abuts the southern most boundary of the proposed subdivision. Packard Subdivision No. 1 connects to Fairview Avenue via Hickory Avenue, which is a 41 - foot back-to-back street. With the development of Packard No.1 and surrounding approved development, Hickory Avenue will reach its recommended maximum volume of 7,500 VDT. C. The site plan proposes 5 stub streets, none of which connect to existing streets. 1. The Hickory Way stub (to the south) will connect to Packard Subdivision No.1 when constructed. 2. The Devlin Avenue stub (to the south) will connect to Kearney Place Subdivision when constructed. 3. The Carnelian Street stub (to the west) will connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No.1 when constructed. 4. The Quartz Street stub (to the west) will eventually connect to Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No.2 when Chamberlain is constructed and when the intervening property is developed. 5. The Devlin Way stub (to the north) will eventually connect to Ustick Road as residential collector. Without this subdivision having a residential collector road connection to Ustick Road, staff recommends that a traffic study be prepared for this subdivision to determine how many lots and associated phases can be developed on each of the adjoining local streets without Packard No.2 - MRZ-7-95/Annexation Page 2 A t1._ < r R 30 -�- ADA PLANN146 AS N• AUG 12%% 11 29 • � '\`( � B AUC 17 24 12 MI 22 p.,> � �1 a4il•� 'II..... ..«. rr• til�1. •w. ,6;1•:.. 10 ' 1 _ .< I /�YIrT• 'IMI Il0• I �� ' 1 `• •�-1 a � � > 2 I a 9 /� ' IMS• •.r1 )I :: � •,• ..n+ li un.a,l� '�. 4erw'i. .uo. ! •w.. + u1:. v: r,1 \. •+x,o.r»• 1(�u!�i i w. .v,• uie. : .m'e. ..+i�c. I'i )}w. ,'�+�4C:.�.s :.:.:� ` :IP.,s. 20 �C 8 • x,u v - i �qj ' r xk • 1� 'Y x.,. t :.\y I f Y Z ' r [ �� 1 N,.$� j � M+.s • rIN • L v l� +a. • ,i I ,uu • s.... J W , • ►141• ♦4Y�� _ --- --- -' -- i .rw. 37 ,�«�.OV: �.I I ' Y' 1 39 S8 32 24 .;,,. ..:1. ..:. i� r-#j�► 10 1. Ana+ u a MAA QW .y 40 ' 'i� 16 4 42 0 26 R,41T: tZ .n• I •In•NOi I�1 '�', 3 •3 <z9 27 ..a�r _ I I ��il 0.,.1. s IS -1.) 12 ` E LOCMMAEA Ov+ Ci.wc..�s y \ "' I �' 14 13 7 8 9 1 IC u 2 13 c-- r -- . ..:.. .� i �.• 4 5 6 3 14 ,5 ,b� 41. Q.Q. i2 E. KATELYN DR. �- f• 3 W 7 , IB 17 I A E LOL� • 2 o e I I z > i2 uj N©. 3 i g i0 3 2 7 802 13 Q �4 '3 a- 2 z A 9 .r > 4 I w a I I C 5 10 II z 3 O2 2 E Chf-TEAU DR. 3' -- -- LJ PLC N o �f _Q • 1:7 •Se Tye ,:)*: -Wt7ui S "I IN 0 7Yc ONWAW W GNrl MAilr7y�N NOISWU1E115 (19y td 10 Irld )LIIYNIR197i#d u a U J e r t '- Y J12 t i x yi II •�� I i I 'I!nRl i x >�- � x � r_ ��k•� I t �s i 1 ,=a=,•� �Ig��I —� :ui�^ • •' l+ I I �i 6�! ( �In I f1�� :,//�� :� R �;.",r�"1�1 'E x -i .it= •i t •:�_•i •1�] Q R -f R __: t.yl P` ,// m dt�L00 • ;as Iit si R. i [ �YI z '� �; :•n�^ill`s-! I,FR•-�•IIp•�Ji��•I� ,'" �.xll_�. IL If R '� tt� ° 'i •a R LR,)• I�' � t� a �f •'! p„ °; t � �i �l S - # j� : •I'• x • IE O� ,/ "x tilgl.s�..i . I I I' ,. i Ii �" � z \ A1•!— - fib•\r, A�y�:,. � i $ e/ ,i � moi= •� "Ii•� � ��'. n .'I��y •:�'�;,5 x—i t< ----tea '�, ,� '�+.•gyp\ x tf •i.��s. I � k '; � •f �'°,7 1/ _'� � ,�t ;l I �; ��ot+._ I � _ � =c . ail �I *' •. +�' 1 { ,:J - S C �'1 R I � eu _ n�1!�f�-�-JI•�J :13,y.E '� • E # I z x x x t E o r (� an 3 W G U) �,--+.}-�WWc 5 : R: °� s r 7 : f: t W a a t Oi� : Q .. z iY w L v W •w A t .= ..:. • E E W;U y �I � � �zu Ix-� � I I � i W �}t�o `� t �•�c�., � ,�1 u: Ill Q d •" --�- �u � s I e r t '- Y J12 t i x yi II •�� I i I 'I!nRl i x >�- � x � r_ ��k•� I t �s i 1 ,=a=,•� �Ig��I —� :ui�^ • •' l+ I I �i 6�! ( �In I f1�� :,//�� :� R �;.",r�"1�1 'E x -i .it= •i t •:�_•i •1�] Q R -f R __: t.yl P` ,// m dt�L00 • ;as Iit si R. i [ �YI z '� �; :•n�^ill`s-! I,FR•-�•IIp•�Ji��•I� ,'" �.xll_�. IL If R '� tt� ° 'i •a R LR,)• I�' � t� a �f •'! p„ °; t � �i �l S - # j� : •I'• x • IE O� ,/ "x tilgl.s�..i . I I I' ,. i Ii �" � z \ A1•!— - fib•\r, A�y�:,. � i $ e/ ,i � moi= •� "Ii•� � ��'. n .'I��y •:�'�;,5 x—i t< ----tea '�, ,� '�+.•gyp\ x tf •i.��s. I � k '; � •f �'°,7 1/ _'� � ,�t ;l I �; ��ot+._ I � _ � =c . ail �I *' •. +�' 1 { ,:J - S C �'1 R I � eu _ n�1!�f�-�-JI•�J :13,y.E '� • E # I z x x x t E Meridian Planning & zen9 Commission March 11, 1997 page 31ated them as noticing, other subdivisio was they have not usually g Borup: That is what I their choice. and I think that was by would put a gate there. Y Teal : If it is something that Nampa Meridian wants then we Borup: Thank you. ublic that would tertain a motion? Since there is no other person from the p MacCoy: En public hearing at this time. tike to speak we will close the p Attorney to prepare Borup: M r. Commissioner: I would move that incsta{ o the City findings of fact and conclusions of law on this app Manning: Second MacCoy: It has been stated and seconded, vote their irrigation seems to be a big Borup: would want to consider in the think for discussion I think some emphasis on concern of the neighbors, I think that is something we findings. MacCoy: All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea TEN MINUTE BREAK FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST ITEM #11: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: PACKARD SUBDIVISION N. 2 BYyou want to make a statement? MacCoy: I will open the public hearing and do g S. 0 Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Pat Tealy, 10 p. We thought that s I said I understand we had a little bi�exation and rezone•I juof procedural mess st ask that you thisTeap reliminary Plat was A included with the an this pfrom the prior item into the record. Thank you enter the public testimony the public that would like to makeot qustate ed toacome MacCoy: Is there anybody from you are n time? Your earlier statements will be carried forward, back up here if you don't feel like it. Meridian Planning & zing Commission 0 March 11, 1997 Page 32 Borup: I do have a question for the applicant then. This is, (inaudible) it looks like on here that there were between the two properties 3 existing residences, is that correct, 2 in the Brown property and 1 on Lot 14. Tealy: There is only one on each property. The original Brown residence and the original Borup residence. They will be made parts of the lots in the subdivision. In other words they will be a lot in the finished subdivision.. Borup: The plat refers to, it is all one l� bothlot of those properties then? n the Brown property. Does the applicant presently o Tealy: I believe they were sold to, I don't know their names. Borup: But they are not the deeded owners at this point of those two properties? Tealy: No they are not, those people will be included in the signature on the plat. Borup: That was my next question. Then I guess we are to assume that they are participating. Tealy: Yes, there was a statement gathered from each one of them prior to the sale of those lot that indicated their concurrence with the plat and their signature on the plat. Borup: I didn't find that in our packets, do you know was that forwarded to the City or not? Tealy: Truthfully I have never seen them myself, that is what the. developer tells me. If you need those statements I am sure they can supply them. But in order for the plat to be recorded they would have to be a record owner of the property and sign the back of the plat. Borup: That is something, you say that is something the County (inaudible). Tealy: The County engineer will assure that fact. Borup: Thank you that is all I have. MacCoy: Are there any other statements to be made? I will close the public hearing on the preliminary plat for the Packard Subdivision No. 2 (inaudible). Borup: Commissioner MacCoy I would since this point we do not have findings awe nd conclusions I would move that we table any action on the preliminary puntil reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Meridian Planning & Ang Commission • March 11, 1997 Page 33 Manning: Second Borup: Table that to our next scheduled meeting which is April 15. MacCoy: All those in favor? Opposed? Borup: I correct that to April 8, table it to April 8. MacCoy: Is everybody in favor of that now? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROX. 4.26 ACRES TO L-0 BY A'a LLC: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant's representative to address the Commission. Roger Smith, 870 N. Linder Road, Suite B, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Smith: This project is as discussed a proposal to annex and rezone to limited office the corner of, the southwest corner of Franklin and Eagle Roads. This is primarily for the purpose shown, the three professional office buildings that will be nestled up in the corner. This project meets with the City's comprehensive plan to have this general area basically rezoned to commercial and mixed use. We have received the City's requirements for annexation and zoning and also for the conditional use which we are in concurrence with and have addressed with a letter in writing to. the City. We feel that this would be an excellent use for this parcel of ground compared to other possible uses for the commercial and mixed use zone. The plan is to have very high quality construction for these buildings basically a split face masonry with glass block and some tinted glass on the exterior structures and an extensive amount of landscaping to both help screen the project from the adjacent residential uses and to buffer noise from both major thoroughfares which this project abuts. The buildings are planned to follow the existing topography and basically blend in with the existing terrain. If you want to look at the elevation that we have now or when we address the conditional use but I can pass this around. The view that is shown there is what the view will be from the corner of Franklin and Eagle. The buildings that are shown the one, in the northeast corner is planned to be basically two stories that are above ground to hide some of the parking we have designed to have the parking underneath that main building for some of the use there. There will be elevators that are going to be in the corners in the parking area along with enclosures for trash so that we keep those out of the exterior of the buildings. The two lower buildings will be 2 stories each with basically a daylight basement concept. The lower floor will be completely below grade of the uphill side of the structure. Walkways are planned in the berms and as shown in the area adjacent f Meridian Planning & Zogg Commission • March 11, 1997 Page 13 Johnson: Recommendation? MacCoy: The recommendation, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the property set forth in the application be approved by the City Council for the zoning amendment requested under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicant or his successor, 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 applicant is not agreeable with .these findings of fact and conclusions of law and is not agreeable with entering into a.development agreement and developing the property only under the conditional use process the application for the zoning amendment should be denied. Manning: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we pass a recommendation onto the City as stated, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 35.23 ACRES TO R-4 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This has been before us some time ago, I personally have a conflict of interest, it is adjacent to my residence so I am going to step down. We are in receipt of numerous letters from adjoining property owners. Most of which are either opposed or unfavorably disposed towards the application. There is one letter in favor of the application as stated. At this time I will step down and turn the conduct of the meeting over to Commissioner MacCoy who needs to open the public hearing. MacCoy: Is the applicant or his representative here, I will open the public hearing. Pat Tealy, 109 S. 4h Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Tealy: What I have given you is a reduced exhibit of what we have here on the poster, it should give you some idea of the location of the people that most likely will testify tonight and their proximity to Packard No. 2. We are here tonight to request annexation, rezone and approval of the preliminary plat with a development agreement. The development agreement will tie the developer to certain items that we will discuss and agree to tonight. These items being for instance fencing of the subdivision, requirement of pressurized irrigation, sewer and water services. While that is not the entirety of the development agreement it will assure the neighbors in the area that we will develop in a responsible manner. All of the utilities are available to this site. We Meridian Planning & Z0Qg Commission March 11, 1997 Page 14 have approved or in the past you have approved Packard Subdivision No. 1 which is a 40 acre site to the southeast of this subdivision. It joins the road system that is proposed for this Packard Subdivision No. 2. It also allows the connection for the sewer to the south slough extension that is planned by the City of Meridian. Water, power and gas are also available to this site along with telephone, cable and other utilities. We had a neighborhood meeting last night at which we had a fairly good response to. There were quite a few neighbors that showed, we talked about some of the problems that people have had with it and some of the misconceptions that possibly have been portrayed in the past. We hope some of these will come out tonight so that we can satisfy the City of Meridian that we are in fact doing this in a responsible manner. There are several questions that were part of the original review of packard Subdivision No. 2. First was connection to a road system. Since we have submitted the application which was in September of 1995 Dove Meadows subdivision has become complete. We now have a connection to a public road system on the south. This will be further enhanced by Packard Subdivision No. 1 which will being the road system to our south boundary. Chamberlain Estates in that period has also been improved and we have a road connection to the west which will get us out onto Locust Grove Road. We have proposed buffering from adjacent subdivisions by, bordering for example the Carol Subdivision and the adjacent acreage with larger lots. The R-4 zone that we are requesting has a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. We have over 50% of these lots above 10,000 square feet and there is approximately 48% between 10,000 and 8,000 square feet, 8,000 being the minimum. We are buffering the adjacent subdivision with larger lots as can be seen on the preliminary plat. If you wish to go over these things, I assume that you will ask me questions when I am done talking here. I will try and keep it short so that we can move on with this. When Packard Subdivision No. 1 was developed and approved and the developers then had an opportunity to buy the Brown property or the Borup property which consisted of 22 acres. They saw this as a natural progression of Packard No. 1 and natural progression of development in that section. Then the Brown property became available and the actual solution to the sewer problem then became evident. We would take the lift station that is a portion of Packard No. 1 and eliminate it and actually get the sewer into a gravity situation along the South Slough. This is one of the main issues that probably will be approached tonight. One of the other main issues being Wingate Lane. Wingate Lane has been a subject of a lot discussion it was the prime point of discussion last night at the neighborhood meeting. We have assured the neighbors that we will have no access whatsoever onto Wingate Lane as is seen by the preliminary plat. There are, let me go to the exhibit here, Wingate Lane is in this, is shown on the map in this area right here. They are fronted by these owners who have access to this private lane along with two five acre lots down here that are owned by Reichert and Sharp. This road system that we anticipate right now will have two gates across the public road system that we have in this area right here you will be able to have pedestrian and bicycle access and some type of emergency access through break away ballards that will allow (inaudible) if anything were to happen on either side and the only access in through here would be break away bollards. These are specifically , Meridian Planning & ZOOg Commission • March 11, 1997 Page 15 designed for these purposes. Just to go over the sewer issue graphically we have a lift station that has been approved for Packard No. 1 down on this area. It is at the north connection of Packard No. 1 to Packard No. 2. We will propose moving this into Packard No. 2 as part of the solution to the sewer to get the sewer out of this area because we had a problem with gaining access to the south slough sewer over the past year we tried to negotiate with the land owner but it just didn't work. This right here that you see in red that you also see on the drawing is the south slough sewer. It is an 18 inch sewer that is proposed to go along the south slough. We will make this connection here at the northwest corner of subdivision. This lift station down here at Packard No. 1 not only serves Packard No. 1 subdivision it also serves the elementary school that is planned for out here on Eagle Road. That is one of the reasons that it was able to be built because we provided sewer up in here and they didn't have to wait for this (inaudible) So that is one of the benefits of us bringing the sewer and the water to this area. There has also been some question about irrigation, we will provide pressurized irrigation to each lot in this subdivision. We have entered into an agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District who will own the system. We are presently right now building a system in Packard No. 1 which will accommodate the Dove Meadows Subdivision, Wingate Subdivision, Packard No. 1 and Packard No. 2. This is being done at the cost of some $85,000 by the developer who will provide the piping system, the pumps and the pump house and then turn it over to Nampa Meridian Irrigation District who will own and operate it. That is a just a short overview, if you have any questions (End of Tape) Borup: (Inaudible) I might mention to the applicant and especially to the public, since last month and for the last several months things have changed as far as our comfort zone with what has happened in the past. We have received packets of minutes of the meetings, all the submittals,, the last week we have been going over those. We have gone through about 6 hours of catch up on this application. I feel a lot more comfortable knowing what has transpired in the past, the requirements from ACHD and the City and everyone else. I think we are all up to date on the thing now which makes it a lot easier on our part. Tealy: Just to add, if you did read those you can see there is quite a long progression of let's stop and get more information and then we got to this point and more information. We got to the point where sewer was the issue and we have solved that issue. That is where at the last meeting we pretty much thought we had the solution to the problem, but with all of the new commissioners on here it was very prudent that you get it reviewed so if you do approve it you can do it at a comfort level. Borup: Just to make one other comment, I know the items that you had mentioned would be completed were all items some of them specified by ACHD. Your solution on Wingate Lane was their recommendation, written recommendation and I believe the same thing on sewer was what was worked out with the City Engineer isn't that correct? Meridian Planning & Zo*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 16 Tealy: That is correct. MacCoy: Just one comment from myself, since I am in the position of one side and then the other. As Keith has already mentioned we have spent a lot of time on this thing Mich I do appreciate. I want you to understand that I know it has been a long drawn out process and sometimes go slow is a way to do things like this. I was going back through some of this material and every commissioner up here has changed since you started all of this. So thanks for the time for that. If there is nothing else, are you going to sit down. Just for the record and the public here, as you will look at this map or you have already heard our applicant state the Name of Borup, Keith didn't get up to leave for conflict. I asked him for the record would you please explain the name situation here? Borup: I think that name had come up with apparently some property that a Borup had owned, I am not even sure of how many acres it was here, was that about 10 acres or somewhere in that range. Whatever it was it was a tract they owned, I didn't even know anything about it until last month's meeting I was talking to one of the neighbors or someone around the area and asked if I was related. Going back it looked like maybe through my great grandfather there was a relationship. Also the property is not owned by Borup at this point anyway. So I don't feel like there is any conflict there and I wouldn't think that anyone else would either. MacCoy: Through working with our Counsel we felt it would be best to go on record with that. Anybody from the public that would like to make a statement now? Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I expect you have this letter, we would like to have those issues in writing that they address those issues in writing and also address the issue of why they sold off part of that split to those properties. I think this is not legal, if it is not then why do we proceed with this. Also, I had a question as to they have all the small lots you might say over, in front or our property, most of them anyway. The minimum lot is I think 4 of them, 8,000 square feet and they are protecting the Carol Subdivision with the larger lots. I think we ought to have a level playing field there if we are going to do this thing. And they say it is difficult to do, well I don't think it is difficult at all. If you take 4 of those lots at 32,000 and divide by 3 you would come up with 10,600 and if you take 3 of the lots over by Carol Subdivision, there are a couple of them with 15,500 and 11,700. If you divide by 4 you would come up with about 10,600 that would kind of even this thing out and not give the appearance of stacking the deck against us. I just don't think it is necessary I think we have been out there before Carol Subdivision was ever in there. In fact if we hadn't been there you would probably have 300 mobile homes out there because that was their original was to put 300 mobile homes in there. Like I say we have been out there and I do object to this subdivision. Our educational system is going Meridian Planning & ZO*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 17 to unduly impacted. Our traffic is going to be impacted, our crime rate is going to go up and all of our services are going to be impacted. So that is what I object to. Fitzgerald: Mr. Sharp, I have one question, you referred to a letter, what letter were you referring to? Sharp: We brought it over for the Commissioners. Fitzgerald: That is the letter dated March 8, 1997? Sharp: Yes MacCoy: Is there anyone else that would like to make a statement? Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Alleman: I have some concerns about Packard No.2, at the present time irrigation water for our property comes through the land proposed for Packard No. 2. 1 understand the City requires these ditches to be tiled, I am concerned that this tiling be done between October 15th and March 15th off season for irrigation so as not to interfere with my crops. I am also concerned about the size of the pipe for this, placement of the main manholes. Also grade of pipe and inspection for the same. I also request that the easement for this be recorded so as to avoid conflicts should be necessary to repair or maintain this in the future. I am also concerned about the location of the system across Packard No. 2 subdivision to our property. As a matter of information there has not been any agreement made for the sewer crossing our property to Packard No. 2. MacCoy: Thank you Borup: I have a question, is that under Nampa Meridian Irrigation District? Alleman: Yes Borup: Don't they usually regulate the irrigation as far as specifications? Alleman: No that is my private ditch you might say or it would have been anybody along there once it left Nampa Meridian's; canal there. Their delivery point is, therefore it becomes our concern from there on from our head gate. Our head gate is up east of the South of Wingate Lane. Borup: And it is the responsibility of any land owner to, then you are saying they can do anything on their property as far as relocating as long as the water is delivered at the beginning of your property. Meridian Planning & ZO*g Commission • March 11, 1997 Page 18 Alleman: I am not saying they can I wanted to see what they, I know where it is now. Borup: Isn't that what it normally is that the water still needs to be provided to your property the same as it was before. Alleman: Oh yes, it has to be delivered Borup: And I think that is the same thing that Nampa Meridian is going to make sure that is required. Then just clarification on your comment on the sewer crossing your property, they have got no plans or designs for that to happen at this point. Alleman: We have discussed it and we haven't reached an agreement. Borup: Well they have gone another way. Alleman: That is fine Borup: Thank you MacCoy: Anyone else? Albert Dauven, 2820 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney Dauven: I am kind of concerned like Vern is with the irrigation water. Ours comes quite a ways further east than his does and then comes all the way almost to the Borup property there and then comes up the regional house. Anyway, Nampa Meridian says they have no laws, they can do nothing for us. This has to be decided right from the get go, we have to have it in writing. Because there is no agency that governs this. You can go right down Ustick and hit every farmer down there that has been impacted by a subdivision along Ustick Road and they will tell you that the have been inconvenienced by the contractors. So to protect ourselves we need to have this done. Borup: I am not sure what it is you want done. Dauven: I want it in writing that the water is going to be delivered to us that they are not going to go out there and tear our ditch out and six months later they put it back in. We have got to protect ourselves. That is what everybody has told us up and down there that has been impacted by a subdivision. You have got to get it in writing, you have to have it notarized, you have got to have some way to make them do it. It might not be them it might be the contractor they hire and he might not just get the job done. Borup: You are talking about an uninterrupted flow of water Meridian Planning & Z0*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 19 Dauven: Right, in the summer time, during the irrigation season which is April 15 to the end of August is usually when the water season actually starts. As far as these gates going across Wingate Lane we went over this time and time again, we do not want the kids out of the subdivision in our animals. I live right on the south slough and that slough is the biggest attraction for little kids that you have ever seen in your life. I mean we can chase them out of there probably three times a week that come out of Carol Subdivision. That is quite a distance if you get to looking at it from the road into Carol Subdivision to my property. But they are in there all of the time. We have said this that we didn't want any foot traffic or bicycle traffic, because we have it right now along the half mile deal, the Nampa Meridian east west road right there behind Sharp's. Now the kids ride their motorcycles likely split up and down that, they have had snowmobiles out there. They dump all of their trash over it, over the fence, that people put all of their clippings, rocks. If you want to see it for yourself just go out there and drive down that dirt road. And you can see what they have thrown over their fences. I want to protected from that. I want to see a berm built with a fence built on top of it. Borup: A berm between where? Dauven: Between Packard No. 2 or the Brown property and Wingate Lane. And probably Dixie's property and Peterson's property. Or else, if Wingate Lane is impacted by a road and it is decided to put a road through there then maybe we ought to have a dead zone from the center line over I don't know what it would be, it would probably be 30 feet because they would probably make it a main road through there in the future. So each side would have to give up 30 feet so maybe there should be a dead zone from the center property line over the 30 feet so they can't do that. If you understand what I mean. The road right now -is dedicated 15 feet off the west side property. If the City or whoever is going to be in jurisdiction of it one of these days they might want to as people sell their property the 5 acres that is in there they might want to put a big road through there or a main road. So we have to take those kinds of things into consideration too. Borup: You are suggesting a right of way dedication for future roads you are saying? Dauven: Well it is something to that effect. I don't know how it would impact the neighbors or what it would do, but I think we have to think about the future, we can't just think about right now. If you build all of those houses right next, let's say 15 feet there where the road is at now. You back it up against there and what are we going to do, if they want to put a road through there if they are going to have a school up through there it is going to be something to kind of think about. Maybe we are not making the right decisions right now that we need to maybe (inaudible) to set that back. Another thing is if we take the 15 foot off the back of those lots they are all along Wingate Lane there that cuts them down, if you want to measure them that is going to cut them down to almost 8,000 feet. Meridian Planning & Zd*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 20 Borup: Well not on this plat, these lots are (inaudible) Dauven: Yes but they lose 15 feet because of road dedication there that was done in 1903 or 1913. See the property line is actually (inaudible) Borup: So you are saying the whole road is on their property? Dauven: Right because our for fathers kind of give it away the people that owned the land on the west dedicated it to the people that lived along the lane. So they proposed 15 feet from that property line to the west. Borup: Even if 25 feet was dedicated which would be a 50 foot right of way if half was taken from each that would still leave those lots 84 by 105. So they are well (inaudible). Dauven: I was just saying that it does size them down when you take into all the considerations and everything. You have to take quite a bit of thought into that. I would just like to say, that we wouldn't like to see the kids, we have horses and horses like that are unpredictable. And you don't know what they are going to do and kids love to go and pet horses. We went through an unfortunate circumstance this last year with two horses and one killed the other one. So, they were both tame horses, you just don't know what an animal is going to do when it is that big and powerful and that is the same with a cow. You might go out there everyday and pet that cow and one day it comes out there and puts its head down and shoves you into next year. So that is about all I have to say, you are putting agricultural with public and I don't think a six foot fence is quite adequate. Because if you put horses up close to that 6 foot fence and they throw their clippings over there they are going to compact a horse and kill it. Lots of people that live in the City don't understand that. They think it is grass and they can eat it. That is just some things that need to be addressed that I think they just get passed by quite a bit. I am a business owner in Meridian, I do pay taxes in this town. I am not an outsider per say. I am not against this subdivision development but I want it done right for what we have got there. That is about all I have to say. MacCoy: Thank you very much Don Bryan, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bryan: There are a lot of new faces here since the last time I was here. So I will introduce myself as a property owner on Locust Grove which was affected and impacted by a multitude of subdivisions around the whole area, the whole section between Locust Grove, Fairview and Eagle Road. I had a history of fighting water problems and the way the developers develop and some of the problems we have run into and we have managed to work out and both the pros and cons of these developments. That is why I am here tonight to get some of these things in writing and Meridian Planning & Zo*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 21 a lot of things that I have learned from my mistakes is I didn't get things in writing and it was my fault, tough luck for me. I don't want to see anybody or myself go through that again. So there are a few items that I would like to bring to your attention over here. Mr. Dauven had a lot of them, I will start by kind of following up on his that agricultural and residential separation needs to be looked at. I think the ordinance requires fencing but I have dealt with the developer. I live between I am right behind the Fred Meyer on Fairview. 1 work with the developer and he put up a chain link fence along my property line but that doesn't keep the kids away from the horses. I am in the process now of putting up signs telling them to stay away both on Locust Grove and in the vacant lot next door seems to be a magnet for everybody, kids and parents alike and dogs and it is a problem. I don't know what the solution would be but it needs to be taken a serious look at. The reason I am putting up signs is to get rid of my liability as far as somebody getting bitten or hurt or anything that is going to happen out there. Another item that needs to be addressed is the pressurized irrigation that they are putting in on this new development, the reason I am here is because Packard No. 2 connects with Packard No. 1. Packard No. 1 my lateral coming off the main ditch canal comes along the two sides of Packard No. 1 and down to me. Since all of this project is tied together then I am wanting the developer if he is here tonight to put on public record stating what his plans are and maintain those ditches until they get developed or while they are getting developed. Right now in Packard No. 1 the ditches are just choke full of weeds they haven't been taken care of in two years. It used to be farm land and the man that used to farm that particular piece ran a ditcher through there and burned it off every year and we had plenty of the good water supply. I don't know what they plan on doing in the next 30 days to get that cleaned out and get taken care of. Or what they are going to do with regards to the pressurized irrigation, what they are installing, what they are putting in and how it will affect me and how it will affect the other property owners. They hire the people to design the systems and they go ahead and put them all in and then say six months down the road I don't get any water who do I go talk to? I had nothing to do with the design it was Nampa Meridian that takes it over after the developer designs it, I am kind of in the dark on this and I am sure (inaudible) because they have to supply water to all of these people. But I would kind of like to see what is going on or be part of the process as far as what they are doing. I also have a problem with the traffic flow, initially, I question how these tie together number 2 and number 1 because they are proposing running a lot of the traffic on the Ada County traffic study. They said most of the traffic will be going since they are connected will be going out Fairview which was nice for me living on Locust Grove, Locust Grove is so busy now you can't even get out there during the peak hours. According to the Ada County Highway District traffic study that :you have in your packet it states that with the development of this project, this Packard No. 2 you are going to put 950 more vehicles per day on Locust Grove Road. I question whether we can handle that until Locust Grove gets improved. It is slated to be improved in 1998 which will be more like the year 2000 before they even widen it enough to handle the traffic. So I think that needs to take a serious look at. I believe that is all I have, do you have any questions? Meridian Planning & ZO*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 22 Borup: You said your ditch, the water delivery to your property goes through Packard No. 1? Bryan: It goes through Packard No. 1 and then from .that point on it, where it comes down on the south side of Packard it abuts the church and the Packard property and then it is buried from that point to me. Borup: So Packard No. 2 does not affect your ditch? Bryan: No Borup: Did you, I assume then that you were here testifying when Packard No. 1 was approved? Bryan: Yes and I got put in the public record that the developer will probably argue this point but the way I read the findings I have in the public record that he is to tile that ditch that affects me before he starts development. If you like I can read that to you, I have it with me. He contested it at the time of the approval but the way I read the approval (inaudible) Borup: Thank you MacCoy: Thank you very much. Marc Peterson, 2700 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Peterson: I just wanted to reiterate some of the concerns that have already been brought up like with the irrigation. They mentioned tonight about where the road in their subdivision is going to cross Wingate lane there and have gates so that they cannot have access onto Wingate Lane. But they said that there would still be pedestrian and bicycle traffic across there which I do not agree with. My property is only about 100 feet from where that gate would be and we do have horses and livestock there. We have electric fences there and I don't want kids and stuff going up and down the lane. I am also concerned with the lot size again they increased the lot sizes around Carol Subdivision and down one side but not directly across from my property right there. I believe that both for the reason of possibly widening the road in the future and a buffer zone from the livestock and what not I like the idea of a berm and a fence there. In particular concern, I only saw the new plot last night that they are planning on doing. They have, I was the last one approved by Ada County to be have access to Wingate Lane. When I did that I had to have a minimum of a five acre parcel. I built my house and now according to their deal it looks like they are trying to squeeze one more house in between me and my neighbor now. It looks to me to be a land locked lot because it shouldn't have access to Wingate Lane and they don't really have access to their streets in their subdivision. So I really don't believe that should be a buildable lot. Meridian Planning & Z069 Commission March 11, 1997 Page 23 Borup: Which lot are you referring to? Peterson: (Inaudible) this is different than what they showed me last night. They showed me that this lot right here was going to be divided in two and that this was going to be another lot here. Because this lot here has access to the street and they cannot get out onto Wingate that would make that an unbuildable lot unless they snuck a little driveway down one side there. Borup: That is lot 14, Block 9, on the plat that I have anyway, Peterson: For the right price I might consider making an offer on the lot. Borup: This seems to indicate that there is an existing house on that lot is that true? Peterson: They are planning on putting a lot between that house and my property. They are planning on splitting that lot again according (inaudible) Anyway those are my concerns, any questions? MacCoy: Thank you, anyone else from the public that would like to make a statement at this time? Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane,' Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: Commissioners I thank you for your time. I think I have more questions than anything. One being I can't believe that they would ask you to pass on this when we find right of way that we have some conflicts in the plat that you have got and what we have got here. I have talked to Boise Planning and Zoning last week and if anybody goes down there and it is all public record you will find that there was no more building on Wingate Lane which means you cannot use Wingate Lane to get off and on the property. We are also told that this is a buffer zone between Boise and Meridian and I for one naturally am favored because I live on Wingate Lane and at time it was supposed to be five acres. We were told too that you couldn't divide off the property if you bought after a given year in 1968 and it has been proven by title check and that too is public record that the property that once was Borup's has now been sold to a young couple. Which means it hasn't been zoned, it hasn't been changed but there is a break. On the property that Brown's owned that is also on Wingate Lane where there are (inaudible) there are three owners there and that course transpired before the cut off and before you were allowed to supposedly legally cut off property. There are three that own that, they are the developers, Brown's and the (inaudible). The thing, my problem too is this is not only a zoning but it is supposed to be planning. I would like to see some serious planning done in this area. I would like to ask each one of you if you have any idea really where this Wingate Lane is? Meridian Planning & Z0169 Commission March 11, 1997 Page 24 Borup: Yes I do Sharp: It is a small '/ mile lane, and there were pictures presented before on this lane when we were here doing this before and one of the questions of course was the benefits that Meridian might get from this so called zoning. We certainly don't need that many new houses right now. Contacting Realtors who -have got over 500 that are now available that is not including those that are being contracted to be built and those that are in the process of being built because of the new subdivisions. Why would they want to build when we are supposed to be progressive a subdivision with a lift station. I am sure that if anybody is aware of what happens with a lift station the City of Meridian would have the good honor or taking care of it and the question is for how long. The sewer, if this is the impact area and we are told that it is clear to McMillan it is a big impact area why are we so concerned about how long it is going to take to get the sewer there. If they are saying that we are going to have a grade school there why wouldn't they try as fast as possible to get sewer in that area as opposed to going to some of the more outlying areas when this is so close to City of Meridian. I think that the idea of a lift station that has been moved which changes, plat one they have changed what they were supposed to be doing there and they moved it over to plat 2. 1 questioned that being a valid argument as far as continuing the development to plat one. As far as you probably can't see it, our property of course is at the end of the lane and we do abut against the subdivision with a fence and told that people do not throw gravel, they do not throw grass clippings and I will let you come over in the middle of the summer and help us move the grass clippings and also when they empty their cement barrels that they don't know what to do with. It gets on our property that is private property. We also have been told that manholes are supposed to be five feet from the property lines. If you will come out and measure ours it right on the property line. The one that goes into the street that is stubbed onto our property. Again I would request that we use a little bit of foresight and not always hindsight. We realize the development is going to be and I am for it but let's do it with some serious planning. I don't think at this point that all of the issues have been addressed clearly and completely enough that they could really ask you to act on it and I agree it should be done in black and white so that you have everything concrete and you know just exactly what you are zoning and what you are planning to do with that zoning. Thank you MacCoy: Thank you very much. Dixie Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Roberts: First of all I want to thank you very much for letting us voice our opinions on this. I really oppose the growth out there, we all moved out there for country living. The developers want to come in and change it and ruin it for us so to speak. Then they leave and we are left with a mess. My son tried to buy an acre out there from me so he could build on it and they said the zoning was that he could not. He had to own five acres and they have sold off and acre and a % and since he tried to do this. So I guess Meridian Planning & Z0109 Commission March 11, 1997 Page 25 some people can sell some acreage off and some can't, I don't understand that. My concern is most of all the irrigation because my land is worthless without it. I don't want a pump, I want it just the way it is now because the way the land lies that is the way it should be irrigated. Another thing with growth comes children and I do love children but if they get in my property and the cows somebody is going to get hurt. I work and I can't protect them. Of course our lane, 1 am real concerned about that and the traffic even though they say it can't be used 1 think there is a lot of concern there. MacCoy: Thank you very much Craig Thompson, 2950 Wingate Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Thompson: I don't live adjacent to where the property is going to be developed. I am concerned with what will happen in the future. There should be some kind of a blending effect there. I can't say how you can make it look good when you have 5 acre plots and they are right up against where you have 8,000 to 10,000 square foot lots.. That bothers me. Another thing is by our property we live by the slough that goes down through there and we have a flume. A concern of mine is children getting in there and playing. How can we possibly prevent that if there is some kind of excess to that. Also, they mentioned dumping grasses over the fence and other things, that bothers me. It seems like every time we come in here we think some certain things have taken place, we come here and the some changes have taken place. The map for example, what we received last night, there are certain places where houses are going to be built where is it here? Why isn't it on the map that we received and why is it different now. I would like to see this be up front, we have been playing games with this for about 3 to 4 years. At first we were approached by the contractors, they were rude to us and threatened us and made statements that were contrary to what is true. We checked things out. I would like to come into a meeting once here where things were said that were true. Where things were consistent. So we would know as an association of what was going to take place. That has never happened and that bothers me. Again, I think there are too many questions here right now. I think that the contractors, they should again respond to some of the questions that we have, they are different than what we talked about and what we were shown last night. That is all I have, thank you. MacCoy: Anybody else? Sharp: Helen Sharp, I am sorry that I didn't bring this up before because I think it is very important. One of the big issues here for those of us that have gone before Ada County Highway and trying to settle crossing a private lane with joining two pieces of property that are divided by a private lane. I was told last week that Ada County Highway has absolutely no jurisdiction and I quote over a private lane unless a deed of warranty is granted that has not been done. So my question is right back to the original how can they get from one piece of property to the other crossing a private lane with the sewer and water if the Ada County Highway District says they too have no problem Meridian Planning & Z#g Commission is March 11, 1997 Page 26 or cannot have jurisdiction. I realize that has been addressed because we have been to the meetings, numerous meetings to that too. They don't have any jurisdiction over that. 1 think this is something else that really needs to be addressed and maybe a precedent set. We had contacted an attorney on this issue for our argument but they didn't have one on their argument when the (inaudible) attorney for Ada County Highway District. He said and I quote "I see no reason why we can't cross a private lane" I am sure that I couldn't go across a public road with a private one just because I thought I should be able to do that. But 1 think it is something that should be addressed very seriously. That you can find out by contacting Ada County offices. Borup: Mrs. Sharp, just some clarification, at this point, the road is not crossing a private lane so I don't believe that is at issue. Sharp: The road isn't but the sewer lines are going to have to cross. Borup: That was my question, you made a statement that a sewer line can't, I was confused on your statement on the sewer line. Sharp: When we had gone to meetings, one of the issues of course connecting the two properties with water and sewer. Of course Ada County Highway got involved with that and they Borup: The two properties are already contiguous. Sharp: I understand (inaudible) Borup: They already adjoin each other, it is not crossing a separate property, the two properties (inaudible) Sharp: But the private lane is in between. Borup: The lane is one their property yes. Sharp: The private lane is an entity of its own because of the contract that was drawn up in 1913. It is a dedicated private lane. So the question is could anybody just do what they want to cross that private lane. I am saying this is something that needs to be addressed. Borup: As far as the sewer you are saying? Sharp: Anything, we are also told of course they can't go down Wingate Lane there can be no more access to it. If you want to go down to Ada County Planning and Zoning they have got on every one of their maps no more building permits on Wingate Lane. So if they have got a piece of property where they would have to go down Wingate Meridian Planning & Z8*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 27 Lane at this point no they cannot do that. So I agree with them I think that the plats and drawings should be more concrete before they even ask you to consider acting on it. MacCoy: Gary, do you have any comment on that? Okay, Dan Wood, 13141 West Blue Bonnet Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. Wood: I would just like to make a couple of comments in favor of this project. The City's comprehensive plan calls, the comprehensive plan as was impact states that they want residential houses in this area. So I mean that is what they are doing. They are also exceeding the surrounding subdivisions which are all zoned at R-8 they are going with larger lots which are R-4 zoning. All of their lots are exceeding the minimum standards of 8,000 to 10,0000 and 12,0000. They are doing everything they can to help these neighbors. At this point they have got their rights too, they own the ground as long as they abide by the rules of the City, the County and the State then they should be able to do as long as they meet the requirements. I understand all of these people's concerns but these guys have their rights. MacCoy: Thank you Alleman: My name is Vern Alleman, I too, I didn't put it in my but I have livestock that adjoins this property on the north. Therefore 1 am concerned about the proper fence to defend problems with children and livestock. So I think that should be addressed. Thank you MacCoy: Is there anyone here that would like to make a statement? I am going to ask the applicant, do you want to take the podium? Tealy: Pat Tealy, the applicant's representative (inaudible) with the City of Meridian that we hope will ensure some of the concerns that the adjoining neighbors have. Irrigation seems to be a problem and certainly we have to deliver the same quantity to the same place that it now exists. In other words Mr. Alleman, Mr. Dauven and Mr. Peterson will all get water delivered to them where they have it delivered now and in the same quantity. If they feel that they need an agency to review our irrigation plans w we will gladly accept any review by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District whether or not they have jurisdiction over these ditches or not or the City of Meridian whichever you choose we will do it correctly. We won't provide pressurized irrigation to them but we will provide them with the water that they now have. Wingate Lane Borup: Mr. Tealy, while you are still on that subject, do you have a comment on the interrupting water flow, is that something, have you talked with the applicant on it if they feel that they can construct the new lines without disrupting water service? Meridian Planning & Z09 Commission March 11, 1997 Page 28 Tealy: It is their intention not to disrupt water service, there is no doubt about that. Typically this is done in an off season situation, we will build it during the winter to market it during the summer. There are always situations I agree where a contractor may not do what he wants, what we want him to do or in a timely manner. If there is anything we can do to assure him of that we will enter into any agreement that they would like. We will not interrupt their water. Borup: Is that the plan at this time the schedule would be, I realize that phase 2 and phase 1 are just going, or Packard No. 1 is just getting going and this is two. So it looks like at this point the schedule would work that it would be planned for construction during the off water season? Tealy: Nampa Meridian will not allow us to mess with their ditches which are their delivery points where they get the water during the water season so we have respected that same (inaudible) Borup: So that should not be a problem of interrupting. Tealy: Wingate Lane seems to touch off more than its share of concern. I am sure that if I lived. there I would share the same concern that they have. We do not plan to access Wingate lane in any way. There was some talk last night I agree at the meeting of an additional lot along Wingate Lane. That is no longer planned, that is not part of this plan, it never was because as ryou see that lot 14, Block 9 is all one lot. We do not plan an additional lot on that. (Inaudible) Tealy: I can assure them that will not be a lot, there will not be any building on it whatsoever. Borup: Doesn't lot 14 have a house on it? Tealy: Lot 14 as an existing house on it. Borup: Is that the lot that they are referring to talking about possibly being split? Tealy: Yes right now the lot that the person that owns Lot 14 doesn't own all of the lot 14 that is represented on this plat. They are either going to sell it to him as part of the subdivision or it will have to be part of lot 14, it will not be another lot, I can't say it any more plainly. There will not be another lot. Borup: And maybe for information that is the way the plat is drawn so that the plat would have to be changed and resubmitted for that configuration to change. Meridian Planning & Zc*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 29 Tealy: That is correct, Wingate Lane getting back to that. We do not plan or the Highway District doesn't plan that I know of in my conversations with them of improving Wingate Lane. That is going to stay the way it is. There was a gentleman up here Mr. Dauven questioning or not whether we should grant some additional right of way to plan for the future of an improved Wingate Lane. We certainly have learned in this process that Wingate Lane is not going to be messed with, that is all there is to it, it is a private lane. I can show you on the drawing where we have planned for an exit out to, originally we had planned for Wingate to be an access to the subdivision. We had this road was actually over in this position and we were going to improve Wingate Lane with curb, gutter and sidewalk and put the sewer and water in. We got so much opposition to it that we totally abandoned any effort to deal .with Wingate Lane. We even had a plan at one time that showed (inaudible) we had discussions with bringing this culdesac (inaudible) so that Wingate Lane would have a good access to Ustick Road, right now it is a pretty dangerous intersection. It is just a 15 foot dirt road that comes out (inaudible) right on Ustick. We were offering (inaudible). Right now our plans are to dead end an access road into the Alleman property. If the Alleman property ever develops in the future this road will then go out to Ustick Road so that we have a main connection with Ustick and can longer mess with Ustick at all. (Inaudible) Mr. Bryan brought up the fact that Packard No. 1 has sort of been on hold for 2 years. Well it has been on hold for two years and not farmed because of this ongoing process with Packard No. 2. 1 assure him right now that we will clean the ditches and we will start the construction of Packard No. 1 within a short time period. We are just waiting for this approval to know the ultimate plan for the location of the lift station. I guess other than that, we did hold a neighborhood meeting, just about all of the people that testified were not there. There was Mr. Dauven was there, Mr. Peterson was there and that is it ( Inaudible) I don't remember him. So there are three of these, a lot of these questions could have been answered and maybe we wouldn't have had such a conflict here at the meeting. If there are any questions I would be happy to answer them. Borup: I had a number of them, but I think we answered them as far as the plat we have the proper plat at this point. Any comment on the sewer crossing Wingate? Tealy: Their easement is for a private road, the developers own the land that underlies this easement. We cannot interrupt their use of that easement in any way. It does not preclude in any way the construction of utilities. If it is a legal issue it will be settled, if they get a lawyer to sue us again we will get a lawyer to defend it. I don't know if that is a good solution to it but if that is where it has to end up we believe we have the right to cross that easement with utilities. MacCoy: Anything else? Thank you very much, are there any other questions? Sharp: Yes I would just like to address why we weren't at the meeting. I think we have gone up and down this road and heard so many stories before on what they are going to do and this change and so forth that we wanted to have it before Council here the Meridian Planning & Zd*g Commission March 11, 1997 Page 30 Commissioners on record of what they are going to do, so it could be understood. Also, on the Nampa Meridian Irrigation easement there we want a gate there because right now we get people going back and forth across our property there and with their snowmobiles and motorcycles and just walking and they throw their grass clippings and even with signs there that say no trespassing for Nampa Meridian Irrigation business only. They go over the cable and they pull it up and go under it. So I want that on my southeast corner of my property there so we don't have access there, people out of the subdivision. If they get there then they can go right down Wingate Lane and cause more problems and we don't need more foot traffic and bicycle people going across on Wingate Lane. It is a private lane and who is going to be responsible. Are you going to put it on us or are you guys, if you allow this are you going to be responsible, the City? Fitzgerald: I am sorry could you identify yourself? Sharp: Dale Sharp Borup: Your comment on the gate, that is access to an irrigation ditch on your property? Sharp: They have, Nampa Meridian uses it or their, it is their Stokesbury lateral. Borup: And that goes through your property and it is the maintenance road that you are referring to, the Nampa Meridian maintenance road. Sharp: Right, all we need is something to discourage that traffic on there. I do have livestock also and the people get on there and they throw rocks and they throw their trash out in my pasture and I don't need that. If we can get the gate there I think it will stop a lot of that. Borup: There have been a lot of comments on grass and I just feel like making an off the record editorial comment, a good solution I have seen happen in the past when someone throws garbage and grass is just go pick it up and throw it back. That usually solves the problem. I have been in that situation before, or talk to the individual. I do have one more question of the applicant and Tealy might be able to answer. That was pertaining to the gate for the maintenance road for Nampa Meridian. Is there any discussion at all with Nampa Meridian do they want a gate there is that something they would like on their property or maintenance road? Tealy: That is nothing we have discussed with Nampa Meridian, typically that was something that was just brought up tonight. We can certainly talk to Nampa Meridian but whether they would want a gate on their road they would just have to get out and unlock every time they go down the maintenance road. That can be more trouble for them than they want. Meridian Planning & Zdag Commission i March 11, 1997 Page 31 Borup: That is what I was noticing, other subdivisions they have not usually gated them and I think that was by their choice. Tealy: If it is something that Nampa Meridian wants then we would put a gate there. Borup: Thank you. MacCoy: Entertain a motion? Since there is no other person from the public that would like to speak we will close the public hearing at this time. Borup: Mr. Commissioner, I would move that instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this application. Manning: Second MacCoy: It has been stated and seconded, vote Borup: I think for discussion I think some emphasis on their irrigation seems to be a big concern of the neighbors, I think that is something we would want to consider in the findings. MacCoy: All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea TEN MINUTE BREAK ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: MacCoy: I will open the public hearing and do you want to make a statement? Pat Tealy, 109 S. 41h Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Tealy: As I said I understand we had a little bit of procedural mess up. We thought that this preliminary plat was included with the annexation and rezone. I just ask that you enter the public testimony from the prior item into the record. Thank you MacCoy: Is there anybody from the public that would like to make a statement at this time? Your earlier statements will be carried forward, you are not required to come back up here if you don't feel like it. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 8 1997 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:00 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Greg Oslund, Ron Manning, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, John Fitzgerald, Gary Smith, Gordon Anderson, Lary Knopp, Steve Youngerman, Tim Bever, Don Palmer, Brigitte Stone, Derrick Bell, Lucille Wood, Roy Wood, Jerry Card, Carolyn Mitchell, Joan Blunk, Paule Lucke, Doris Tewksberry: Johnson: We would like to present a certificate to Greg Oslund, this is his last evening with us. Served for 17 months for the City of Meridian volunteering his time with now pay and as Mr. Sharp pointed out had some poignant comments that the rest of us were afraid to ask. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MARCH 11, 1997: Johnson: Are there any additions, corrections or deletions to the minutes as prepared. Borup: Just one minor, page 41, bottom paragraph should be 18,000 square feet rather than 1800. Johnson: Any others? If not I will "entertain a motion to approve the minutes as written. Borup: I move we approve the minutes as corrected. Oslund: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as written and corrected all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 35.23 ACRES TO R-4 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: Any comments, discussion, any corrections on the findings of fact as prepared. Borup: Mr. Chairman, one correction, we have received a letter from Vern Alleman, referring to page 2 paragraph 5. On the amount of, the size of acreage north of the property. Mr. Alleman would like to state that he has approximately 20 acres, the minutes refer to 3 to 5 acre parcel. So I guess you add 3 to 20 acres. Meridian Planning & ZCGg Commission . April 8, 1997 Page 2 Johnson: Any other corrections or comments? Is there a motion for approval as written with the correction then? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and Conclusions of law. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Motion and a second to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as written and corrected, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup — Yea, Oslund - Yea, MacCoy — Yea, Manning — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any decision ore recommendation you wish to pass on to the City Council. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the property set forth and the application be approved by the City Council on the annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicant or its successor, interests, assigns, heirs, executors, or personal representative enter into a development . agreement. If the applicant is 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. Borup: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we pass the recommendation onto City Council as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 213Y PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: What is your pleasure regarding the preliminary plat. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend "the approval of findings of fact and conclusions of law on this item. Johnson: We don't have any findings of fact on the preliminary plat. We just did the annexation and zoning, we are on item #2. Meridian Planning & Z099 Commission is April 8, 1997 Page 3 MacCoy: Okay 1 see, Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, if I could take a shot at it? That we pass on a recommendation to the City Council to approve the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2. MacCoy: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to approve the preliminary plat as a recommendation to City Council, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Did you have a comment Gary? Smith: Mr. Chairman, I think there are a couple of unanswered issues still. I have written a letter to the applicant concerning a lift station in Packard No. 2. 1 haven't received anything from them as to what their proposal is for a lift station in Packard No. 2. Right now the preliminary plat, the last copy that I have shows the sewer exiting the property into the Alleman's property and I don't believe that is their intention. Johnson: No, that is not their intention as stated at the last meeting, that they found an alternate solution. Smith: All I have done is just have some verbal discussions with them, I don't know what their proposal is exactly. I haven't seen anything. Part of this issue too concerns a lift station in Packard No. 1 because their approval of Packard No. 2 was linked to the location of the lift station in Packard No. 1. Right now the development plans for Packard No. 1 includes the construction of a lift station in Packard No. 1 at a specific site. I don't know if the intent of the applicant is to move that lift station into Packard No. 2 or not. Johnson: What you are saying if you haven't gotten any answers to your (inaudible) about the lift station. Smith: I haven't received anything in the form of a plan that shows what they are going to do on the preliminary plat. The last preliminary plat that I have I think Borup: Mr. Chairman, if I remember.:right I think one of their concerns was they did not want to design the lift station in No. 2 without assurance that it was going to be annexed. Once they were assured of the annexation that it was, then they were going to redesign. We may be premature on approving the plat. Isn't that what you were saying Gary? Smith: Yes, I think part of the findings of fact relates to that issue. Meridian Planning & ZoNg Commission • April 8, 1997 Page 4 Borup: There were a lot of comments on the lift station. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Smith, what would you like to do then? Borup: I feel we either need to withdraw the recommendation or can the City Council go ahead, it should be approved by us rather than (inaudible) Johnson: My guidance would be or suggestion would be is that whoever made that motion if they are willing to withdraw we can have a new motion. But we have made the motion and approved it so we can't pretend it doesn't exist. Oslund: This item is going to go before Council and it is going to go back through the public hearing. Johnson: That is correct Borup: But we don't have a an accurate plat Oslund: Well there are many times that we approve a preliminary plat, well every time we approve a preliminary plat it undergoes change before it is a final. Sometime substantial change. I think staff is aware of the issue and if it could be, if Council is made aware of the issue then I don't know that we need to necessarily if we hold, if we rescind the motion and hang onto this it sounds like, the question in my mind is what are we going to do, are we going to table it again. That is our only other than rescinding the motion and making another motion with possibly (inaudible) that this plan needs to be finalized. But that Johnson: Well you have that alternative of tabling, but you have the alternative of a new motion with different conditions. Oslund: I guess what it really comes down to is does the Commission feel like they need to see the refined plan before they feel comfortable sending on a recommendation to Council. If they do then let's table it and they can fix it now that we have sent along the recommendation that they be annexed into the City. Maybe they want to way until Council settles that issue before they fix up their plan. MacCoy: I recommend that we table it then because I would like to see it. Borup: Gary, was, it is just the matter of the lift station location at this point. Was that going to necessitate a realignment of streets? Smith: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, it wouldn't affect the lot arrangement, it wouldn't affect the street alignment. It would in my mind affect the Meridian Planning 9 & ZoPh Commission April 8, 1997 Page 5 amount of property that can be developed as to where that lift station is located. That would be the only thing that it would affect. Borup: That was already their understanding, some of the northern lots would not sewer. Smith: I have drawn a line on the preliminary plat that I have indicating the most northerly lots that can be developed in my mind. If you want to attach that as a condition that the phase line be approved by staff and City Council and forward that on as a recommendation then perhaps that would be the procedure. I don't know that might be a suggestion. Borup: I think the applicant is going to need to do that. If he wants to go in and develop lots that are unbuildable and unsellable that is kind of his problem. But they are not going to do that. Smith: The other thing that he needs to decide and he may have already decided is whether or not the lift station in Packard No. 1 is going to remain where it is or if he is going to relocate that farther to the north and to construct some gravity line between Packard No. 1 and this Packard No. 2. 1 think that is a decision that is strictly based on money, the amount of capital outlay up front that he wants to make, the amount of land that he wants to open for development as far as sewer service is concerned. He has probably already made that decision. But there is in my mind and on my plat there is a point or a line that I have drawn indicating that is as far north that he can develop lots with this lift station that pumps into Chamberlain Estates No. 1 subdivision. Borup: I would be in support of Greg's original motion, I think what he said is true, the changes are not substantial. Johnson: One additional point is City Council will not look at annexation and zoning without a preliminary plat. So if you table it then it comes back to us. Oslund: If it comes back to us we wouldn't necessarily have to have a public hearing, wouldn't have a public hearing. I don't necessarily what specific issues we would be tackling. This thing, I think it is time to move it forward. There is opportunity at the next step to take care of some of these things. Johnson: Any other discussion? If not we will move on. ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 4.26 ACRES TO L-0 BY A'a LLC: Johnson: Any corrections or discussions of the findings of fact as prepared by the City Attorney? MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: April 8.1997 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1 & 2 REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND ONCLUSIONSOFLAW-FORANNEXATIONfZONINGVWITHA PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDMSION NO.2 AGENCY 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 o. 61P YZ�r All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian City Council June 3, 1997 Page 4 Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we table items 4 and 5 the two ordinances, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NW % SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone here that would like to have Ordinance #764 read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from Council. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve of ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION; TABLED MAY 20,1997: Corrie: Is there a representative from the Packard Subdivision here tonight? Morrow. I believe the tabling was a procedural matter so that we could do the annexation ordinance first. Rountree: I think that and also so that they would have an opportunity to respond to comments provided previously and incorporate any comments in the preliminary plat. It is my understanding we haven't seen either of those. Corrie: Is that correct staff? Stiles: Yes Morrow: You have not seen any of the incorporation of the comments from our last meetings within the preliminary plat? Stiles: No, we had requested some changes to the plat and responses to my comments and I haven't seen any response. Meridian City Council June 3, 1997 Page 5 Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I am going to ask from Edmonds if he has a response to that. Corrie: Would you come up here please? Edmonds: The only thing that I have seen as Pat Tealey sent me a letter I received yesterday a copy of the one that was in question about the 17 items that Shari wanted in writing that he had sent to the City clear back in early part of 1996. He sent me a copy of that and a new copy that he re -answered and sent over. That is the only thing that I have seen. Rountree: And you received that yesterday? Edmonds I received that from Pat Tealey yesterday. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I guess if Mr. Tealey or someone shows up later we can bring this back off the table. My suggestion would be since we have not received the information that we were after for the time being we table this until the 17tH (Inaudible) Corrie: Council I, Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentle� to table the preliminary plat of Packard Subdivision No. 2 until the proper to June 17t until the proper credentials are presented to us and the study by Staff, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: FINAL PLAT: SPORTSMAN POINTE SUBDIVISION NO. 7, 45 LOTS, SW CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE AND OVERLAND BY WESTPARK CO. INC.: Corrie: Is there are representative from Sportsman Pointe here tonight? Council, comments or discussion, staff? Rountree: I would have a question for staff, Gary have either you or Shari seen a response to your letter of the 29th? Stiles: Yes we have. Rountree: And is it satisfactory? MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 1997 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD MAY 13,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD MAY 20,1997: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MAY 20,1997: (APPROVED) 1. TABLED MAY 6,1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED TO JULY 1, 1997) 2. TABLED MAY 20,1997: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 9.42 ACRES FROM R-4 TO R-15 BY LORIN SAUNDERS: (TABLED TO JUNE 17, 1997) 3. TABLED MAY 20, 1997: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY ONE ACRE TO R-15 BY LARRY & KAY HANSEN: (TABLED TO JUNE 17, 1997) 4. TABLED MAY 20, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 - COMMISSIONS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES: (TABLED TO JULY 1, 1997) 5. TABLED MAY 20, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 - TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION: (TABLED TO JULY 1, 1997) 6. ORDINANCE #764 - PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION: (APPROVED) 7. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION; TABLED MAY 20,1997: (TABLE TO JUNE 17, 1997) 8. FINAL PLAT: SPORTSMAN POINTE SUBDIVISION NO. 7, 45 LOTS, SW CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE AND OVERLAND, BY WESTPARK CO. INC.: (APPROVED) Meridian City Council June 3, 1997 Page 4 Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we table items 4 and 5 the two ordinances, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #764 — PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 ANNEXATION: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NW Y4 SECTION 5, T.3N, R.1E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone here that would like to have Ordinance #764 read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from Council. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance #764 with suspension of rules. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve of ordinance #764 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION; TABLED MAY 20,1997: Corrie: Is there a representative from the Packard Subdivision here tonight? Morrow: I believe the tabling was a procedural matter so that we could do the annexation ordinance first. Rountree: I think that and also so that they would have an opportunity to respond to comments provided previously and incorporate any comments in the preliminary plat. It is my understanding we haven't seen either of those. Corrie: Is that correct staff? Stiles: Yes Morrow: You have not seen any of the incorporation of the comments from our last meetings within the preliminary plat? Stiles: No, we had requested some changes to the plat and responses to my comments and I haven't seen any response. 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: June 3 1997 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 6 REQUEST: ORDINANCE #764 - PAC SUBDIVISION NO. 2 ANNEXATION 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: �� U 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: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. RECEIVED J U N 2 1997 CITY OF MERIDIAN "'I'MN ALLEMAN F. US (K _PH. ,-RIDIAN, 10 I ORDINANCE NO. 764 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 5 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: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described as: PARCEL I A parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the North Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 27,32" West 1,673.35 feet to a point; thence along a line that is 935.00 feet North of and parallel with the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 40120" East 182.20 feet to a point; thence leaving said parallel line South 0 degrees 26123" West 80.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0 degrees 26123" West 119.58 feet to a point on the right-of-way line representing the location of a future road; thence along said future right-of-way line North 89 degrees 33137" West 159.29 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a curve to the right whose radius is 20.00 feet, whose ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 1 central angle is 90 degrees 00100", whose length is 1,831.42 feet, and whose long chord bears North 44 degrees 33137" West 28.28 feet to a Point of tangency; thence North 0 degrees 26123" East 99.58 feet to a point; thence leaving said future right-of-way line South 89 degrees 33137" East 179.29 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL II An easement for ingress, egress, and parking described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the North Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 27,32" West 1,673.39 feet to a point; thence along a line that is 935.00 feet North of and parallel with the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 40, 20" East 182.20 feet to a point; thence leaving said parallel line South 0 degrees 26123" West 63.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0 degrees 26,23" West 15.00 feet to a point; thence North 89 degrees 33137" West 182.25 feet to a point on the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0 degrees 27,32" East 15.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 2 South 89 degrees 33,37" East 182.24 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4 Residential; that the reason for the R-4 zoning is to allow development for a single family residential subdivision to be known as Packard Subdivision No. 2; 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; that all ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled including those that are property boundaries or only partially located on the property. 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, particularly as stated in the Conclusions of Law, paragraph 22. 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, 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. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 3 • 0 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. PASSED by the City Council and approved b the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this _ RD day of June, 1996. ATTEST: 0011rrr1u1ff /'Of '''`��r� SEAL CITY CLERK -- WILLIAM B G, JR. = - 7 '.��.q T 1st • � � ��`� fffffflfltf 311111���,,' ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 4 STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) 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 READ PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 5 TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE"; passed as Ordinance No. 764, pay the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the day of June, 1997, as the same appears in my office. d DATED this1AW of SEAL r 181 . STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) June, 1997. Clerk, City of County, Idaho On this 3rd1 day of June, 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.; , tp SEAL % .� ., �srcviid""i tar Publicfor Idaho si ing at Meridian, Idaho ommission expires: 0.r ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD R-4 PAGE 5 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: March 11, 1997 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 10&11 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION/ZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED MINUTES nn pp CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS 4,0 pi, CITY ATTORNEY: " CITY POLICE DEPT: C� CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS Y IDAHO POWER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS G,•/► US WEST: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS p INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: frp 11L i. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. N M Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 2 1996. Shearer: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we table item #1 Highlands Ranch until our next regularly scheduled meeting January 9, 1996, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: The next two items I am stepping down because I have an apparent conflict of interest. The meeting on those two items will be conducted by Commissioner Hepper. ITEM #2: TABLED NOVEMBER 14,1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Hepper: It was previously tabled on November 14, 1995 so the City staff could get some more input on some questions they had. I believe the public hearing was closed at that time so we won't take any public testimony. Do you guys have any questions. Alidjani: Commissioner Hepper yes I do, last time we discussed this for an hour and a half and there were certain items that were not clear such as the easement for the sewer on Packard No. 2, Mr. Smith can you enlighten us with what has happened since yesterday when I talked to you in your office? Smith: Commission members, Commissioner Alidjani, I guess it is today at 2:001 received a fax from Tealey's Land Surveying representing the applicant that addresses the comments that we originally made back in July of this year. I did receive a revised preliminary plat yesterday afternoon from the applicant's land planner. It did show, the revised plat did show a sewer line exiting the northwest corner crossing the Vern Alleman property and stubbing into what is known as Chamberlain Estates Subdivision No. 2 preliminary plat. It is my recollection that preliminary plat on Chamberlain Estates No. 2 has had its effective date of approval extended by the City Council because it was nearing expiration. I don't know of any plans, I don't know what the developers plans are to develop that subdivision. At this time that developer of Chamberlain Estates is involved in the first phase of Chamberlain Estates No. 1 Subdivision. So I can't speak to the time that may go by before Chamberlain Estates No. 2 is developed which would allow this applicant's proposed connection to sanitary sewer through Vern Alleman property. A week ago today I met with Ted Hutchinson and Dave March from Tealey's Land Surveying and we discussed sewer line, water lines access, public access from Dove Meadows. It was a result of that meeting that this revised preliminary plat was submitted to my office at which time I gave a copy to Planning & Zoning Director and a copy to Will's office. The 00 N Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 3 response to our comments, to Public Works Department review comments Ted Hutchinson faxed to us today has under the site specific comments number 3 has quite a dissertation on if you have had a chance to review it has quite a dissertation on their attitude toward approval of a preliminary plat based on some conditions. I guess I would have to leave that dissertation in your court as far as how you feel about it. 1 spoke with City Attorney about the conditions of preliminary plats and what we should endeavor to do as staff. I think he can outline, I made some copies of the specific areas that he referred me to from the subdivision, development ordinance that speaks to outlining in generality how utilities are going to be provided to proposed subdivisions. I did receive, I believe you have a copy also of a letter that Vern Alleman wrote and brought that in today I believe and received a copy of that. I was also hand delivered an original signature letter just a few minutes ago from Floyd and Cathy Reichert who live on the west side or are adjacent to the westerly boundary of this subdivision that needed to have any easement through their property for sewer line which is off the premises of this subdivision proper. They have consented in this letter to PNE for an easement to place a sewer line. Which is another item that I discussed with Tealey's Land Surveying representatives a week ago today. So that cleared up that matter. I think that is a summary of my involvement in this project over the last week. Hepper: So Gary, have your concerns been satisfied then or do you still have some concerns that need to be addressed? Smith: Well, 1 guess the overriding question that I have is if a plat is approved by the City of Meridian, preliminary plat is approved by the City of Meridian and there is no, there is a proposed connection for sewer are we City of Meridian committing ourselves to a kind of a requirement to assist the developer at a certain point in extending the sewer or getting the sewer extended. Or can an approval of a subdivision such as this be contingent upon acquisition of a sewer easement in this case at a future time when a final plat is submitted. Submittal of a final plat in accordance with the ordinance would require submittal of development plans. Submittal of development plans would involve a pathway or a right of way an easement way for the sewer in this case off site. So I guess that gets to be a question that I am not prepared to answer, I shouldn't say I am not prepared to answer I can't answer it. All I can say in the length of time that I have been involved in City engineering work I haven't had to address a situation where a subdivision a proposed subdivision did not have access to sewer in this case sewer. They have access to water through the Packard No. 1 subdivision. Reportedly they have access to public right of way through Packard No. 1 and what was known as Dove Meadows Subdivision which now that approval has lapsed on that subdivision I believe, the preliminary approval. So I think the major question here that Ted Hutchinson and I and the developers talked about yesterday afternoon in my office was can a subdivision be approved contingent upon future acquisition in this case of sewer right of way. I can understand the developer's s so Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 4 concerns about a preliminary plat and not at this point not acquiring the right of way or acquiring easements. But in the same breath somewhere along the line they are going to have to. Hepper: Thank you Gary. Oslund: I have a question for Gary, has the developer or his representative provided any other options in terms of sewer service either'verbally or in writing anything? Smith: No Commissioner, they, we talked, I suggested yesterday that perhaps if the route through Chamberlain Estates was hindered by another developer that they could cross tot he north side of the ditch and talk to property owners on the north side about an easement. Ted Hutchinson indicated that was a possibility that they could pursue but there hasn't been to my, as far as I know there hasn't been any alternative proposed. We have as part of Packard No. 1 Subdivision we have been approached by the School District to site an elementary school adjacent to the northeast corner of Packard No. 1. This would put additional sewage load into the proposed lift station for Packard No. 1 and I have not given the school district an answer yet as to whether we have capacity in the gravity line in Fairview Avenue that would accept this pump station's effluent. But I need to do that yet. I would not be receptive to moving the lift station farther to the north to pick up Packard No. 2. 1 say that mainly because I don't know what the capacity in Fairview is, secondly I have not been an advocate nor has the City Council been an advocate of pumping sewage from one drainage area into another. Temporary lift stations in a lot of cases in this City have turned into long term installations. I just don't think that we want to get involved in that sort of thing. But no there, in answer to your question, there hasn't been an alternative proposed. Oslund: I guess I would just make one observation and hopefully I am not putting my foot in my mouth because all I have read is the meeting minutes from last and any of the material that has been provided. It seems to me that the developer's representative has stated at least twice I believe that there is a verbal agreement with the owner to carry that sanitary line with the Alleman's. And then we have this information here today presented to the City on the 12th that indicates there is no verbal agreement that the discussions have been very preliminary and that in fact the owner is not really interested in that. My concern would be that apparently there is some confusion here and I am a little bit confused about exactly how feasible it is for that sewer line. So that would be my concern at this point. Alidjani: I have a question for the developer Commissioner Hepper, or his representative. My question is we have been going back and forth who knows from when, we almost lost all of our memory regarding what has happened a year ago. What could you tell us to so 00 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 5 satisfy this Commission or at least me alone that we have something going. I talked to the developer and you about 5 or 6 months ago outside. He indicated to me as our new Commissioner indicated that there is some verbal agreement. Mr. Alleman's letter clearly stated there is no agreement period. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Alidjani it was our understanding from the first of this because knowing the required location of the South Slough sewer trunk that it would have to extend first through Chamberlain Estates No. 2 and then across the parcel owned by Mr. Alleman. The developers spoke directly with Mr. Alleman back at the beginning of this process. It was our understanding at that time that Mr. Alleman had agreed to allow the sewer to cross that he had specified where he expected this crossing to be and some parameters. For example it had be at least one lot depth south of the South Slough so that he could back lots up onto that lot in the event that he ever developed. Now whether or not he chooses to develop that is entirely up to him. But he did specify to the developers to our developers at that time where he expected it and what he had anticipated at that time. Our client went out and talked to Mr. Alleman again today and I think that was probably part of what prompted the letter from Mr. Alleman that you received today. There is discussion about preliminary engineering or doing the engineering and planning for his particular piece of ground which basically an expense that would be required to be paid up front and we still have no guarantee or not assurance that this project is even going to get off the ground. I think a lot of it has been based upon specific requirements or perceived specific requirements that certain things be in place or that you have to have in hand right now. Things in order for you to approve this subdivision and I don't know that dissertation is what I was intending in the letter it was trying to come to a clear understanding and to give you a basic idea of how things are done elsewhere. First of all your City ordinance requires wet line sewers, we understand that. If you approve this subdivision it would be conditioned upon obtaining wet line sewer and it would have to be in the manner and fashion that is acceptable to the City Engineer in a location that is planned by the City. We recognize that, so if you approved this as a preliminary plat subject to a list of conditions of approval and this more or less a punch list as I call it the map. You tell us how you want us to go about this, you give us that list of conditions and then it is up to us to meet those conditions. Otherwise you don't have to sign the plat, you are not obligated, your obligation, if we meet those conditions of approval then the City more or less becomes obligated to sign that plat. But if for some reason we cannot complete that list of conditions or approval there is no agreement, the agreement is that you will not get the final plat. That is part of the frustration that we have in this is that we understand what the process is, we have been doing this for a long time, not only here but elsewhere. We are just asking that you give us the set of conditions that will satisfy the City of Meridian that when we have satisfied those conditions of approval that we will be able to get the final plat and at that point everything will be in place by the time we are ready to sell any lots in that (inaudible). so so Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 6 Alidjani: Well, see I have a different opinion, I believe that they have given you those conditions, I believe they have been giving you those conditions on Packard No. 1 for example I know it was due not to the fault of the developer that Dove Meadows Subdivision has lost their option on ground north of them. But understand the two different issues, we have a set of rules that the sewer easement has to be there. At one time we all assumed it was going to be there, now with this letter it is not going to be there. Those conditions are there and according to my understanding 12 years being here is that we should not annex and zone a subdivision until all those criteria is met already. And a portion of it according to our staff and it is my understanding again it is not done. Hutchinson: I can understand your position with no doubt but you also have to understand that it seems that you are getting the cart before the horse. What we are asking for is your approval so we can proceed with obtaining the exact easements that are required in the exact locations that are required and the hose of other things. Now, typically you are given that with the preliminary plat approval. What you do is you review your comprehensive plan, you review the zoning ordinance, and does this comply, does this fit within what we have in mind with the City of Meridian. If you meet this set of criteria and you have to understand that you are asking the developer to, he is already making a big risk by investing his money to propose the development. You are asking him to put up even more money with absolutely no guarantee that you guys are going to approve it. Now you are asking that before we even come into the public hearing that you have everything in hand. That is an expense that most developers aren't willing to take the chance on because the public hearing process doesn't guarantee any result even if you have done eve public opposition up to that point. We can still nun into some ro ect isn't appropriate. that would be convincing enough to you that the P 1 ppropriate. And in that case all of that work has been done for nought. What we are saying is you make the decision whether or not it is appropriate for that development and tell us exactly what, give us that list of things we are supposed to do. We will meet those, if we can't meet them the project dies. It is pure and simple, if we can't meet them you don't sign off, the project never gets recorded, the project dies. It has a natural life within the confines of the ordinance. We recognize that is there, but we think that you can give us the approval, the preliminary plat approval subject to a list of conditions of approval which includes obtaining wet line sewer directly to the parcel so that the sewer line will be extended to all of those lots within the development. It is a reasonable request on our part. You're guaranteed that will be there otherwise the plat just simply the project dies. Oslund: Can I add something, the project dies, is it the case that the property is still annexed into the City and the City would have to de -annex it? Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Oslund, I believe you could make the annexation subject to a development agreement or other contingencies that would in so so Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 7 essence not annex the ground until the final plat is recorded. I know with zone changes if we are already annexed ground and you had proposed a zone change with a plat a lot of times you can withhold the final action of the City's approval not only of the subdivision but of the zone change at the same time you can contingent the annexation upon the approval of the final plat. At that time then all of the ground would be annexed, but at least you would have the assurances because it is already going to be there with the approval of the final plat that those things are in place at that time. So there wouldn't be the requirement to de -annex. It is simply, with the final plat you would then annex, without the final plat the ground is not annexed. There is no final action by the City Council until they have done that. Oslund: The concerns I expressed earlier obviously mine and I don't know if anyone else shares those, but and I don't think that we should expect to see a final design for a sewer or easements acquired or in the ground or anything like that. I think what would make me feel more comfortable is if there was one option that seemed plausible or feasible and right now we have one option that based on the appearances of the exhibit here is that it is not feasible at all it seems pretty clear to me that if there were one other option that at least seemed reasonable. Hutchinson: I think you must also take into consideration the same property owner that owns the piece that we are proposed to (inaudible) also owns the piece to the north which is in the same position. What we are asking is that if you grant us the approval then we will go and work directly with Mr. Alleman to satisfy his concerns and satisfy his needs and still be able to get a sewer trunk line which is important enough to the City of Meridian they have identified the specific location for then we can work on that. If whatever it would take to get Mr. Alleman and if that does not happen then there is no viability in the project, the project will die because we cannot meet the first condition of approval of the provision of wet line sewer. Oslund: Don't you have to answer that question regardless, I mean if you are going to go to the next step it seems to me you want the feasibility of the project and find out the sewer lien that you have to (inaudible) twice as much as you can afford. Hutchinson: Then there is that option that if the developer determines that after examining all of the options and perhaps in the discussions with Mr. Alleman it might tum out to be (inaudible) in .another location. This is all strictly speculation because we are still at preliminary stage. But if it turned out that he would prefer it on the north side of the ditch rather than the south side of the ditch then we could work that out. If it turns out that it is going to cost an amount of money that is going to make the project so it is not financially viable to the developer the project. will die anyway a natural death because it is not, it just simply becomes not feasible. We are asking that you grant the approval so that we can 00 00 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 8 get on with that next step of securing these things that need to be done here. Hepper: Mr. Hutchinson, I have a question, 1 am trying to think how the other developers do it because other developers have to acquire easements and stuff and I think generally that the way that they would probably do it is they would enter into an easement agreement with the property owner conditioned upon approval of the City. They would maybe, maybe there is a fee involved or something but that fee would not be paid unless the city passed the project. Hutchinson: There are several different options as far as approaching this. Hepper: I am kind of reading that you are saying there is only one option and I am trying to think how the other developers do it and I am wondering if maybe that wouldn't be another option is to enter into an agreement with Mr. Alleman without the developer having to put money up front but an agreement for whatever consideration he might want conditioned upon approval of the City. Hutchinson: I wasn't privy to the conversations that were held between the developer and Mr. Alleman. Hepper: If the City doesn't approve of it then the deal would be. Hutchinson: 1 understand that. Hepper: So apparently there are several different ways to handle this. Anyone else have any questions? Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I think the word preliminary plat in our ordinance is kind of confusing because it is not really a preliminary plat it is a final plat for recommendation to the City Council as I understand it. Which means that all of these things need to be taken care of before hand because it should be that the plat that comes before us should be the same one that goes before the City Council is that right Mr. Attorney? Crookston: It is preferable that they are the same. There have been in the past situations where one plat comes before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission has some suggested changes, the changes are made and then it goes to the Council. That is really not a good procedure, what should happen is if there are changes made the plat as changed should come back before Planning and Zoning Commission. The hard part about the plat idea is that if the preliminary plat is approved let's say ultimately by the Council then that is the plat that can be further developed and if there are things that the City subsequently desires if the preliminary plat was approved the developer can say you Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 9 have already approved it, it is the preliminary plat that controls on the plat. The thing, however that is before the City on this particular application as it is in most of them that we have recently done and within the last five or six years preliminary plats come in with the annexation and zoning request. The City has the ability to set further requirements in the process of the annexation. To me the first question you have to decide on is whether or not you want this property annexed. If you think that you than you can condition or make conditions on the plat. You can make conditions on the land as to what has to be required or what the Council wants to be required. It is not my suggestion whatsoever to approve of the plat without prior approval of annexation of the land. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I would like to state that this section is a very complicated piece of ground, it is probably one of the most complicated that we have dealt with due to lack of accesses etc. These gentlemen have come up with what I feel is a good solution and 1 am quite in favor of this project. Having said that due to the fact that there are so many of these things that are not handled and taken care of at this time I move that we table both items 2 and 3 until the next regularly scheduled meeting on January 9. Alidjani: Second Hepper: Moved and seconded. Alidjani: Discussion, so then we come back here another month then the easement is not done. I mean clearly Shearer: They can't do anything with the property until the easement is done. Alidjani: I understand that, but clearly we have a different interpretation of our ordinance is saying regarding the zoning and annexation. Our ordinance says we do not have an access we do not have an access for sewer, for water for everything else we need the services we have to provide the reason is only annexation. It is just not there, that is the way I understand it. We can't provide them with the sewer services and water services and the rest of the services we might have to do that as a City they better not annex and zone that piece of ground. Shearer: That is why we are tabling that to give them the opportunity to do that stuff. Alidjani: I guess what I am saying is and (inaudible) how many months do we have to be patient and just wait and go back and forth? Hepper: Okay we have a motion from Jim Shearer and a second from Moe Alidjani to table items 2 and 3 until January 9 which is our next regularly schedule meeting, that is 1996, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 12, 1995 Page 10 all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED NOVEMBER 14,1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 6 BY BOB NAHAS: Johnson: We have a recent request by Mr. Nahas's representative to table this item until January 9, 1996. We need a motion to that effect. Shearer: I so move Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we table in accordance with the applicant's request item #4 until January 9, 1996, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LIGHT AUTOMOTIVE AND R.V. REPAIR SHOP BY KEVIN HOWELL AND DIRK MARCUM: Johnson: Are there any corrections, comments regarding the findings of fact that you have in front of you? Entertain a motion for approval of the findings of fact as prepared by the City Attorney. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move that Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper - Yea, Oslund - Yea, Shearer - Yea, Alidjani - Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any decision or recommendation you wish to pass on to the City Council at this time. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 14 1995 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Hepper, Charlie Rountree, Jim Shearer, Moe Alidjani: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith,. Shari Stiles, Vern Alleman, Dale Sharp, Bill Howell, Helen Sharp, Al Dauven, Jonathan Seel, Glen Smith, Mike Wardle, Dixie Roberts, Marc & Cathy Peterson, Malcolm MacCoy, Denis Piper, Ted Hutchinson, Don Brian, Becky Bowcut, Dave Turnbull, Amy Duenas, Michelle Noll, Dirk Marcum, Elaine Williams Schleckway, Clyde Steinback, Dennis Butterfield, Chuck Elliott, Leon Blazer, Paul Geile, Tom Eddy: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 10, 1995: Johnson: Are there any corrections, deletions or additions to those minutes? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we approve the minutes. Rountree: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 26,1995: Johnson: Any changes to these minutes as prepared? Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the minutes of the special meeting. Shearer: Second Johnson: We have a motion by Charlie, second by Jim Shearer to approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED OCTOBER 10, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: I am going to step down on items 1 and 2 for an apparent conflict of interest. Charlie Rountree will take over, preside in my place. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 2 Rountree: Shari could you give us the status of where that is? Stiles: Commissioner Rountree and Commissioners 1 believe it was the annexation and zoning request was tabled to allow the applicant to meet the findings with a revised plat. That is how I remembered it, is that what you remember Wayne? Crookston: Yes Rountree: (Inaudible) comments from ACHD and we have not received those. Stiles: I have not received comments on the revised plat. Rountree: Counselor, is the hearing still opened on that or did we hold it open just for receipt of comments from ACRD? Crookston: I don't recall exactly whether we left the hearing open or not Charlie. It was some time ago. I can check my notes. What I have in my notes is that it was tabled for ACHD comments on September 12 and that is all I have in my notes. Rountree: Any discussion on item 1 ? Alidjani: I would like to know why we don't (inaudible) are they not doing their work or what? Shearer: I am not sure we ever got a completely revised plat, we got 2 or 3 revised plats. Rountree: We have the plat on the next item. Crookston: I have some notes on October 10, the annexation and zoning was tabled because we did not have Ada County Highway District comments on the preliminary plat which is item 2 on tonights agenda. It states that the City received a new preliminary plat and it stated because it is a new preliminary plat that if there are substantial changes there would need to be another public hearing. It was moved to table which was passed and Mr. Hepper moved to have another public hearing on today's date on the plat. Rountree: (Inaudible) Shearer: I so move. Hepper: Second Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 3 Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to defer action on item 1 until (inaudible) all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Rountree: Is there a representative from the applicant here? I will open the hearing, you need to be sworn. Ted Hutchinson, Tealy's Land Surveying, 109 S. 4th St., Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: This has been going on so long it is kind of hard to figure out and remember where we are and what we have looked at on this one. The Highway District has reviewed this I don't know why you guys don't have your comments we received them in the mail I believe yesterday. The Highway District has made a decision and in essence what the Highway District has done is we had a traffic report prepared and submitted and I believe you guys have a copy of that and an updated copy which would include Packard Subdivision No. 2 that wasn't an issue of discussion with the Highway District. Our major discussions we had probably 3 or 4 public hearings with the Highway District over this it had to do with the crossing of Wingate Lane. We have proposed a single road crossing and it would simply cross Wingate Lane and the revised plat which I believe you have now, at one point we did have a road that actually came over and we were going to improve that portion of Wingate Lane that lies within the plat. We have now revised that and you should have that plat it has moved that portion of the road a lot to the west so that there is no longer that portion of. We are not improving any portion of Wingate Lane. The Highway District is requiring that we put in gates for the east and west traffic that we will build the public street up to Wingate Lane and gate it but we will not improve that portion across Wingate Lane until the 2 properties to the south are developed. At that point then the gates will be removed and there will be additional crossings or whatever is going to be done to that area south of our project which would be the Reichert and the Sharp property. But the Highway District has made that recommendation or requirement that we get that so that there is no traffic from this development crossing. This will give us the opportunity to install the sewer and water and utility services in that area and provide an all weather surface so that your public works department can get through for maintenance on the sewer but no traffic will cross Wingate Lane from the development. In essence that is what has happened with the Highway District comments. A couple of other issues that have come up since the time that we originally submitted this, John Barnes has been talking to the Meridian School district about a site that is adjacent he owns a 20 acre Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 3 Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to defer action on item 1 until (inaudible) all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Rountree: Is there a representative from the applicant here? I will open the hearing, you need to be sworn. Ted Hutchinson, Tealy's Land Surveying, 109 S. 4th St., Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: This has been going on so long it is kind of hard to figure out and remember where we are and what we have looked at on this one. The Highway District has reviewed this I don't know why you guys don't have your comments we received them in the mail I believe yesterday. The Highway District has made a decision and in essence what the Highway District has done is we had a traffic report prepared and submitted and I believe you guys have a copy of that and an updated copy which would include Packard Subdivision No. 2 that wasn't an issue of discussion with the Highway District. Our major discussions we had probably 3 or 4 public hearings with the Highway District over this it had to do with the crossing of Wingate Lane. We have proposed a single road crossing and it would simply cross Wingate Lane and the revised plat which I believe you have now, at one point we did have a road that actually came over and we were going to improve that portion of Wingate Lane that lies within the plat. We have now revised that and you should have that plat it has moved that portion of the road a lot to the west so that there is no longer that portion of. We are not improving any portion of Wingate Lane. The Highway District is requiring that we put in gates for the east and west traffic that we will build the public street up to Wingate Lane and gate it but we will not improve that portion across Wingate Lane until the 2 properties to the south are developed. At that point then the gates will be removed and there will be additional crossings or whatever is going to be done to that area south of our project which would be the Reichert and the Sharp property. But the Highway District has made that recommendation or requirement that we get that so that there is no traffic from this development crossing. This will give us the opportunity to install the sewer and water and utility services in that area and provide an all weather surface so that your public works department can get through for maintenance on the sewer but no traffic will cross Wingate Lane from the development. In essence that is what has happened with the Highway District comments. A couple of other issues that have come up since the time that we originally submitted this, John Barnes has been talking to the Meridian School district about a site that is adjacent he owns a 20 acre Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 4 parcel that is adjacent to Carol Subdivision. Mr. Barnes has been negotiating with the School District about a portion of that. I believe they have come to an agreement for a school site on the western portion of that 20 acres. Part of the agreement is that we get sewer to that the Packard 1 subdivision will now be subject to an easement in that corner so that sewer can be provided and water services, I believe it is a 20 foot wide easement that will extend up through the NE corner of our lot so that they can get sewer and water to the school and provide a pathway access .from this development into the school site. I don't know if there are any questions on this, like I say this has been such a long drawn out process on this particular development. I think we have heard the issues several times and I don't want to try to beat a dead horse on these issues. We recognize that the sewer extension is contingent upon the completion of the Chamberlain Estates Subdivision so that it will make that extension from the existing location in Locust Grove Road when it comes through to the end of the Chamberlain Estates Subdivision then I believe PNE and Edmonds has worked out a verbal agreement with Mr. Alleman concerning the location of the sewer crossing. I think we also had* discussions with your public works department about not requiring a paved or all weather surface for that small portion that crosses the Alleman property that there would be a manhole on either end I think it is less than 400 feet so that it could have clean outs from either end. So that when Chamberlain is developed we will connect to the sewer at that point and in all likelihood that is where the first phase of the Packard 2 development will begin on that north end. It will have ready access through the Chamberlain Estates development to Locust Grove Road and we will be able to extend the sewer south through this project and eventually connect to the Packard 1 subdivision and remove the temporary lift station that is going to be installed to service that. Are there any questions that I might answer for the Commission at this time? Hepper: The gates on Wingate Lane has been an issue in the past. Can you elaborate on what type of gates and how they would open and who would have access to those. If they are electronic or manual. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Heppers, the gates will be probably manual gates and the people that will have access to those gates will be your sewer department so they can have access to utilities so they can maintain the sewer in there and then emergency personnel. There won't be an residents that have access to those gates and the gates are required to be maintained by the developer. Hepper: Would the Sharp's have access to those gates? Hutchinson: No, the gates will be so the Sharp's will have uninterrupted access along Wingate Lane. They will not have to stop and open a gate, they will have direct access north to Ustick. What it is doing is interrupting the public road until those properties to the south develop and then at that point then the Highway District will make a decision about Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 5 removing the gates and crossing. Hepper: So the public road would be locked off. Hutchinson: The public road would be the one interrupted that is why it is going to be very important. This is really going to tie to the development of Chamberlain when that is completed that will be the access to that major northern portion of our development. Any other questions? Rountree: Is the plat dated March of 1995 the most recent? Do you have a best guess time table of starting any activity on this particular phase? Hutchinson: On that phase no we don't have an estimate. Like I said a lot of it is, I believe Chamberlain has received a one year time extension but that time is running now so I would suspect that they will be beginning this spring which will give us a pretty good idea of when this particular development will get off the ground. Hepper: Have you seen the comments from Shari Stiles? Hutchinson: Yes I have. Hepper: Number 41 think states that, not #4, it is #7 that there is a report that apartments have been started or something, do you know anything about that? Hutchinson: I don't know anything about any new construction? Hepper: There isn't any construction on this parcel? Hutchinson: I believe that is the old Brown house on that site and I don't know, we haven't been involved in any changes in new service on that particular parcel. Hepper: Do you have any problems with any of her other comments? Hutchinson: No I didn't in fact because they require written response we will make sure that she gets the written response to all of these. With regard to some of them we will note those lots that have the frontage requirement we (inaudible). All of the lots have been calculated for area based on your requirements in your code for lot size. The phasing we have been a little unsure of because we are not sure exactly where is this going to start. We will have a better idea once we know exactly how the sewer is running on that. The easements will be located as required. The pressurized irrigation we are going to provide as required by ordinance. The buffering, we are going to provide an exterior fence on this. • 0 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 6 Some areas will have berms where others will not but they will be fenced. Ditches will be tiled or covered in accordance with City ordinance. Number 16 of those knuckles, that is an ACHD standard they allow the 21 feet. That is a minimum that they want on those, in fact that design was, we originally did not have that small island in there but after discussions with the Highway District staff those islands were placed in there with that street width. So those do meet ACHD requirements but we really have no problem with the comments issues. Hepper: What about her number 1 comment? Hutchinson: I don't know how much parks area is going to be required or what is recommended for this particular area. We are providing open space they are smaller parks within this development. Open areas as well as the larger parks that are in the Packard 1 subdivision and all of this is going to be tied together. With the negotiations and movement with the school district I believe there is going to be adequate recreation facilities in that particular area adequate open space. Rountree: Any other questions? Okay, we might have you back. This is a public hearing, anybody wish to testify and I will point out that we are in receipt of a list of issues dated November 12, 1995 from Wingate Lane residents and that will be included in the testimony in this hearing. Vern Alleman, 2101 E. Ustick, was sworn by the City Attorney. Alleman: I guess some of this I might have given before, I hope you don't mind I don't think I will take over the 3 minutes if I can go ahead. I have it written down, is that alright? I have some concerns about this subdivision which are not addressed as best I can determine. What size of irrigation pipe will be installed? Will it be buried? And where will it be placed, what kind of easement and access for maintaining and so forth. If buried, where will manholes and so forth be? What access to head gate from Nampa Meridian Irrigation lateral? How will pressurized irrigation be installed and how will it affect our irrigation? Also, drainage, overflow from pressurized irrigation. What assurances that any changes made to the irrigation system will be done? (Inaudible) irrigation water? I have had experience with this, it has been a real problem. Also, that the irrigation system continues past our property and drains in the south slough. In reference to the sewers I mentioned before there will not be a road across our property nor manholes until such time as our property might be developed. Also, there are a number of conditions that will have to be met in regards to putting the sewer across our property. The sewer and stub street on North Devlin Way where they access our property are not acceptable and I need the right to change these before final approval. 1 am concerned about fencing for the good of both the subdivision and us adjoining property owners. The South Slough runs a lot of 0 • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 7 water at certain times of the year and there is danger of children getting hurt. It should be fenced off, we need a fence to keep dogs and people out of our properties so they don't get hurt as well as to keep dogs and so forth from chasing our livestock. I am afraid that an animal will be chased through a fence and get out and cause an accident and I will be sued. Also, there is a possibility that someone could come on our property and get hurt and sue us. I think there needs to be some provision made for recreation of people in subdivisions in general. My thinking is that small areas will be developed where children can play outside, basketball, volleyball or maybe a little tennis something that wouldn't be elaborate and easy to maintain. Hopefully maintenance could be done by a neighborhood association. As it is now where can kids play except in the streets. I noticed that developers are changing from small (inaudible) and instead setting aside open spaces. I fail to see how these will provide for areas for children to play in. I realize there is cost associated with this. I think this cost should be borne by the people in the subdivision who are creating the need. In my estimation this cost is best met by impact fees. I think the City is working to address this now but I question whether it is addressing the need for small recreation areas in the subdivisions. The plan as I see it now is for large area recreation facilities. I think for large facilities the location of school and park together can compliment each other. I am concerned about the traffic generated by the subdivision. What provision is there to handle it? As I understand it the last information I had from the Highway department they don't have any way out of this subdivision to accommodate the traffic to meet what they require. What about the school situation, what is the school board's position for more building with the present situation of over crowding. Have you as a Commission discussed the recreation to schools situation and if so what are your thoughts. I am not trying to intimidate anyone, I just think there are these things important to good planning. An incident that supports my testimony happened at 5:00 this evening. I took a short walk back to the rear of our property, in the property adjoining us on the west is a pasture and three children from the subdivision were playing in the pasture. When they saw me they started running. Two of the children looked to be 6 or 7 but the third one probably 10 or 12 years old. As they were running a big Holstein bull came toward them and me. I yelled at them to get out of there that the bull could hurt them. The bull was bellowing and showing his strength. Instead of the kids getting under the fence they proceeded to cross to the other side of the pasture and were out in the middle without any way to escape so the bull charged him. This greatly concerned me because I know what a bull can do fortunately the bull did not charge them. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the City Attorney. Brian: You will have to bear with me because plead ignorance on a lot of this stuff that has been going on for the last six months regarding Packard 1 and Packard 2 and where they connect. Mr. Smith has graciously given me the new plat. One of my biggest Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 8 concerns is the connection between one and two. What access, are they going to have a road, they have a 40 foot easement or right of way down through 2 separations there between one and two. I don't know if there is going to be a road in there or if it is a fenced area. That is where my head gate is on the (inaudible) and I need to get down that road to operate my head gate. At the first public hearing on Packard 1 1 voiced my concerns about it and as well as a lot of other people as far as how much land they are going to have to give up to provide access and also provide adequate berming for Carol Subdivision. It was up in the air as to what was going to happen with that development in that area. The only findings that I have are the ones that were recommended denial until they came out with a better plan. I guess they have since come out with a better plan but I don't know what it is. Also, in the findings that I have from October 11 in the Planning and Zoning meeting it states on item 16 that all ditches, canals, waterways require to be tiled by City Ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation, when annexed, and if not so tiled the property should be subject to de -annexation. The way I read that is it sounds to me like they have to go and tile the ditches before you can annex. That has not been done and I believe one has been annexed already has it not? Rountree: I believe so. Brian: As a month ago it hadn't been done, I don't know what their plans on doing, but at the first public hearing I got up and voiced my concern about getting those ditches tiled at time of development, that is the first thing they do when they go in and develop some property some parcels so we don't' run into the same problems we run into at Dove Meadows which is adjacent to this development where they bury the ditch as they run phase 1, 2, 3, 4 or what have you because they seem to always get that ditch tiling done in the last final phases. They put it off of course because of the money factor of what it costs to do this. So they usually do that part last and that is the problems I am having with Dove Meadows it is all over grown and nobody takes care of it and as you well know we have had multiple problems with all the irrigation out there. Also, I would like to reiterate Vern's concerns about this pressurized irrigation and the availability of water to us water users that are already on the system as well as access to our head gates and who is going to have access to them. And where is the run off water going to go with this pressurized irrigation. It is going to have to go somewhere. Right now they are having a little pow wow concerning the nun off water with the Fred Meyer development and the Stor it facility with Avest who are working with me and trying to get that figured out. Which is working quite well. But, my biggest concern is the irrigation and keeping informed to what is going on and what is going to be going on instead of what is just getting everything past and sent through and then find out down the road when it is all done that it isn't right. I also had a question of what happened to, is it still going to be a lift station in this area that Meridian is going to be taking care of? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 9 Rountree: In this particular subdivision it would not require a lift station. One requires it, with the completion of this subdivision it is our understanding that they then can gravity sewer both subdivision 1 and 2. Brian: I believe that is my biggest concerns. Do you have any questions? Thank you. Rountree: Anyone else? Al Dauvin, 2820 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Dauvin: Well, I live kind of kitty comer to this subdivision here they are talking about right now. I have got concerns about the water too because it goes through one of these, right through the center of it. When spring gets here we would like to have our pasture growing green. My wife has seven horses and they are not old plugs or nags, three of them are jumping horses so they are very valuable. And we have a world champion paint horse sitting there too. We just can't afford to have kids and all of these people running up and down the road and in our pasture where the South Slough goes through our pasture, we have to be real careful of it because there are always kids out in it. It is a constant battle of chasing them out from the Carol Subdivision. I mean, this, I will give you an example of subdivision intelligence. This spring, I am talking to the neighbor and here comes these limbs, they are floating down the Slough. So I said well I better go over there and see what is going on. Just before I get across the road here is a guy with a chain saw and he is out there sawing limbs off and he picks it up and he throws it in the Slough. Before he can pick up the next one he sees me coming and stops and says that was just an accident. I said yeah that was just an accident they come down to our culvert they plugged it up and it floods our house and our barn and our yard and this is what we are trying to stop. The Highway District has said gates but they are going to allow bicycle and foot traffic up and down the lane. I know that you guys will take no responsibility for that foot traffic up an down that road. As me being a part owner of that road I will take no responsibility for it either if an accident does happen to somebody on that. So, the foot traffic has to stop along with the automobile traffic. I guess I agree with the rest of the guys around there, the irrigation system seems to be a big problem. It needs to be done right away if they are going to go ahead with this. I have no objections to it, I am not anti -growth or anything. It it is just that I would like to see these things addressed immediately. If they tear up a ditch it needs to be fixed right away. I have trouble right now with one of the neighbors right by the head gate. He has it tiled and he will run a back hoe over it every year and bust the pipe, it. invariably takes him a month to 2 months to fix it. So we get about half the flow of water. This is some of things that greatly concern me and my wife. Thank you. Rountree: Thank you, anyone else? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 10 Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was swom by the City Attorney. Sharp: I have some of these same concerns that have been voiced here. On this of course is the irrigation system that we have and any work on that irrigation system should be done between on the off season between the irrigation season, October to April. Those that (inaudible) which comes right off the Nampa Meridian canal right east of me, south and east it is about 100 yards east, that is where the delivery comes off that. That should be tiled across there. It should be tiled, there is a delivery ditch on the east of my property there right on the other side of my lane and that should be tiled so it handles that So we don't have a maintenance problem there. It should be tiled by Reicherts and down through that subdivision and wherever else. It goes on down and feeds in clear down to the comer, I think Brinegar gets that water too. Anyway that is a major concern of us on this defiVery system here and another thing that I have that we didn't put in on this issues that should be addressed here is berms and fences on the east of my property and then a gate across the Nampa Meridian irrigation as a buffer between the subdivision 1 and subdivision 2 so that those people don't use that as a foot path because that is not what it is for. It is for strictly those people that have right to be on there for the irrigation purposes. So I would request that be done, a gate be put on there. I made a little (inaudible) I do have the same concerns that Al addressed as far as the foot traffic that would be allowed. Ada County said that they would allow foot traffic and bicyclist on the lane. If they are going to do that and you guys accept that then I think you guys should be liable for any injuries or damage to personal property that involves any of those people that come on our lane. It is a private lane so if that occurs. There is one thing that Ada County said that Reichert should be provided access to a public street system. We say on the lane here that if that is the case then he should access north of his property onto the street system there and not across Wingate Lane there because that just opens it up to what we have right now. What we had before we said no gate put the gates on the east and west rather than on the north and south. So, we are into that. As Shari noted and I don't know for sure, but there is on the Brown's property there probably anywhere from 10 to 20 cars down there right now. Whether he has an automobile mechanic shop going on there or what it is going on with this. There is plenty of traffic and he does, that is supposed to be a single dwelling and there is 2 addresses. The postal service does go down there and the traffic down that little street that goes down to that property I can see it from my place and I bet some time those people are going 50 or 60 miles an hour. So I think somebody should take a look at that, what is happening down there before anything (inaudible). As far as approving this right now I understand that there is a subdivision that went in default that was to be accessed off of phase 1 and so whether that is true or not we should, if that is in default how are they going to get into one and two and so forth. That should be addressed. There are so many ifs and ands right now. I think before you gentlemen do any approval of this we all need to know what is happening here. Because we are the ones being negatively impacted out there. So we want to know what is going to happen and we don't have to say well 1 think Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 11 this is going to happen. (Inaudible) 5 years or 10 years down the road before the sewer system gets across Alleman's property before they meet his stipulations. So there are so many things that, and as far as schools right now, if growth occurs I think we better have our services go along with the growth and that is all I have got. Any questions? Alidjani: I have one Mr. Sharp, you were mentioning something about a paper that you had in your hands, the concerns you had, are you referring to the letter of November 12? Is that what you were saying, I couldn't see the paper, you had the paper in your hand. Sharp: Yes Rountree: Anyone else? Dixie Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Roberts: Like the rest of the neighbors I am very concerned about the irrigation, and I don't think that the developers whoever it is has really addressed that. I really don't understand the pressurized part of it, but if that means that we are going to have to put in more of a system additional monies to me I am not for that at all. I certainly want it the same as it is now, I don't know how they plan on doing that. Also, they talked about berms but not around my properties which I would certainly like to see, have them do. Eight foot berms and fences on the south side of my land and on the west side because the back of these homes I assume are going to be their back yards it is going to be on my part of the plan. So I am real concerned about the berm part because they don't show it on the plat as berms on that. The tall berms like 8 feet because they do settle. But the irrigation, my land is worthless without good irrigation like I have now. That is my main concern. That is all I have thank you. Rountree: Anyone else? Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: Council members, I like everybody I don't want to be redundant and constantly repeat myself but I guess if they can't remember what has happened we are going to have to. I agree with my husband, there are a great many ifs here. I think one of the first ones that I hope everybody is listening to is when the engineer was saying that they pretty well have things verbally on the irrigation and Mr. Alleman's steps up because it has to cross his property stating that there are many things that have to be determined but they would have to come to an agreement before this can happen. We are right back where we started, we have a lot of ifs. I agree with the others, unless it is in black and white this is what is going to be and then I think we are going to have a lot of problems down the road. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 12 Of course speaking of road we are right back to the public versus the private of Wingate Lane. For those of us that were down at the Ada County Highway meetings several times and listened and saw part of the review I find it kind of interesting when they said and I think Shari has a copy of it that bicyclist and the walkers could walk down that lane and have access, meaning they could go beyond those gates through there. I think a letter was given to Shari from an attorney Ken Krise, defining the public road and of course this has been addressed in the Idaho Courts if you look in the library, Cox v. Cox you will see how it defines private and public roads and of course once you get into one case it states another and another. Until this is a established as a public road which it is not, we have not got really the ability to say that somebody has the ability to use it. Partially as a public road or either bicyclist or foot traffic. And of course like the rest of them I a Iittle concerned too when they say the school is going to go in there. Of course we all know that the schools are vitally important here in Meridian even if we can't get a bond issue passed. But they are going to be right next to Eagle Road and Fairview and we are going to have a situation quite comparable to Cole Rd and Fairview. So I think there is something that really needs to be addressed very cautiously. Here again it is a verbal agreement nothing is in concrete. And of course our traffic from the subdivision on the east side of Wingate (inaudible) and we all know what the traffic conditions are there and also the condition of Locust Grove itself. Being told by Ada County that they would pave that and resurface that in the year 2001 only because Fred Meyer is going in there. I think there are a great many ifs here and 1 don't want to go on and on to elaborate on them but I think they need to think to as my husband or someone mentioned we are not too sure whether they are going to get (inaudible) phase 1 if they haven't got the access which they had hoped to get that either 2 was not in black and white because of the width of the access road into that property. So I think there are a lot of things here that need to be considered and I am not saying that we are not going to have this subdivision which I honestly say I don't want because at this point we have too much going in Meridian, we really don't need the housing. So it is not a vital issue at this point in time. I think there are too many things here because we are at the corner where the lateral is for irrigation and here again we have another addition to consider and of course we are talking about these other things (End of Tape) private and public road should really be scrutinized. Thank you. Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Ted, do you want to clarify some issues that have been pointed out? Hutchinson: My confusion on not understanding what is going on, we are not hiding anything, we have not hidden anything we have presented exactly what the proposal is going to be. We are in the preliminary process right now with this application. It is before you as a preliminary plat. We recognize that there are conditions of approval that have to be met. Things that will not be worked at this time but will be worked out prior to the City signing the final plat which means we have met your conditions of approval in an Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 13 acceptable manner that those issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of not only the City Engineer but also the City Council and the City Clerk. These are some of the exhibits that we have had in the past to kind of remind you where we are with this project and how this entire section lays out. The development that is occurring in in section, nearly the entire west half of this particular section is presently developed. We are simply moving in a progressive and a natural progression by extending the City from its existing city limits to the east. We are not leap frogging, the only parcels that are being left out of this particular area are these two and Reicherts would be involved in this they have absolutely no problems and have been very accommodating to us and have worked with us quite closely on this development. Their's in all likelihood would be the next parcel that is going to fall in line and come forward to you. Chamberlain Estates 1 and 2, just speaking with a representative from Hubble Engineering they are working on getting the pre - construction meetings set up so that they can get Chamberlain Estates underway. They are hoping to get that project off the ground and running by spring with the Chamberlain Estates No. 2 up and running starting in the spring. So we are really not that far off as far as providing the access and the services coming into this portion of the development. Again, it makes logical sense there. With regard to the irrigation issues, we are working with the irrigation districts. Anything that we do to the irrigation system has to have their approval. We can't cover a ditch, we can't change the location of a ditch without having that approved by the irrigation district. Naturally we don't know exactly how the system is going to layout, we are in the preliminary phases. We know that we are going to have to pressurize an irrigation system and service the lots of this development. That is an issue that will be worked out through engineering and through cooperation and guidance with the irrigation district. I believe Nampa Meridian is one of the forerunners regrind pressurized irrigation systems in urban subdivisions. It is new to the area, the City's have adopted the requirement that you pressurize irrigation systems using the existing water right. We intend to do that. But as I say it has to be worked out with the irrigation district. Rountree: Clarify that does not affect the existing property owners. Hutchinson: No, in fact those water rights that are existing cannot be interrupted, they have to receive their water. Regardless of the development that water has to get through to those individuals who have the right to that water and we will provide that water through the system so they receive their (inaudible). Hepper: Ted, would that pressurized irrigation system be administered by Nampa Meridian Irrigation or by the homeowners association? Hutchinson: At this point I believe it would be administered by the Homeowners association I am not sure that Nampa Meridian is taking over those systems. I think they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 14 will work in closely but if Nampa Meridian would love to take it over we would love to give it to them. Because that is going to be, it is really difficult utilizing a rural agricultural water right for an urban development. It has some inherent problems but I don't believe they are insurmountable at this time. Hepper: I think we checked with them, there is a means in which they will take them over. Hutchinson: We would certainly look at that and probably encourage the developer to grant that over. One of the major issues that has come up in this project has been the traffic from this development. Primarily it has been the neighbors concern of the traffic using Wingate lane. We don't want our traffic onto Wingate Lane in fact the Highway District has now set it up so that there will be no vehicular traffic onto Wingate Lane. It would seem a little ludicrous to cut off the only access point to which would allow students to walk to a school site by not providing an access pedestrian and bicycle access across this area so that they can get access to the school. Hepper: Could you show us where the potential school site is? Hutchinson: The potential school site is this (inaudible) we will providing an access easement (inaudible) through this lot and it will also cut off the comer of Mr. Barnes' lot so it will not (inaudible) Rountree: Would you point that out to the audience? Hutchinson: Again this is the Barnes' property here (inaudible) providing access to that school site through this area right here. Not only that but sewer and water (inaudible). Again in the preliminary stages we are asking you what do you want to see what do you want us specifically when we get to the final plat stage those items have to be accomplished satisfactorily to the city or you will not sign and at that time all of the is are crossed and the is are dotted and everything is in place. If it is not in place then the signatures are withheld. Again, what do you want us to do, we know some specific things that we have to be done, those are very clearly called out in the ordinance. We are working toward those but we are, it would be ludicrous to start any work prior to having some type of approval and that is what we are asking for at this point is your approval. Are there any questions from the Commission? Thank you. (Inaudible) Hutchinson: Members of the Commission, I don't know exactly what Mr. Barnes' has proposed on the balance of the property which would be the eastern portion. That would provide the rest of the access into the development. We are providing a readily accessible Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 15 foot or bicycle traffic from this area through our development into the school site. (Inaudible) Hutchinson: That will come through Packard Subdivision No. 1, this is the northeast corner of Packard Subdivision. (Inaudible) Crookston: We need to address the comments on the record, if you have other questions please come forward. Sharp: I am still a little concerned, he says he is going to grant a walking path from phase one is that what we are saying then? I am right back to square one until they can prove that is not a private road they can't really make Wingate Lane a private road public. I think if they test that and it has been tested in the courts and we don't mean to sound that we don't want the kids walking by there or through there but here again we are with public and private and my ability. Brian: The access to the school, correct me if I am wrong, does that have to cross the access of the ditch lateral I mean the right of way for the ditch? (Inaudible) Brian: And what kind of, if that is an access way for the foot traffic is that a road or foot traffic? (Inaudible) Brian: What is going to keep those kids from using that access that ditch right of way as a walking path? And messing with the ditch head gates and what have you down though there. When I go down to, I turn at Eagle Road to turn my head gate in I have to go through 1 or 2 gates there and go to my head gate and then go to another gate down at the other end of Chateau Meadows, there would be about 4 gates on that road by the time I get to the other end to go that way. If I can turn around and come back out the other way I can do that but I don't know what is going on. Also, I don't know where the traffic is getting into the first phase unless it is coming through the second phase. The access from Dove Meadows that plat in Dove Meadows that they have drawn in on this is a part that has been developed. This part he has lost his plat on that whole area, that has to go back to Planning and Zoning and square one. So I don't know how they are coming up with this road in the middle. That is no man's land that everybody is kind of waiting until the last thing and that is where my second head gate is right there where it splits off into two laterals at this point where I am having all of my problems. This is a ditch along here that • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 16 is not maintained and having problems. My other lateral is off -of here and goes completely around that entire project. So, if we are talking access to that road down to that head gate access road that is going to be more problems. Just build a sky bridge or something like that. Thanks Rountree: Any other testimony? Sharp: I do have concerns about using the Nampa Meridian easement there for a foot path and I think that is what they have in mind to get down to that school. I do want a gate across to separate my property from that subdivision in any way they are on that Nampa Meridian irrigation because I don't want those kids. They throw rocks at my livestock, I can go out there and pick up golf balls at any time. I've got debris, plastic and everything else close down and gets down and can plug up that delivery ditch that goes into the subdivision west of me and on down. So that is a real concern and as far as Mr. Hutchinson saying that you don't' want to stop kids going across there so they can go to that school well like I say if you guys are willing to take the liability for anybody causing property damage or personal injury but we don't want it because that would just be a flock down there. We don't have, we don't need that problem. Rountree: Anyone else? Seeing none I will close the hearing. I think having heard the testimony on the plat I would entertain a motion to go back to the first item on the agenda the tabled annexation and zoning request. Shearer: So moved Hepper: Second Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to return to item 1 on the agenda, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Rountree: Any discussion on item 1? We need to either continue tabling that item for further information which might be or some type of a motion. Shearer: What were we missing on this? Rountree: I believe the only thing we are missing is the official comments from ACHD is that correct Shari? Did you get those today? Stiles; Commissioner Rountree do you have the comments from Bruce Freckleton as far Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 17 as some of the information he is still requesting on this plat? Rountree: Yes we do, those pertain to the plat not necessarily the annexation and zoning request. Gary, are you aware of the comments from ACRD? When we will be receiving them? Smith: Nothing other than what has been testified to by the applicant's representative. Rountree: Thank you, we need some kind of an action. We have not prepared findings as of yet have we Counselor? Crookston: (Inaudible) Rountree: So they would have to be either re -written, modified or tabled. Crookston: These notes do not go back far enough for me to be able to tell what happened on the findings. Rountree: My recollection was that they were prepared and tabled. Crookston: That could very well be, I think even if that is the case you need to at least review those to see if you desire to take action (inaudible) as they have been done or whether or not (inaudible) if you haven't reviewed them recently. Hepper: I think where there has also been some changes in the plat and some additional testimony. Crookston: There isn't any additional testimony on the annexation. Hepper: I suppose rather than write new ones we need to dig up the old ones and have them reviewed for the next meeting. Crookston: You could do that or if in the night you could review them during the break or you could table this matter right now and bring them back on the table at the next meeting or bring them back on the next agenda. Hepper: I wouldn't mind reviewing them tonight if they are available, I am not sure they can be available that quick. Rountree: Do you want to move as such? 0 • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 18 Shearer: I move we defer this until later in the meeting. Hepper: Second Rountree: Moved and seconded, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Rountree: Let's go back to item 2 on the agenda, which is the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision, we need a motion on that. I don't believe you can take any action until the annexation and zoning has been completed. Shearer: We have already deferred that so let's go on to 3. Rountree: Okay, it is considered deferred until later on this evening as well. ITEM #3: TABLED OCTOBER 10, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR VALLEY CENTER MARKET PLACE BY W. H. MOORE COMPANY: Bowcutt: If you recall this item was heard I believe in September. It was a public hearing for preliminary plat approval. The Commission asked for 3 different items, one they wanted us to submit a landscaping plan along Overland Road for this commercial subdivision which we have submitted landscape plans. Shari and I brought copies for you to look at this evening. Two, at that particular time Ada County Highway District staff had not reviewed this project formally reviewed nor had they written a staff report. We have since received a staff report and then there was one item where we had a difference of opinion and then we received a letter this week from Mr. Sale addressing the item. One of you recall one of the issues that Mr. Sale brought up when we had our public hearing was the issue of the site visibility for this approach right here. After review by the ACHD traffic engineer it has been determined that approach is acceptable, we don't have any hazard with visibility. I brought copies of that for you this evening. The letter on top is the letter from Mr. Sale (inaudible). The one issue that we could not agree on was the number of approaches, we had a previous commitment from ACHD in writing that we were allowed up to 5 access points for these parcels on Overland Road. We had submitted a preliminary plat showing four approaches, two were the private road accesses and two were drive ways shared by two lots. ACHD came back and said we would only allow two approaches then they revised their staff report and indicated they would allow only three and then finally they agreed that they had made previous written commitments to my client and accepted the four approaches. So I believe, Rountree: Would you point those out? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 55 Hepper: Second Johnson: Motion by Commissioner Rountree, seconded by Commissioner Hepper to table this item until we act on item #13 annexation and zoning until the findings of fact are in, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: I understand we are re -visiting Item #1, is it just #1 or 1 & 2? Rountree: Both Johnson: At this time I will turn the podium over to Commissioner Rountree and hope he gets it done this time. Rountree: You all have had an opportunity to review the previous findings of fact and conclusions at the break and that is I believe item #1. Does anybody have any recommendations or motions, discussion on that particular item? Hepper: I think I had a question for Gary Smith, I believe it was Gary that had a comment on the sewerability and the water service to this. Has that been worked out? Smith: Commissioner Hepper I haven't heard from the applicant, we don't have any record of anything from the applicant on the comments that we made previously. I think that was reiterated in the last review, we just changed the date on the review comments that we have previously prepared. We still don't have any plans as to how this project will be sewered to the west. We know that they are generally speaking as to how it is going to happen but there was nothing shown on the preliminary plat as one item. Rountree: Now we are dealing with the annexation and zoning request at this point. Smith: I'm sorry, the question, I thought I was answering that question. Hepper: You were, it is related, it may not be specific but it is related. What about the water Gary? Smith: The water would have to come from Packard No. 1 subdivision and until such time as the Vern Alleman property would develop which would connect this property to Chamberlain Estates No. 2 the water wouldn't loop back out in a second direction. It would be what we call a dead end feed. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 56 Alidjani: So what you are saying Gary at the present time there is no water available? Smith: No, there wouldn't be any water available to this subdivision until Packard No. 1 was developed. Plus the water needs to be brought from the existing Dove Meadows No. 1 Subdivision through the remaining Dove Meadows undeveloped property to get to Packard No. 1 Subdivision as well as a roadway to provide access. Hepper: Has that been resolved? Smith: I don't know, I haven't heard. Or at least, as everyone else has mentioned tonight it has been long enough that I have forgotten if it has. Rountree: Any additional discussion? Shearer: Well, with the sewer it was discussed how the sewer was going to be hooked up. The formal agreement has not been written up yet but I don't see that as a problem for approval of preliminary plat of course it would be a must for the final plat and that. Smith: Commissioner Shearer, one of the things that we continue to battle and I have made a note to notify all developers and engineers by letter we are not getting complete preliminary plat submittal. I guess the only thing that I can do is when I get a submittal I am simply going to return it unreviewed if it doesn't show how a subdivision will be served, if it doesn't show irrigation ditches and which ditches are going to be piped and how the water is going to be carried through because we just continue to get the same comments from the public they want to know and it is not shown. We shouldn't even be listening to it I guess from my standpoint. But right now there is no service to this subdivision for water, there is no service to this subdivision for sewer. Speaking to the plat now rather than to the annexation. The ordinance says, the Subdivision and Development Ordinance says that the plat is to show proposed and existing utilities which includes water, sewer, irrigation, bridges, culverts. I don't remember all of the items but without water and sewer you don't have much of a subdivision. And of course we don't have the approval of this subdivision is totally dependent upon the development of Packard No. 1. Which in turn is dependent upon the development of access for sewer, water and roadways from Dove Meadows. I don't know what kinds of agreements are in place to allow that to happen but we would have to have all of that information at final plat time along with the development plans. Rountree: Bringing us back to the topic again, you are talking about whether or not this is annexed and or zoned for residential use. We need to press on with either modifying, tabling or resolving the findings of fact on this item. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 57 Crookston: I just have a comment on what Gary Smith mentioned and I have mentioned it before. Actually by law it is the preliminary plat that is much more important than the final plat. It is the preliminary plat that is approved that controls the development. I think Gary's comments are very correct that the City should not approve a preliminary plat until everything is done. That is all I have. The final plat is approval of what basically already has been approved in the final plat. Rountree: And again I go back to the item I have, annexation and zoning request. We have findings of fact, you have reviewed them. Do we need to act on those, do we need to modify them, do we need to have them re -drafted: Alidjani: I would rather table it because the way I feel is in 1994 September 13, we approved these findings of fact and we asked at the end if this is not all the conditions are not met this should be denied. And then we have gone over and over a year almost, a year and 2 months and nothing gets done. I know (inaudible) because they lost their access to the Dove Meadows Subdivision it looks to me is I would rather table it for December 12 and a meeting and see if there is anything going to get done by then. Rountree: Specifically addressing the items that were included in the preliminary draft, the items that staff has identified, not only on the comments to the annexation and zoning but comments to the preliminary plat, what specifically that we need if we table this? Alidjani: My feeling is we table both items if every other commissioner agrees with me because what do we want to annex and zone (inaudible) approve the preliminary plat they are connected one to the other. Shearer: I would just as soon approve the findings of fact and table the preliminary plat myself. Alidjani: You are saying Jim you want to approve these findings of fact, we already approved them. Shearer: No we haven't we tabled the recommendation. Rountree: But (inaudible) Shearer: (Inaudible) Rountree: Do you have a suggested recommendation? Shearer: I don't care. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 14, 1995 Page 58 Rountree: Does anybody care? Hepper: I don't see how we can pass recommendation on the annexation and zoning if the preliminary plat is not complete. So I think we need to table both, I agree with Moe that we need to have the staff s approval, staff needs to be satisfied with all of their concerns have been met. Rountree: So are you recommending then that this item be tabled until (inaudible) concurrence on information needed on the annexation and zoning? Hepper: Right Rountree: Is that what you are thinking Moe? Alidjani: That is exactly what I said. Rountree: I am still waiting for a motion on item one, how do we resolve this? Hepper: I move that we table item number one and two until December 12. Shearer: Second Rountree: It has been moved by Commissioner Hepper and second by Commissioner Shearer to table items 1 and 2 until the next regularly scheduled meeting December 12, any discussion? All those in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Does anyone have anything further to bring before the Commission? If not I will entertain a motion for adjournment. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we adjourn. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It was moved and seconded that we adjourn, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:12 P.M. • 0 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 6 Hepper: My other question was do we have the input from the Highway District yet on Wingate Lane? Hutchinson: As soon as I got the traffic study from the engineer that was submitted to your City Engineer. So that report is available, the Highway District has reviewed that and they are ready to prepare their comments. But I haven't got that number yet. Rountree: Any other questions? If you not forget, please leave those with us. Anyone else wish to provide any new testimony on this particular item. Seeing none I will close the hearing. We need to have some kind of an action. ACHD's meeting is Friday. Hepper: Gary, do you still need to meet with the developer or his representative on sewer and water routing? Smith: Yes Commissioner, we don't have any information on how they are going to get there other than what we have been told verbally, no plans have been submitted. Rountree: Those are addressed in your comments? Smith: Yes Hepper: I would move that we table this until our next scheduled meeting and give the developer time to meet with the City Engineer and also to get the ACHD recommendations. That would be August 8. Shearer: Second Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to table this item until August 8, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED JUNE 22,1995: PUBLIC HEARING FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Rountree: The public hearing is still open for the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2, anyone wishing to provide additional comments on that particular. Is it the same relative to the annexation? Sharp: What I did do is I did call the public library to ask on how they define easement and how that is going to be pertinent to this preliminary plat. The thing that we are hearing Meridian Planning & Zuning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 7 quite a bit is easement. My question I guess would be directed I guess to the attorney here and that is, is an easement a permission granting someone permission to have access to get to a spot or is it something that can be transferred bought and sold? We had heard last time that Mr. Reichert was going to grant his easement to the people on the east side of the lane, where would that leave his property should it be sold to someone else? We are talking about equal access, if that is (inaudible) because we are at the end of that lane and if they have a gate there to service us would they want to go through the subdivision just to deliver to our house, I am talking about mail, post office, UPS, whatever, friends of relatives when they can come right down Wingate Lane. I realize lines look great, the pictures aren't too great my camera isn't too good but I took some pictures of the lane and the properties that would show you just what we are talking about and that might mean a little bit more to you so I will just leave them with you. On the back I have tried to describe where the properties are. There are pictures here where they hope to put the slough and if they cross Wingate Lane and I am not sure where they propose to cross the lane if it is where Borup's property was then it is next to Reichert it would not cross Mr. Reichert's property so his granting the easement at this point would make me wonder why other than he would get his part of the lane paved. Anyway, here are some pictures that might tell you where the subdivision is going to be and you can see on the other side where the Carol Subdivision is right adjacent to it. Where the slough is right behind Dauvin's property and each piece of property. I apologize because they are not the best of pictures, but might do you a little bit better idea of what we are talking about rather than just some lines on a piece of paper. Crookston: Mrs. Sharp, with regard to your questions of easement. An easement (inaudible) what the language of the easement document indicates. You can draw up an easement that said you can only use the easement if you paid $500 a day. I have not reviewed the easement in particular. Generally an easement can be conveyed, when you sell your property if you have rights to use the property you can convey your rights to use that easement to your buyer. If there were restrictions in the easement that said you could not convey then you could not. It is controlled by the easement document itself. Sharp: I do believe that was presented at one of the meetings last time. Crookston: It was presented I just haven't reviewed it. Sharp: I was just curious because it did say equal access and I think that would be a key word, we would not have equal access then if a gate were put up there for access into our property. Of course Boise City's code states a grant of right to use land for specific purpose or purposes and I am not sure what the City of Meridian's code book would read on that. But here again I think it is something that needs to be clearly identified. For example if someone in the middle of the lane signed over their easement say to strangers Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 8 what does that do to their property and the accessibility then as far as the original easement? Because we know that the original easement was granted for our property because we are at the end of the lane and the people of course at the front of the lane granted it (inaudible). Crookston: (Inaudible) it would depend upon how the easement was worded. If a property has a right to use the easement that, the owner of that property could convey that right separate from conveying the property. Again it just depends on what the easement document says. Sharp: I am glad they are tabling this because I think these are some of the things that need to be addressed. Thank you. Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Hutchinson: Shari do you have a copy of that easement I gave you yesterday? The easement that I submitted last time was the original grant of easement for Wingate Lane and (inaudible) people who lived on Wingate Lane plus any assignees or any heirs and it would happen to be on the west side of the centerline which would have been all of basically Wingate Lane is to the west. That is the only properties it talked about, it didn't talk about the properties that are on the east side of that line that was described for Wingate Lane. This is the easement that the property owners have from Mr. Leader which would in the event of dedication of the public road right of way which would be required in order for us to complete the access from Dove Meadows. I provided this copy to Shari in a meeting yesterday. I will give you this again, specific language about the easement is temporary and it will go away with the dedication of public road right of way. Rountree: You are talking specifically about your easement through the Dove Meadows area, not Wingate Lane? Hutchinson: That would be just this now. Now the Wingate Lane easement because Sigmont and Edmonds are now property owners on the west side of Wingate Lane they have purchased and have the right of access in easement to Wingate Lane. However we have no intention of developing any access or to provide an access for this development onto Wingate Lane. We recognize the status of Wingate Lane, we know what this lane looks like, it is a very narrow, one lane at most dirt road. We don't want to use that as part of our development. However that portion of Wingate Lane that Sigmont and Edmonds own in this development which is right here we intend to improve and dedicate to the public right of way, it would be just this portion. Mr. Reichert has said that he will dedicate his portion of the ground so that this will be a complete street down to this point. So it will be a full width street improved public standards, curb, gutter, sidewalk so that this will be Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 9 completed and look forward to working with Mr. Reichert to complete that. He will dedicate it, it won't be an easement, it will be a public road dedication to complete this portion of that street. So that actual dedication of Wingate Lane for public street will be from about this point to this point. Then it reverts back to its easement and we are trying to figure out the best way and we would like to work with the Sharp's to figure out the best way to prevent access from this development and still provide so that the Sharp's can get to their property. Again when it comes off of the public road right of way down here they still have access to their easement. There will be no interference with that easement. They have the right to use that and we are going to make sure that right is maintained so that they can access their property. As far as mail the mail will be delivered on public streets, I would imagine they would still receive mail in the same fashion that the receive it now. We are dealing with just the portion we are dedicating this public and in essence any easement for access will go away with dedication. Any other questions? Here is that copy of this. Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Premoe: I would like to reiterate I live on the west side of the lane and my property was the property that made the original agreement in 1913. We feel that our rights are being violated with the changes that are being made. The original document said that there would be equal use of this right of way, this easement. If they go though and make public access on part of the lane and then put a gate that is not going to be the access that I have today. I feel that these people bought this property knowing that there was no access, no more building permitted on this lane. They knew they were being landlocked and now we are in the process of trying to force us all to go along with their money making project. I feel that they are stepping on our rights that have been longstanding. They want to change our way of life and I think that they have gotten themselves in a position and that we don't need to accommodate them. I feel that they haven't talked to us about what, they say they would do something for us but they haven't talked to us at all. They haven't approached us other than being intimidating on the telephone to us trying to buy us out. Telling things about our property, saying that we were selling out when we weren't. Things like that we just don't appreciate the attitude we have received from them. We haven't been approached in any way to tell us how they would provide our rights. Thank you. Rountree: Anyone else wishing to provide new testimony? Thompson: My name is Craig Thompson, my main concern is if they do put a gate up, accessibility to the subdivision. If they don't put up a gate they will have accessibility. think something, before this can proceed, I think that something has to be done there. Understanding what is going, each time we have a meeting, it is said we will furnish something or do something that will take care of that problem. Every time we meet that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 10 problem hasn't been taken care of. Last meeting that we had Mr. Hepper brought up an idea of why do they have to intersect Wingate Lane. Anybody that I talk to I can't get a straight answer. It is right in the middle of everything that people on the west side of Wingate Lane they are going to access Locust and the people on the other side they are going to access Fairview. Why do we have to have that intersection there anyway? I don't think it is going to be used that much. I think that should be looked into further. Intersecting that I would like to have documents that prove that has to be done. People that I talk to I haven't received an answer from that. Hepper: Have you had a chance to talk to the highway district about that and see what their feelings are? Thompson: No I haven't, what I did was talk to the Mayor. He didn't have an answer as to why. Hepper: You know they have public hearings too, I would like to see somebody from Wingate Lane go down there and talk to them and voice their concerns to them and make sure they are aware of everything that you have made us aware of and see what their comments are on it. Thompson: Okay, we will do that. Hutchinson: The public hearing following this Friday's meeting will be next Wednesday night or Wednesday noon, I will have to find out. Rountree: Ada County Highway District? Hutchinson: Ada County Highway District, we will have this before their commission next Wednesday or so and it is a public hearing. Rountree: Is that evening or aftemoon? Hutchinson: I don't know they alternate between evenings and noons, I will find out Friday. They could call the Highway District and find out. Rountree: Anyone else? Sharp: I'm Dale Sharp, something that hasn't been addressed yet tonight is the water pressure. I don't know if that has ever been resolved out in that area. I know it is not very strong because I have talked to a neighbor and he said they didn't have any water pressure. Has that been resolved? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 11 Rountree: When you got up to ask that question the City Engineer left (inaudible). Sharp: I think there are so many questions. I don't see how you can even act on this thing. It is so nebulous as to what they are really doing. We haven't got the sewer, you don't have the sewer and Alleman testified and wrote a letter that he is not ready to sell and so forth. So, that is a stumbling block right there. I think the schools are another issue, we don't have the bond passed and it could be very likely it wouldn't be passed again. So we have a lot of houses, there is going to be a lot of bussing of those students. As far as having a gate and so forth you are restricting if this, if what they are proposing they are taking away my right to have an easement down my property. If they put a gate there it doesn't say it is restricted to Dale and Helen Sharp, we have an easement to that property for whatever reason people need to get down there. If you put a gate there that is restricting that lane. I think that if they are going to do something then they should probably put berm and fence Wingate Lane and separate those, these subdivisions. Right now I just don't see how you could even act with all of this questions. Rountree: Anyone else? I will close the hearing. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this until our next meeting until we can get comments from ACHD, until the sewer and water problems can be worked out with the City and I would like to see the developer try to work something out with the Sharp's on this and see if we can have an answer to this before the next meeting. Rountree: The next meeting of the meeting after? Excuse me for interrupting Tim, the next meeting would be August 8. Hepper: I move we table this to August 8. Shearer: Second Rountree: It has been moved and seconded to table this item until August 8, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PROJECT BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: Rountree: We have been requested by the Highway District to withhold action until they can report back to us. It is my understanding that they will report back to us August 9th MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: November 12.1996 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1 & 2 REQUEST; REQUEST FOR ANNEXATIONIZONING/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 AGENCY 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 � pC. 1 j1p All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 /� � /Z9 e- -4el� ,I':z., ""Zd Q: I EI) Nov 2 j''95 ITy OF MEnIOIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JULY 9. 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at. 7:30 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Hepper, Greg Oslund, Jim Shearer, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Rose Maloney, Pat Maloney, Helen Sharp, Dale Sharp, Don Couch, Jim Ballantyne, Ron Crow, Don Northrop, Ted Hanson, Billie Jo Premoe, Brian Hoff, John and Renee Longden, David Brooks, Kay McKinney, Terry Trakel, Kelle Watkins, Angie Duncan, D'Arlene Stutzman, Rod Linja, David Hughes, Mike Wewers, Ted Caroon, John Jackson, Doug Stewart, Mike Ballantyne: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JUNE 11, 1996: Johnson: You have read the minutes, are there any corrections deletions or additions? I will entertain a motion for approval as written. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda for the date of June 11 be accepted. Johnson: Not the agenda but the minutes right? MacCoy: Yes Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED JUNE 11, 1996: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: It is my understanding that we have received nothing new since our last meeting is that correct staff? Based upon that then I would suggest that we re -table this item. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I would like to add if we could table this for say four months given the fact it has been on the agenda as a tabled item for over a year. Johnson: Is that your motion? Oslund: Yes Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 1996 Page 2 MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion to table the item for four months to a date certain which would be November 12, 1996, is there any discussion or questions regarding the motion? Hearing none then, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED JUNE 11, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: Item 2 requires the same motion if we want to do the same thing. We can't do one without the other. Oslund: I make a motion that this item be tabled to the next regularly scheduled meeting. MacCoy: Second Oslund: Discussion, this one was, when was this originally tabled two months ago? As I recall they did a pretty substantial rework on the proposal and scaled down the proposal quite a bit. Johnson: On the plat? Oslund: The Ranch. Johnson: No, we are not into the Ranch we are on item 2. Oslund: Well then I withdraw my motion, and I will make that motion all over again. I am sore.,, on item #2 1 would like to table that one for 4 month just like the original motion. MacCoy: Second Johnson: A motion and a second to table item #2 until November 12, 1996, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 11, 1996: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 1996 Page 2 MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion to table the item for four months to a date certain which would be November 12, 1996, is there any discussion or questions regarding the motion? Hearing none then, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED JUNE 11, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: Item 2 requires the same motion if we want to do the same thing. We can't do one without the other. Oslund: I make a motion that this item be tabled to the next regularly scheduled meeting. MacCoy: Second Oslund: Discussion, this one was, when was this originally tabled two months ago? As I recall they did a pretty substantial rework on the proposal and scaled down the proposal quite a bit. Johnson: On the plat? Oslund: The Ranch. Johnson: No, we are not into the Ranch we are on item 2. Oslund: Well then I withdraw my motion, and I will make that motion all over again. I am sorry, on item #2 1 would like to table that one fo: 4 months just like the original motion. MacCoy: Second Johnson: A motion and a second to table item #2 until November 12, 1996, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 11, 1996: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JULY 9.1996 APPLICANT: PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1&2 REQUEST; REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION20NING/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: r CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: rill 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: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 VE RII ALLEPIAN 2101 E. USTICK - PH. 888-2895 MEADIAN, 10 �364� • • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 11, 1996 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1 & 2 REQUEST; TABLED MARCH 12.1996: ANNEXATION/ZONING/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. REcEIvED APR 1 81996 CITY OF MERIDIAN April 17, 1996 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission To Whom It May Concern: In the March 12, 1996 meeting you tabled the annexation and zoning request and the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 until the meeting to be held in June. The undersigned are requesting the items for Packard Subdivision No.2 be tabled until later in the year as some of us will not be able to attend the June meeting because of prior arrangements and conflicting schedules. Since we are directly impacted by any decision concerning the Packard Subdivision we feel it would be appropriate to reschedule to a later date. Sincerely, 103 cd o i;. x PMO xw°-Cad " ° y �c�. O X•0^ F d to y rb0� '0 U. m �. m m cd 41 °' m y o m y U a) X .a. .= ,a . w y 0 V d-, Qi VOZ cp UO w w ACA ,a 0 d�''..d 'b bO ai aXi i dpi � 3 U 4 °4 a _" 3 S. 4,J O p UU+ y m + 19 0+ boo - ^d y 044 (>,)^O a0i 3y o QY :ted U .� y +'�•+ N E Xo oaa>,Ha� Cd a�z �,-- F � � 00 c CO ¢ oy a EE l y„ w w O = 0 U 0.9>4 a V E O y V 0� O. O m > O Vl ,� 7 m O O U cz G Li w v! Vy�i y cJ too 20 � C U > U s3 >, p ai CCU U� �.E 0 >,,c O O O >> �. O O p p SR 2-§��§ Ebol p O y O ^ O H O O V ^U•'� C) `v ed 'O a i- E U a ED y O y� c V .� X cnU y s..0 E- E �y s cEd z. 3 > O 2C O � � � � g � a>i � y On U m �--. c3 y y c p O -v 'O p cd C J '-' y v' Oxy ^ .-. J :J ?'C' •U c", cr J o a c .0 L :'J y U C :J �.� y ... •C) a ^O sV'" p c3 O O y_ v O Q O J `-- V1 X yw •� Y C " O 0 ^ p 0 =I J RECEIVED '00`�r�; J U N 10 1996 CITY OF MERIDIAN A40e VERN ALLWAN 1) ST 2101 C. 1.iq,Lmlxi, R25, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 12, 1996 Page 6 development comes in. That is basically the opportunity to acquire the right of way before , a property develops. Other ways of doing that would be through the review and development process as developers come in that if they are adjacent to the roadway the negotiation process for that could include acquiring the right of way or preserving the right of way making sure they don't put in any major improvements in what would be the future right of way. The Highway District's impact fee program there are opportunities to negotiate that, they actually have been doing that. With few exceptions I think we are beginning to catch the needs as developments come in rather than after the fact. Those are basically the two ways. There will either be an early acquisition there is a lot of public support for actually putting some budget funds aside to acquire future rights of way when the opportunity is there, you actually save money in the long run. Hepper: Anything else? Thank you ITEM #2: TABLED FEBRUARY 13,1996:. ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Hepper. We have actually received a letter from them requesting that be tabled until June. So I guess we need a motion. Shearer: Mr. Chairman I move that we table that until the regular June meeting, the 11th. MacCoy: Second Hepper: Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Shearer, seconded by Commissioner MacCoy to table until June 11th, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED FEBRUARY 13, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Shearer: I so move MacCoy: Second Hepper: Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Shearer, second by Commissioner MacCoy to table the preliminary plat also until June 11th, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 12, 1996 Page 6 development comes in. That is basically the opportunity to acquire the right of way before . a property develops. Other ways of doing that would be through the review and development process as developers come in that if they are adjacent to the roadway the negotiation process for that could include acquiring the right of way or preserving the right of way making sure they don't put in. any major improvements in what would be the future right of way. The Highway District's impact fee program there are opportunities to negotiate that, they actually have been doing that. With few exceptions I think we are beginning to catch the needs as developments come in rather than after the fact. Those are basically the two ways. There will either be an early acquisition there is a lot of public support for actually putting some budget funds aside to acquire future rights of way when the opportunity is there, you actually save money in the long run. Hepper: Anything else? Thank you ITEM #2: TABLED FEBRUARY 13,1996:. ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Hepper: We have actually received a letter from them requesting that be tabled until June. So I guess we need a motion. Shearer: Mr. Chairman I move that we table that until the regular June meeting, the 11th. MacCoy: Second Hepper. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Shearer, seconded by Commissioner MacCoy to table until June 11th, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED FEBRUARY 13, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Shearer: I so move MacCoy: Second Hepper: Okay,.we have a motion by Commissioner Shearer, second by Commissioner MacCoy to table the preliminary plat also until June 11th, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea • 0 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: MARCH 12.1996 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 2&3 REQUEST: ANNEXATION/ZONING/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD NO.2 SUBDIVISION AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 1�914*4 /"� IFK �,p �✓.�ee � -� ' � °moi VERN ALLEMAN 2101 E. US'? ICS, - PH. 888-2895 jC.RID1AN, iG 364 RECEIVED MAR 12 1996 CITY OF MERIDIAN ,r] `SERIN AL LEMAN Us/ 82 210! - 1 11. llv�,ERIDIW3 3 n" 4 MAR 1 2 19906 CITY OF MERIDIAN MRR-12-1996 16:41 TERLEY'S SURVEYING 0 • TEALEY's LAND SURVEYING 109 SOUTH 4TH STREET BOISE, IDAHO 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax: (208) 385-0696 r a n s m i t t a l to: I Jim Johnson fay 1 887-4813 from: I Ted Hutchinson date: [March 12, 1996 re: I Packard Subdivision #2 pages: I 1 [includes cover sheet) NOTES: Dear Mr: Johnson and members of the Commission: RECEIVED MAR 1 2 1996 CITY OF MERIDIAN Please table the Packard Subdivision #2 for until June Public Hearing. Things are progressing on the sewer easement through the Alleman property. However, we are not ready to proceed with the public hearing. Therefore, as stated above, please table this application until your June meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this request and for your patience as we worldng through this issue. MAR 12 '96 16:43 TOTAL P.01 PAGE. 01 MRR-12-1996 16:38 TERLEY'S SURVEYING P.01 0 • TEALEY's LAND SURVEYING 109 SOUTH 4TH STREET BOISE, IDAHO 83702 (208) 385-0636 FAX: (208) 386-0696 a RECEIVED t r a n s m i t t a CITY to: I Jim Johnson fax: [887-4813 from: Ted Hutchinson date: I March 12, 1996 re: Packard Subdivision #2 pages: I I (includes cover sheet] NOTES: Dear Mr. Johnson and members of the Commission - Please table the Packard Subdivision #2 for until June Public Hearing. Things are progress on the sewer easement through the Alleman property. However, we are not ready to proceed with the public hearing. Therefore, as stated above, please table this application until your June meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this request and for your patience as we working through this issue. TOTAL P.01 MAR 12 '96 16:40 PAGE.01 • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 13. 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Hepper, Greg Oslund, Jim Shearer, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Larry Rackham, John Shipley, Gladys Abrahams, Bernice Young, Dean Mihalsihal, Helen Sharp, Dale Sharp, Mike Ford, Kathleen Lawrence, Jerry Ellis, Billie Jo Premoe, Larry Dirkin, Wayne S. Forrey, Angela Miller, Bert and Bonnie Trask, Bill Humphrey, Bob Nahas, Nancy Hansen, Dixie Lee Roberts, Mike Wewer, Bob Haley, JoAnn Butler, Carl Babbitt, Karen Gallagher, Herbert Papenfuss: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 9,1996: Johnson: Are there any corrections, additions or deletions? Oslund: I have a couple, having seen none I withdraw my request. Johnson: Does anyone else have any comments, if not I will entertain a motion for approval. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the minutes of the previous meeting. Shearer: Second Johnson: A motion and a second to approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED JANUARY 9,1996: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: It is my understanding we are awaiting additional information, we still have not received that. Is the applicant here or a representative? Is this a continuation of a public hearing? Crookston: I don't believe it is. Hutchinson: Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, we are in the process of trying to get the easement worked out for the sewer across Mr. Alleman's property. Apparently Mr. Alleman has retained the services of Hubble Engineering to do that work. We have yet to hear from them on the that connection. It is my understanding • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 13, 1996 Page 2 that work is proceeding in that direction and that we will eventually have something to give you that will hopefully satisfy the requirements of the City Engineer. Johnson: Okay, thank you, we do have a letter dated February 12 from Mr. Alleman stating basically the same thing that (inaudible) and you are in the process of working something out. Anything else? Hutchinson: Not tonight. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we table these two items until the next regular meeting March 12, items 1 and 2. Hepper: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we table items 1 and 2 since they are the same, they are connected to the same applicant until our next regular meeting which would be March 12, 1996, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JANUARY 9,1996: PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 6 BY BOB NAHAS: Johnson: Would the applicant care to come forward at this time and address the Commission. Bob Nahas, 8437 West Creek Run, Boise. Nahas: How much do we know about what we are talking about tonight. Johnson: It did come up once or twice and we tabled it at your request is what we had done at this point. We are prepared to proceed now. Nahas: Certainly, I would be happy to answer any questions, was Shari going to go over this beforehand. This is basically a resubdivision of some existing lots Johnson: Right, I think we are all familiar with it. Are there any questions of the applicant? Hepper: We have some comments here from the Ada County Highway District I believe, are those new comments are just standard comments? 0 0 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: FEBRUARY 13.1996 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1 & 2 REQUEST: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION/ZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBD NO 2 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: �� 1 CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT:Vj (Il U' CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: (� MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: itflvi - 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: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 ,4g*. 1-21 qty d✓� �� �' �€? , p nD 2 �;pJ�� FEB 131996 Ale CITY OF MERIDIAN VERN ALLEMAN 2101 E. LISTIC"K - PH. 888.2395 MERIDIAN, ID 63642 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. December 13, 1995 Mr. Ted Hutchinson Tealey's Land Surveying 109 So. 4th St. Boise, Idaho 83702 • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 0 A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 8884443 GRANT R KINGSFORD Mayor RE: PACKARD SUBD. NO.2 ANNEXATION / ZONING / PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Ted: GOUNGIL MEfl!B Rc RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER Any additional data to be submitted to me on this project for the January 9, 1996 Planning and Zoning meeting needs to be done so, at the latest, by Thursday, January 4, 1996, to be considered by me for that January 9 meeting. Submittal of any data at a later date does not give me or my staff enough time to review and prepare comments for the Commission, which isn't fair to them, to you or to your client. Sincerely, xz� Gary D. Smith, PE City Engineer cc: File City Clerk 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 & 2 Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney December 28, 1995 Dixie Roberts 2855 Wingate Lane Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mrs. Roberts, • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW 33 EAST IDAHO P A z COMMISSION MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 JIM SHEARER Motor Vehicle/Driveas License (208) 888-4443 CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor Thank you for your letter of December 27, 1995. The meeting you attended on December 12, 1995 was one of only several that Planning and Zoning has had in which the PNE/Edmonds application for Packard Subdivision No. 2 was discussed. The public hearing, at which time several people did testify, was conducted at an earlier date. As I'm sure you learned at the December 12 meeting there are many items on t he agenda and only a few are public hearings at which testimony is taken. However, every application that comes before the City presents a minimum of two opportunities for the public to express their sentiments; one before Planning & Zoning and one before the City Council. This particular application has not yet been heard at the City Council level and we do not know yet exactly when it will be. There are several problems with the application that have kept it from proceeding forward. Proper notice for the public hearing before the City Council will be given as required by law. They City Council meets the first and third Tuesday of each month and a copy of the agenda is available at the City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, prior to the meetings. The phone number is 888-4433, ask for Will Berg or Anna Doty. If you have specific questions about irrigation or the City's pressurized irrigation ordinance you may contact the Public Works Department at 887-2211. Sincerely ��j "ohon Plan& Zoning Commission Chairman r I, • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 12 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:00 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Greg Oslund, Keith Borup, Jim Shearer, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Helen Sharp, Dale Sharp, David Wiltsee, Denise Crabtree, R. Stansbury, M. Stansbury, Terry Leighton, Gary Weeks, Gene and Jamie Peters, Tom Ensley, Corbey, Steve Bradbury, Richard Zamzow, Jeff Dorman: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 8,1996: Johnson: You have the minutes, are there any additions, corrections or deletions to these as prepared? Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we accept the minutes as written. Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED JULY 9, 1996: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: ITEM #2: TABLED JULY 9,1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: It is my understanding we have had no new information since this was tabled July 9, 1996. Is the applicant or representative here this evening? We do have one letter that has come in on this from Vern Alleman which you have in your file. He apparently has had no contact either with the developers concerning an easement across his property. This thing has gone on for quite a long period of time, what would you gentlemen like to do? Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table not only items 1 and 2 by 3, 4 and 5 as well. Johnson: For what length of time? Oslund: All of these items have been going month to month with no action. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission November 12, 1996 Page 2 Johnson: I would like to make sure the representatives for items 3 and 4 are not here first. Is there anyone here representing the applicant or the applicant for items 3 and 4 which is Westpark Company, the Ranch Subdivision, anyone here for that? Crookston: Since those are not, since those were not called, 1 and 2 were called at the same time that is the matter that you are dealing with now. I don't think it is appropriate to take action on items 3 and 4 at this time. Johnson: thank you, we will just handle 1 and 2 then. Would you restate your motion please Mr. Oslund? Oslund: I withdraw my motion and restate it to table items 1 and 2. Johnson: For what date, for what date certain, how long? Oslund: We have been tabling them for 2 to 3 months but we have been carrying them. I don't know that it has any advantage to it anymore than the next meeting, the December meeting. Johnson: We have December 10 in there that would our next meeting, Do we have a second to the motion? Shearer: I second it. Johnson: Any discussion regarding that? We have a motion to table these items to our next regularly scheduled meeting on December 10, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED OCTOBER 8, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: ITEM #4: TABLED OCTOBER 8,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we table these until the December meeting. Oslund: Second Johnson: Any discussion, we have a motion and a second. I have a question of the City Attorney, with these items that we are continually tabling, I know I can't remember anything • 1 • MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:00 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Greg Oslund, Jim Shearer: MEMBERS ABSENT: Malcom MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Shannon Spencer, Dale Sharp, Helen Sharp, John Bookes, Tyler Couch, Erik Fisher, Tyler Richardson, Kevin Golightly, Tim Golightly, Gary & Debbie Little, Dixie Lee Roberts, Brian Draper, Wart Edmonds, Vern Alleman, Steve Bradbury, Patricia Reed: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 12,1996: Johnson: You have read the minutes, are there any corrections, deletions or additions? Shearer: Mr. Chairman I move we accept the minutes as written. Oslund: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we accept the minutes as prepared, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Just a short announcement, if you happen to be here for items 3, 4 or 14 we won't be hearing those this evening. Three and four is Ranch Subdivision that has been formally withdrawn by the applicant. On number 14 which was a public hearing request for annexation and zoning by Properties West Inc. off Franklin Road, that was improperly noticed so that will have to be renoticed. ITEM #1: TABLED NOVEMBER 12,1996: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: ITEM #2: TABLED NOVEMBER 12, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This application was initially submitted to us in June of 19951 believe and has virtually been tabled from day one. I don't know what kind of feedback the City has had since our last tabling which I believe was in July. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I see a representative from that group here, I was wondering if he could give us some information on that project? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 2 Johnson: Yes, we didn't continue the public hearing did we, I of course couldn't remember back that far. But we would be glad to take a comment if someone has a comment or the applicant (inaudible) what is new happening if anything. Edmonds: My name is Wart Edmonds from 1966 N. Stoneview in Boise. I am one of the developers, our engineer is not here tonight. We haven't been getting any notices of this we thought it was tabled indefinitely until we got the sewer right of way worked out through Vern Alleman's property. After the last time it was tabled, not the last time but back I believe in March I left for Japan and hadn't been back. I haven't heard anything from anybody and at that time Hubble Engineering was doing some work for Vern Apeman to lay out his land to see where the sewer and the roads went and all of that. Until today I haven't heard anything on this and I had heard it was coming up tonight so I came over to see Gary Smith today. I tried to get an appointment with Shari but we haven't managed to do that today. So, at this point we haven't done anything different, we are still waiting on everything to fall in line to get the easement through Alleman's property if we can and go forward with it. So that is where it is so I showed up tonight not knowing a whole lot about it but Pat Tealey he is not here he called me this morning and let me know that 1 should be here or somebody should be. We are still interested, we still want to do it at this point I don't know where to go from here with what we need to do next for you. Johnson: We don't try to keep these things a secret, so somebody has been getting notification and from our position just speaking for myself when things drag on this long without any contact or discussion or some of the items that we discussed have not been addressed then we are really of the opinion or of the feeling that we just start over because property owners change in this area. Those people that were originally noticed about your development may not be the same people now. And circumstances may have changed. That is virtually what has happened with items 3 and 4 tonight. I think you can understand our position in that. I have had some contact with Vern Alleman who happens to be here this evening. Just when (Inaudible) to see if he has heard anything new. The last time I spoke with Mr. Apeman he can verify this tonight is that he hasn't had any further contact regarding his easement there. Edmonds: I went to see him before I left, he was sick with the flu at the time I had been out there 3 or 4 times and at that time he needed to get this property engineered to see where the roads go. Well we offered to let Pat Tealey and he wanted his engineer to do it So that was the plan for him to get that and then get back to me when he got the thing laid out, I haven't seen one yet. But I just found out tonight he said he did have that, the plan on that, but I haven't seen it. That is where it is now, we have to get with him I guess and see what he wants to do. Johnson: The disappointing thing from our viewpoint or at least my viewpoint is that we Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 3 have been inconveniencing people with these notices to come to these meetings and they come here and we don't do anything so they more or less wasted their evening. Edmonds: Well that is what I thought it was indefinitely postponed when I left to go to Japan because we haven't received one notice and Pat Tealey swears that he hasn't received one. Johnson: This body does not table things indefinitely, by law we have to table to a date certain. So we always table to, I can't answer that because I don't do notifications, but usually there is someone that wants to read the minutes or to be in attendance at the meeting representing you as the developer so they will know what is going on. Edmonds: Right, we didn't know, (Inaudible) Johnson: We never just table things until (inaudible) we always have to pick a specific date to table it to. And we tabled it last time for our meeting in December. That is why we are on the agenda tonight. Did anyone else have anything they would like to add to this right now? Oslund: Well right now we are witnessing a good example of what a waste of time this is. We have all of these people waiting here for active items on the agenda. I have only been on P & Z for about 11 months but this one has been tabled every meefing since I have been on board. I personally am getting kind of tired of tabling it let's get it off the agenda or do something with it and stop wasting people's time. Johnson: If you have a question about our notification procedure then you need to get with Shari Stiles or Will Berg who can direct you to that. I don't do that personally, we don't do those. So you will know what the program, what little feedback I have had as I have said it has just been because I run into Vern once in awhile and talk to him. Shearer. If we tabled this to next month do you think that you would have time to proceed with the thing at that time? Edmonds: (Inaudible) Johnson: At this point we have got to get everything on the recording so if you are going to talk to us we need you in front of the mic. Edmonds: I will say that again then so you can get it on the recording. We are ready to go forward at any time with whatever requirements that you have got here. As far as him mentioning awhile ago about tabling and wasting people's time we were tabled three times Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 4 before I left. Every time, we have tried to get this thing going, we want to get it going. But if we are spinning our wheels it is not going to wont, we need to know that too. And we will go differently. At this point we are willing to do and I think we have represented that all the way through Packard One and everything else to do whatever we can to make this work. We have accepted everything and everybody has come along with. So we just need to know what you (inaudible) Johnson: Are you still working with the, not that this is any of my business but are you still represented by an engineer, Pat Tealey? And Pat certainly knows the procedures? Edmonds: No, he told me today that he didn't know, he was over here on Dove Meadows, he is doing that for Dave Leader at the last meeting he said I heard something about Packard No. 2 we need to get over there and check it out with Gary and with whatever I forget her name there Stiles to see what is going on over there. He said I haven't been notified about anything and we haven't either. So I don't know how we are supposed to get this information when you are going to have a meeting and have our stuff on the agenda if somebody don't notify us. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I think the question that we had is from your aspect would it be better to table it for January or February? Edmonds: Well let me be honest with you, at this time I don't know what we have to do to get back to satisfy this Commission. I don't know the items other than the one with the sewer easement. I talked to Mr. Alleman tonight and I told him I am ready to go to the attorney and draw it up whenever he is ready. That wouldn't take very long if he is ready. Johnson: Apparently you haven't worked with an attorney lately. Edmonds: (Inaudible) I will guarantee I will get him into my attorney if he is ready. (inaudible) Johnson: Let me ask a question here of staff, is it possible to give the applicant here a list of the criteria that has to be met before we move forward on this sometime within the next week or so or is that information that is already out there. Certainly our minutes when we tabled it initially would have addressed some of the, my memory isn't good enough to remember back to June of 1995. Shearer: The sewer easement has always been a problem (inaudible) Stiles: Chairman Johnson and Commissioners it has been so long since I have looked at this I have no idea what all the issues are, I know the major thing has always been the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 5 sewer easement through Vern Alleman's property. Whether any of the other conditions have been addressed or the plat changed to reflect those comments I don't know. I am also worried about the public notice requirements and I don't have any idea where we are on that legally. Johnson: Let me ask this question then, the oness is on the applicant to clarify the sewer easement correct? Is the City of Meridian holding that up in any way? Stiles: No Johnson: That is something they have to work out between themselves isn't that correct? Stiles: Yes Johnson: So we can't give them any guidance on how to do that right? Stiles: No Johnson: Well I think then this commission can do what they want to do and make a motion accordingly. 1 would guess until we are certain that some agreement has been worked out that there is no sense for us to table without for a short period of time and not knowing whether or not anything has been done. So, I really don't have any suggestions on how to handle that any better. It is up to you people what you want to do. The missing item is the same missing item that has been missing for well over a year. There is nothing we can do about that as a City. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, there is the item of the sewer, there may be others. It seems to me that one way we can approach this is direct staff to basically give us the findings again and dig those out and give everybody a copy. I think it is time to bring this to a vote. The applicant has had a lot of time to address these issues and maybe we do it in January or February but I think it is time. Obviously we can go on forever. If it is up to Vern Alleman whether your development goes through that just seems peculiar to me. You are the applicant you are responsible to move it forward not Vern. Edmonds: I have done what I can do, I am ready. If he is ready, if he is going to do it let's go do it, if he is not going to do it say so and we don't do it and we do something else. That is where i am at this point. We are ready, and I will do everything I can do to put it together. But first off he wouldn't even talk about that until he has seen how it is going to affect his land. He had to go to an engineer and that took a long time. Merkle at Hubble Engineering took forever. We would come back here and supposed to have it in 30 days and we get back here and her wouldn't have it. We did that three times if you look in the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 6 record it was tabled three times for that reason. That has been done now I understand but I haven't seen it. I guess we need to go to the attorney if he is going to go through with it then we will draw up an easement to his liking whatever. We have worked with Gary on the sewer on the manholes, he didn't want any manholes on his property, that is 330 feet. It has to be engineered it had to show manholes on Kevin Howell's property and one on ours and covered back up where they can farm it and no disturb it at all. Put it back just like it is (inaudible) all of that takes time and it is something beyond my control. If I could do it I would do it. Johnson: Well it is definitely beyond our control. Oslund: I would like to make a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that first the staff supply us with the findings of fact on this. I am assuming those have been prepared. Johnson: I don't think they would have been, because we tabled this from the very first meeting is that not true? I don't remember. I would have to pull the file on that and I just don't know. Crookston: Excuse me, I believe that findings of fact were initially done on the annexation but as has been said quite a few times prior tonight I would have to go back and look at the record. But I believe that I have done findings on the annexation. Shearer: (Inaudible) Crookston: I think at one time it even went as far as the City Council and findings were done and it came back to the Commission. Johnson: Well we are kind of guessing here I guess what we need to do is to find out what we have done and to try and determine whether findings that were prepared that long ago have any worth today. I think that is the decision you have to come up with. And we can't do that unless we analyze those findings. Oslund: I am trying to figure out a way to make a motion that we can get some action at the next meeting and then maybe by February have this thing resolved. But without knowing where we are at. Shearer. I would think that we would table this (inaudible) until January or February date and if nothing is done by then reject it and then start over if it comes back. Johnson: Have you finished your motion, was that a motion Commissioner Osknd? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 7 Oslund: It sounded good to me if it is a motion I will second it. Johnson: No I meant your motion, was that a motion or were you just thinking about making one? Oslund: Well he did so well 1 am about ready to second his conversation. Crookston: Mr. Alleman would like to make a comment. Johnson: Do you have a comment Vern, help us out here? Alleman: My name is Vern Alleman and I reside at 2101 E. Ustick, Meridian. I thought that perhaps I couldn't testify, I want to testify. Johnson: Well we want your input, if you have some input that will speed this thing along that is what we are looking for right now. Alleman: Okay, to clarify the past it is true, I did have the land surveyed but that wasn't the problem. That has been done a long time and there has been no contact with me on that at all. So since that time, since there has been no contact until today about an hour before 5:00 or somewhere and I wasn't home. that is the only contact that I have had so I have told them that I would work with them but I had to have it done right and I had to have an attorney and a planner to do it. So that is where we are at and I understand one thing further which I think should be considered in this is that there is not, that I have been told by the other developer that is involved in this that they have not reached an agreement with him to participate in getting that over to my property. I talked to the developer about that and they have had a problem there because they want to change which way it came across that property. So that is where it is. Johnson: To sum it up then nothing has been worked out and you haven't had any recent contact? Alleman: No Johnson: Thank you Vern Shearer. Mr. Chairman, I move we table this until the February meeting and if at that time we will take action on it one way or another. Oslund: Second and call for discussion. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission December 10, 1996 Page 8 Johnson: We have a motion on the floor to table this to our February meeting which is February 11, and some discussion prior to the vote. Oslund: I think that on item one we should go ahead and direct the attorney to prepare findings of fact whether they are already prepared or not, that way we will have something to act on the January meeting and not wait until February. Because right now we don't even know that if we may go to February and then find out we don't have any findings and then we need to order them and then we are into March and so I think we need Shearer: (inaudible) we don't have any findings when they research why we can have them done from January to February. Oslund: Your motion was to table to February so we won't even be looking at it in January. So I am saying whether they are prepared right now or not but in January let's look at the findings and consider the findings. Then make a determination at that point. Johnson: Any further discussion, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: What we need to do is review the information that we have already had prepared between now and our next meeting. Let's do that, that is what you are saying. Oslund: (Inaudible) Borup: If there were findings we will have that or maybe the minutes of the last meeting where anything (inaudible) Johnson: So we will update ourselves -and perhaps you can give me a call on that Wayne if it is incomplete or whatever. I want to welcome Boy Scout Troop #180 here this evening, I have no idea why you are here. Is this part of a merit badge thing? Good, this is not your tax dollars at work, we are all volunteers here, City Council, that is your tax dollars at work. That is when you want to be critical. ITEM #3: TABLED NOVEMBER 12, 1996: PRELIMINARY FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: ITEM #4`. TABLED NOVEMBER 12,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE RANCH SUBDIVISION BY THE WESTPARK COMPANY: Johnson: We have a letter from the applicant withdrawing the application. I need a motion Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 40 by next month and if he doesn't than it gets denied. All of these are (inaudible) big concern about the water pressure, Shari has 13 items, the way I look at it all of those have to be resolved by the time the findings of fact are ready and if it is not and hopefully that would be reflected in the findings. Hepper: That is what I am wondering if that stuff is going to be in in time to be reflected in the findings. Rountree: I think Mr. Crookston might have something to say about that. Crookston: For additional information to be included in the findings it needs to be presented to the Commission realistically as part of the public hearing or if you make a statement that you are going to accept written statements for a period of time than you can do that when you state that they will be put into the record. For the purposes of the findings it is best to have those made a part of the record so that the findings can use those things. Alidjani: So I guess what you are trying to educate me personally is because I did not say the request of Bruce and Stiari that could or could not affect the findings? Crookston: They could yes, as well as particularly the (inaudible) Ada County Highway District. Rountree: And the public. Crookston: And the public Hepper: I think that the public also needs to be, these studies and stuff need to be made available to the public too. I would make a motion that we table this until we receive further information. Crookston: Do you want to table have a motion to table the public hearing so that these matters can be addressed at a public hearing without publication of a notice then I would suggest that you make a motion to table the public hearing to be brought back up whenever you want it brought back up and have the additional information submitted either to the Commission prior to that time at the public hearing. Hepper: Say that in English? Rountree: (Inaudible) Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 41 Hepper: I don't know, I am not trying to circumvent the public, I think they made their position pretty clear. I think from my own standpoint I think 1 understand their position before I make a determination on the recommendation I would like to see what Ada County Highway District has to say and I would like to see a possible solution to the City's water pressure question out there and a couple of these other things. I don't know that we need to have another public hearing. Crookston: No you wouldn't have another public hearing you would just have this public hearing hearing, it would need to be re -opened but you would have that continued and realistically if someone wants to come forward on the date that it is continued to they would have the right to do that. But if you keep the record open then it is best to do that so you can have the ACHD comments submitted and made a part of the record. Hepper: Potentially someone from the public may have a comment about the ACHD comments. So we would probably want to restrict the public hearing to new information. Crookston: You can do that, but I want to see ACHD's comments because normally we have those comments prior to the public hearing. They are part of the record at the time the public hearing is held. When we do not have them until after the public hearing we actually need to have the public hearing held open. Rountree: Did that communicate to you? Hepper: Yes, I would like to amend my motion that we table the public hearing until our next Crookston: You need to re -open the hearing, the hearing has been closed. Hepper: I would make a motion that we re -open the public hearing and then table it until we have received ACHD comments and get some of these other questions resolved. Alidjani: Second Rountree: We have a motion and a second to re -open the hearing, leave the hearing open until such time as we have received the information specific to ACHD's comments and addressing the City staffs comments at our next regularly scheduled meeting July 11th, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea 0 0 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 25 during the morning and evening rush hour you are talking about adding I don't know how many thousand new homes in the entire area. 1 don't know whether or not their proposals have the proper number of accesses into all of the subdivisions. Also, the irrigation concerns me, right now we are adjacent to the Borup's property and the irrigation comes across on the high ground right there which accesses our property on the high ground which allows us to irrigate the entire property. If they try and tile that and put it way below surface so they can put the subdivision in there is that going to affect our irrigation which then flows down to our neighbors irrigation. The sewer I didn't bring my X-ray vision so I couldn't see through the card here through the back. To access the second subdivision the sewer coming down through the slough has to go I believe through my neighbors property and then through the back of my property. I don't know that they have easement or access right now to that to access the second property to be able to get rid of the lift station. So that concerns me. The schools you already know were overcrowded on the schools for this much density. The access on the road and of course I am against the subdivision having access to our private road and affecting the way we maintain that. Those are my major concerns right now. Thanks. Hepper: Could you show us where your property is on that plat? Peterson: (Inaudible) Hutchinson: For record this is Sharp's, this is Reichert's, Peterson's, Dauvin's, Robert's, Alleman owns this. Peterson: This is the slough? Hutchinson: Yes Peterson: Now to get access for this for sewer you have to come (inaudible) Hutchinson: (Inaudible) Hepper: Once the roads are in the sewer would be brought down the road right of ways is that correct? Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Vern Alleman, 2101 East Ustick, was sworn by the City Attorney. Alleman: I guess, you each have a copy of the letter that I presented and I can go over 0 • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 26 that I don't know as it is necessary in regards and I don't know as it pertains to this particularly. But in regards to this property and the one time split, the one time split if it is what I am thinking they are thinking of has already been done on this property. When.my brother (End of Tape) so how it affects what they are doing I don't know. I guess I am open to any questions you might have concerning my letter. Hepper: Would you like to address the sewer easement through your property if that becomes necessary for this project to be viable would you be willing to do that. Is that something you are against? Alleman: Well, I have stated there are certain conditions that have to be met in order for them to cross my property. Of course that is that there would be no roadways across it. I can read here what I said, I am concerned about the sewer which will need to cross our property. The location of the sewer is very important it must be located so that it will properly serve our property if need be in the future. This requires engineering and planning and legal documents. The timing of construction and method must be done to conform to my farming operation. Upon completion it must be put back in shape for present farming without manholes and so forth. There is proposed street exiting the proposed subdivision on the west and entering our property on the east. There must not be any streets across our property for traffic or for sewer servicing until such time as our property is developed. As I stated we have owned this land for 25 years on the north and west side of Packard No. 2. 1 am presently farm this and additional land, I farm the Brown until this year and we have 2 sons who are involved in various farming activities with us. It is my intention to continue to operate as we do now. Because of the development around us it is important to be involved in the planning process. It is in the context that I make reference to the developing of the property. And if you so desire I can read the rest of it but you have it. I would be, I would hope that they could have enough area for sewer servicing without putting a road and obstacles in my property for sewer. Is there any questions? Rountree: Thank you, anyone else wish to testify? Albert Dauvin, 2820 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Dauvin: I kind of live kitty comer from the Brown property there. We live in a 3,000 square foot brick home. It is very nicely landscaped. I probably have a deck bigger than the homes that they are planning on building behind my house. It is an insult to my integrity to say that they are going to put a 30 foot buffer zone around John Barnes, and Miller's house and Johnson's house that sits on this Council and they do not consider me or the Peterson's in this thing. I think the buffer zone needs to go around the larger lots just as Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 27 well as it does the smaller ones. Peterson's have just built their house their they are not planning on moving. We have lived there for nine years we are not planning on moving. I am a businessman here in this community. I can't see where they are coming off saying we are putting a buffer around Carol Subdivision and they come down there and they are treating us like we are some kind of old farmers or something or yokel-dokles it is just it is beyond me to what they think they are dealing with here. They have insulted everyone of the neighbors and done stuff that is just not right. I think maybe they need to go back and realize we are human beings and they need to come and talk to us before this thing ever goes any further. They need to have a buffer zone there they need to have, you have animals we raise horses, we have a cult or 2 a year. You get little kids in there with the colt and a mean mare and the kid gets between them what do you think is going to happen? That mare is going to kick the tar out of that kid. How can we, when we work or are away from home how can we be responsible for these kids. We have it right now with the kids in Carol Subdivision, they come down the slough, we own the land that the slough comes through and they come down through there right now and you can't control it. Alidjani: Would you show us your house? Dauvin: (Inaudible) Alidjani: So then really the southwest comer of your property and their property is abutting? Dauvin: (Inaudible) If you are going to have a buffer zone it should be around everybody's property, it shouldn't be around just a slick few. I guess is what I am trying to say, everybody should be treated equal, not some better than others. So that buffer zone it should be in place for everybody because I don't think anybody is intending on living or moving right away or dying in here. You buy a house to stay there for a while you don't buy it to sell. We are perfectly happy right there. I think that is basically all I have to say besides the sewer line as to go through my property sooner or later in years to come and I am not anti -growth don't get me wrong, it is just the idea the way it was approached. I told the gentlemen when this first came up that they could I would tell the neighbors and we would have a meeting in our front room and that never came about. So, it was never handled responsibly. Hepper. Are you just to the north of Peterson's property, is that yours, where the slough goes through? Dauvin: (Inaudible) That is all I have to say. • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 28 Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Roberta Thompson, 2950 Wingate, was sworn by the City Attorney. Thompson: Of course my concerns are similar to Craig's and he just stated them earlier in the letter he read. I have a couple more concerns that come up, I might need to show you where our property is. (Inaudible) Our title insurance makes us understand that we own the property that the slough runs through, the government owns the water. So that is a little bit of a problem as far as getting access to that area where the slough runs through without our permission. As far as negotiations it is probably not acceptable because then it would take some of our property to be able to have access to that sewer and maintain it and whatever. Another concern I have is a question for Mr. Crookston is what constitutes a private road and how can, is that a tough one? Except for the fact that apparently a private road is owned and maintained by the people who use the road. If in fact the easement statement that the gentleman made earlier is correct we could not find that information, we went to the courthouse and tried to find it and could not find it. So 1 will need to see his documentation to see what that is. I am just wondering at what point can someone on a private lane designate that area to be public and use for public access. I am under the understanding it cannot be done by any person along the road it has to be done by everyone in order to designate it as a public use in any section of it. If in fact which Mr. Sigmond indicated to us earlier in another after another meeting that they would not impact Wingate Lane at all. They would just put their subdivision in and go along with their business. Well, it does impact us simply by the fact of how it does cross Wingate and leaves that open for access by the subdivision. We don't' want to be laborious on this issues but it is very important that you folks understand our problem with the fact that there would be an access there. Not only the agricultural meeting with the urban but also where Wingate intersects with Ustick is halfway between the mile of Eagle and Locust Grove. There is an immense amount of traffic already. It is a small access so very hard to get out into that road without some kind of a problem as far as seeing who is coming and who is going. If it is children, teenagers going to school there are going to be many accidents there with the more use. It is a single lane and we are able to use it because it is light use, we have an area where we move over and people come in. I don't think that would happen with someone that was late for school and trying to get there swiftly. Still concerned about the R1 and the R-4 where there is a (inaudible) acre properties there on Wingate Lane and having R-4 next to it. I am wondering about the property values and that type of question a little bit. We are not opposed, I can speak for myself I am not opposed to the growth, I think growth is good if it is done correctly and if it is done without encroachment on people that are existing there and having their life there already. So, if these considerations are made I was a little concerned with the statement made about being aware of the problem and to be aware of a problem and actually say what you are going Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 29 to do to fix it to me are 2 different things. So, we would really like to know what there intentions are to solve this problem that we feel like we have with that spot on Wingate Lane. If there is anyway possible to be able to communicate with them on this at this point we would appreciate that. That is all. Rountree: Thank you, anyone else wish to testify? Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I think a couple things that need to be reiterated is we have heard repeatedly about the comprehensive plan and this does not go outside the guidelines of that. However, in looking at the comprehensive plan there are certain guidelines and those of course being sewer. I think for a developer to ask this council or anybody to take on an expensive lift station so they can have what they want at the expense of others is not being very fair to those of us who will have to pick up the load for that. We hear a lot or hear quite a bit about they are going to work with us. I have yet to hear a developer say let's try to divide the Brown and Borup's subdivisions so we don't have to cross Wingate Lane. This right now is a big thorn for those of us who live on that private lane and of course we are at the very end of the lanb. With the argument we will talk and work with the Sharp's or the Reichert's or whoever has to cross that, can you imagine a gate and every time you wanted to go down that lane you had to use, and what if someone came to see you in the middle of the night? Who is going to maintain the gate, I am sure if I can't get it open they are going to love to come with an oil can to make sure we can swing that gate. I don't think these things are really thoroughly thought through. If he is really sincere the owners and developers that they want to develop this and I don't know the highway department says they have to have 2 accesses in and out they would design it so they could go without going over Wingate Lane over a private lane. We have a really unique situation here in that it is a private lane and they want to put a public across it. So I think that really needs to be addressed. I think that when you talk about talking to each other and I admired the man that was here before who said rather than cause a problem with the people he would withdraw his permit. I have never heard a developer say that we will walk and talk and work with you so that we all have what we want. It is I want, we want the developer and unfortunately they get what they want. Of course they talked about the schools, we know someone who tried to buy some of that property on Wingate Lane and we know they can't go to the schools they are going to be bussed over to Meridian schools which is quite a ways away. Of course here again is another expense for us (inaudible) bussing these children clear across town because they can't go to Chief Joseph which is practically a stone's throw away. We have also heard, I didn't tonight but we have heard about the broadening of the tax base and we know that is true, it broadens it (inaudible) feature for us why are we suffering so with our schools and the things that the taxes Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 30 provide. I wanted to, the thing that comes foremost to my mind, we have lived on the lane (inaudible) and granted for so that the original owner could get to it. What (inaudible) after us (inaudible) our choice which is to live out in the rural area where we have a graveled dirt lane that we maintain. I think that we need to be considered as well as those people. Of course I realize that we talked about the water and we talked about the high water table and it is a serious factor. We have just a small cellar under our house and we have to (inaudible) is high. These are things that really need to be considered. I would like to ask you very sincerely to consider our issues too. Maybe off the record, how many people are usually on this council? Alidjani: Why should it be off the record? Sharp: I notice that we haven't got the usual number of people. (Inaudible) Sharp: Can you act on it without your other people? Rountree: Yes, we have a quorum. Sharp: Well, that makes it interesting. Anyway, I am opposed to it until they redesign it so they don't have to cross Wingate Lane. Rountree: Thank you, anyone else wish to testify? Billy Jo Premoe, 3045 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Premoe: I would also just like to address our concern as members of Wingate Lane Users, as I understand our property which is near Ustick on the northern end of the lane was the original land owner and was the property that gave the access to the Sharp property and established the original use the easement through this property. My concern is that these people have bought these properties knowing that there was no access and that they would be having to infringe upon what has been a long standing private area. Now they expect everyone to bow to meet their needs to find a way to make it work for them. Those of us who bought through the years purchased our land because we like the type of area it was that is was private and took upon the responsibility of a private lane and maintain it so we could have the quality of life we want so we can have the rural environment. We just don't feel that this property has the right to go across what has been a longstanding private lane and infringe upon the rights of the Sharp's and the rest of us who have been maintaining this property. I would like to go on record as saying I oppose it. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 31 Rountree: Anyone else wish to testify? Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I also oppose this subdivision, it has kind of been piece meal planning from the start and we are getting all of this stuff at a here and there. You don't know what is going on half the time. As far as going ahead with the subdivision and approving any annexation or approval of these subdivisions that these services should be available before it ever goes and approved by City Council so they can proceed with the subdivision. They don't have access, sewer. They are saying that we should pick up the lift station so that they can profit from it. As far as I think that the people on Wingate Lane should have the same treatment as far as buffering as Carol Subdivision. Carol Subdivision is getting preferential treatment. We have 5 acres, our neighbors, Reicherts have 5 acres and on down the way they probably have the larger acreage than Carol Subdivision. As far as I am concerned and others that this is preferential treatment because they are backing up those small lots right in front of our property. I am opposed to that, as far as access to Wingate Lane that is a private lane and it has been for as long as I have been there and I have a document that says it was 1913. As far as those people accessing it and I am sure that what they would like to do if this is approved these subdivisions is bring their construction equipment down through there. What about the traffic that is (inaudible) going to come right down Wingate Lane. So, I think that before anything is ever approved these services should be available. Our schools can't handle it, our water pressure, my neighbor right south in a subdivision said they have a trickle and that is in the city right now. We have irrigation laterals there that certainly has to be addressed to the one that goes down my property to the west and one goes to the north and to service all of those people down there. So there is lots of things that should be addressed before it is ever approved. Rountree: Thank you, anyone else? Floyd Reichert, 2575 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Reichert: I have some concerns about it, also. I understand from the conversation tonight that the perimeter of it would be fenced, the irrigation water that we get comes out of the lateral out there that it comes out it is over on the old Borup property and Kirkpatrick's and comes across and comes down Dale's I would recommend that from the lateral on if they are going to tile it they should tile the whole ditch so if they go into a pressurized system so that it is synchronized rather than have it partly buried and then have it open and go to another pressurized system. I have spoke with the developer, if this development goes in I agree to grant him dedication across the front of my place to make the flow of that traffic a little easier which he would come on join onto Wingate and go a little bit further and go Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 32 through so the flow of traffic from the south to the north through the west would be more feasible and would be a more accessible road through there. We had started like I say with my property to include it into those but I have some personal tax problems that at this time it would not be convenient for me. The road that abuts me on the north like I say would be adequate if there is any future development of my property and Sharp's that sewer would be enough to carry it to the north. I would speak in favor of the annexation. Rountree: Anyone else? Ted do you want to come up and address some of the questions. Hutchinson: For the record the recorded document with the reference to Wingate Lane is found in Book 6, page 253 of the contracts and agreements on record at the Ada County Recorders Office, we will provide a copy. It is a little hard to read but it was granted in 1913 and there are several people involved including Cynthia Aldridge, Fred Ames, Harry Yost, C.IC Van Auker, I believe it is L.A. Lewison, and H.A. and I can't quite read that last name being the owners of several tracts of land constituting and bordering on the east line of the east half of the northwest 1/4 of Section 5, T. 3N, R.1 E of the Boise Meridian being described for opening and maintenance a private road along said line beginning a the public highway forming the north line of Section 5 and running south along the said east line of the east half of the northwest 1/4 said Section 5, being the half section line to the southeast corner of the northwest corner of said section line. Said road to be 15 feet in width. Now therefore we the undersigned do here by agree to and with each other and bind ourselves and our successors as owners of the several tracts abutting the said half section line that we will open and maintain a private road 15 feet in width. The half section line constituting the east line of the said road. That the road will be for the use of all the owners or the said tracts with equal rights as to use of the same that it has bee witnessed b those particular owners. That is the document that I have given you. It is a little difficult to read I think partly because of the age of the document. That did (inaudible) property owners the developers of this property have taken title the ground, they are owners they own a portion of that particular easement that is referred to in this document. It is their intention to develop only that portion and improve that portion that lies within their property. As far as cutting off that access there are several options one would be to put in a gate as I have suggested earlier. It is not out of the question and it is not an impossibility that the balance that is not improved as public right of way could actually be dedicated to the highway district and the developer could let them do with it what they desire. But I think because you read that document you will find that the dedication of the easement was west of the center section line for 15 feet so that in essence cut everybody on the east off so I don't know how those people have gained access to Wingate. But we don't want to affect the traffic that uses Wingate lane. Obviously we are going to affect those properties that belong to the Sharp's and Reichert's because the development 0 9 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 33 basically surrounds their properties. We won't affect that portion that is not on our property they will have complete access through that portion of the development and part of it on a public street. If they want to continue to use an unimproved gravel road rather than to take a public street out of their property they have that and we will continue to provide for that particular access. I am not sure what questions that you might have that I can answer that have been raised by those people who have testified. Alidjani: What is your tentative time that you think that Chamberlain will go through the street and you will have access to sewer and water? Any rough idea at all? Hutchinson: I believe that they, the time frame that I have heard has been about 2 to 3 years before Chamberlain is built out to that extent. Again it is part of it is market driven, if the market stays like it has been of course we have had a bit of a slow down but I think that we are still seeing some growth it is not the rapid rate that we had before. Alidjani: So would it be correct to say if their project does not go through you do not have a sewer line to your project? Hutchinson: That would be correct, we wouldn't have a sewer line to the north to Packard No. 2, Packard No. 1 is going to connect to existing sewer in Dove Meadows. Alidjani: May I interrupt you, didn't you also say that Dove Meadows at the present time do have some problem and the connection of a stub street is not going to happen for awhile? Hutchinson: Dove Meadows No. 2 the preliminary plat approval for that subdivision has expired. Mr. Leader is checking his options to decide whether or not he is going to go ahead. We are going to have to make that connection make the street connection and that would also include the sewer connection on Hickory so that, whether Dove Meadows No. 2 goes through or not we will acquire the ground for dedication of the public right of way and construct the street. Alidjani: Maybe I am missing something, how could you do that if that doesn't belong to Dove Meadows No. 2 and you don't have control of it? Hutchinson: Well Mr. Leader is willing to work with us to make that provision. Alidjani: So I guess what you are saying you are going to talk to the original owner then you would do some kind of easement. 0 • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 34 Hutchinson: Actually it would be a public dedication of a right of way so that there would be public road right of way fully improved to public street standards. In fact it would be a collector status street 60 feet wide with curb, gutter and sidewalk. So Hickory will be a continuous street from Fairview up through Packard No. 1. That would be the provision of the sewer for Packard no. 1 and we worked out, we have been in contact with the City Engineer about provision of a lift station and it is our understanding and that the lift station would not be able to serve beyond Packard Subdivision No. 1. So the development of Packard No. 2 would be contingent upon provision of gravity sewer through the south slough. I don't know if that helped clarify that or not for you. With regard to the lift station, I believe the developers will tell you that in the covenants there is going to be an additional assessment that will be charged to the lot owners on a monthly basis will be collected to help offset the cost of the maintenance of that lift station so that it is not entirely borne by the City but it would be by the users. Hepper: I have a question, one of the concerns was why Wingate Lane couldn't remain as it is with a subdivision, part of Packard No. 2 accessing from Locust Grove and the other part accessing from Fairview, could you address why that wouldn't be feasible from your stand point? Hutchinson: I don't think it makes good traffic planning sense to make that kind of division. The highway district is looking for a collector status street in this particular area. They would love to get Wingate Lane but they know the problems there so they are not about to push to get Wingate Lane as a collector street. So they would like to have a collector status street somewhere in that immediate vicinity. We are providing a stub that will eventually provide that collector status street to Ustick in the event that Mr. Alleman decides that it is more profitable to subdivide then to farm. But as far as having one then the other we are providing a continuity of the existing street pattern and the street system it makes more traffic sense to provide that then to in essence you would end up with a dead end that is more than half a mile from Fairview and a dead end more than half a mile from Locust Grove and that just doesn't make good traffic sense. Hepper: Have we got comments from Ada County Highway District that would pertain to that? I don't think in my packet that (inaudible). Hutchinson: No, the highway district has asked for a traffic study on this and there was originally a traffic study prepared for Packard No. 1. When we submitted Packard No. 2 they wanted that traffic study updated to include the information. That traffic study is being completed now by Dobey Engineering. As soon as that traffic study is completed a copy will be forwarded to the City of Meridian and also to the highway district. They will make their formal comments once they have that traffic study. We took this proposal to the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 35 highway district from the beginning, we have talked to City staff, we have talked to Shari about this proposal, and she identified many of the issues that have arisen here. We talked to the highway district and that is where the issue of the collector streets and .the number of stubs and how the street pattern is laid out in this particular development and based upon the comments that we received from Ada County Highway District. They are holding their official comments until they get that updated traffic study but that would be forthcoming very shortly. Hepper: Are they going to have a public hearing on that do you know? Hutchinson: They take care of it at their regular public hearings but I don't know that they publish the specifics like your notification for this particular public hearing consider this item I don't know how the highway district operates on that on their agenda. But again the street patterns has been based upon interviews from the highway district. Rountree: There were a couple of issues that I heard and I don't know if it is a matter of clarity or what, would you point out not only for us but for the audience the routing of the sewer. Several people testified it would have to come through their property and that is not my understanding. Hutchinson: The sewer would come from the west through Chamberlain Estates in here. I am not sure exactly where you have that planned as far as servicing Chamberlain, but it is my understanding that within we are hoping to have this provision across Mr. Alleman's ground here and once it got to this intersection which would be right here then it would extend south so that it would pick up not only all of Packard but it would pick up Packard No. 1 and provide for extension further to the west. However, I don't know how the city would want to, if they are looking at further extending it on the south slough or whether they would want it to go out somewhere else. I don't know that you have really identified that have you? Rountree: For purpose of your proposal it would (inaudible) south in (inaudible). Hutchinson: The only place it would cross Wingate Lane would be in this improved public road section in here. That is down here that is south of Peterson's in the public road right of way and then come over this way. It would be in the public road in front of Reichert's and then in the public road down so that we could eventually remove that lift station that will service this one and then all gravity flow to the northwest. Rountree: There also seems to be some folks concerned about the use of the Wingate (inaudible) at the Reichert property you have also indicated that there would be no access Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 36 provided for the (inaudible) and you propose to mechanically gate that or design that into the project so only those folks will have the easement use of that (inaudible). Hutchinson: Right, anyone south of this point and that would only be the two the Reichert property and Sharp property anything south of this point would be the only users. It is designed so that the public street is more convenient than this very narrow dirt road. This would be designed to discourage the use of this road. In fact (inaudible) if it takes a gate with the Sharp's having a key than that is what it would be. The visitors would use the public road right of way to get down to this point where they would enter the easement which would then go the Sharp's. The question of using Wingate Lane as a visitor when there is a public street access. Rountree: (Inaudible) Anybody else? Alidjani: I guess the whole complaint or problem is when the dedicated road goes across Wingate Lane at that point. Hutchinson: Yes, this section and it actually would go from about this point which is at this intersection because Mr. Reichert has indicated that he would be willing to allow the improvement of his ground dedication for public road improvement so it would be to this point then, this would be public right of way and they are concerned that rather than stay on a public street that they would want to go over curb, gutter or vertical curb or try to go through a gate or whatever. The concern is traffic will want to naturally go up this road. It makes more sense for the convenience of using a paved public road as opposed to a one lane dirt road, it just makes more sense the traffic will use the higher speed paved road. Alidjani: Thank you Hutchinson: I guess in final comment right now there is a bit of a rural flavor to it and we recognize that, the city limits is coming out to them, in fact the city limits is to them now. I don't know if Sharp's commented when Kearney Place went in or when this phase of Chateau Meadows went in, those are smaller lots than we are proposing anywhere in our subdivision. The urban development is there, this is just a logical extension of your own city limits and your own street patterns. (Inaudible) Rountree: You need to come up and ask the question. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 37 Peterson: You stated earlier Rountree: You need to address the question to the Commission. Peterson: He stated earlier that the easement for Wingate Lane was on the west side of the section line and you were saying you were going to maintain access on Wingate Lane but it seems to indicate here that their property is coming all the way over to the section line which would be the back of all of this property is using up Wingate Lane. So is it going to stay intact on the back of this property which this is my property here. If Wingate Lane lines up with this road right here we are going to be cutting all of these lots by a 1/3 down this section. This is Wingate Lane here and it doesn't really show it well and I don't know what is going to happen here. Hutchinson: The base map which has the colors on it with the exception of these black and white ones were prepared by Ada County GIS using the assessors records. They have drawn on here what they have as of record and this thin red line that runs here these 2 lines are Wingate Lane. Now when it gets down to this point at this scale of map it is a little difficult, 15 feet on a 200 scale map gets, the lines themselves can be wider than 15 feet. So when you are dealing on this scale it is our intention that those properties will be fenced against access to Wingate Lane. The easement is there we cannot cut off the easement, they have the legal right to the access to that easement. We recognize that we are not trying to interfere with their access (End of Tape) and will still exist once this development is completed. Rountree: So you are stating that you would physically cut the access off to those lots in your development that presently would have access? Hutchinson: Right, those lots will not have any access to Wingate Lane, in fact not only the covenants would prohibit it but I believe there would be notes on the plat prohibiting access to it. Only those people who have access which would be the Sharp's, the Reichert's and I believe Robert's and anybody on the west side of that section line according to this document have access to that particular easement. But because it is there we will recognize that easement, we will not interfere with their use of the easement. Crookston: What kind of a document are you going to have that is going to evidence that the property that the lot owners in the subdivision would not have access to Wingate Lane? Hutchinson: That would be included in the covenants for this subdivision and if the City Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 38 would prefer we can also include it as a note on the plat that there is no access from any of the lots within this development to the Wingate Lane easement. Sharp: Here again we are getting conflicting stories, I talked to the engineer for the department of highway and he says they don't care one thing for Wingate Lane and he is telling us they want to kind of get their hands on it so they can have another access through there. I think what I am asking is for the City Attorney or some attorney to really fine read that document. Of course when that was written in 1913 people were a little bit more honest and maybe intent is a factor there. Was that road intended only for access for those. He said his people in the subdivision won't have access to it, if that is the case why bother to cross Wingate Lane except to annoy us. Like you said, he said it isn't feasible or to go along with the flow of the traffic to design it so it doesn't cross Wingate lane why does a drawing in fact submitted or is that they are talking about economic feasibility which should not be a factor in any decision except for those that are developing it certainly shouldn't be for this board or the City Council. And going along with the City Council we were at the meeting Tuesday night and phase 1 was tabled it has not been accepted yet or annexed by the City of Meridian. Here again they are asked to go back to the drawing board and take care of some problems. So my question is since this is all kind of intertwined with phase 1 s1nd 2 maybe we had better look at the whole picture and not do it just spot by spot. But like I said I talked to the engineer for the highway department and while he couldn't give me legal advice because he is an attorney for the highway department I also talked to him and here again I would like to see the attorney's really scrutinize that document. Thank you Alidjani: Mrs. Sharp, what was the gentleman that you talked to what was his name? Sharp: I have it on another piece of paper, it ends with Lund, Joel Lund was the engineer with the highway department. I'm sorry I didn't bring that piece of paper, I could get that to you, the attorney. Like I said he couldn't give me legal advice because he has to act for the highway department as I am sure is true for Mr. Crookston here too. I would like to see him scrutinize that document closely. I think intent might be a factor there too. Rountree: Thank you, anyone else? Dixie Lee Roberts, 2855 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Roberts: I would just like to make it a public record that I too am very concerned about what happens to our community out there. The same as my neighbors, I think with subdivisions comes a lot of children along with it. My concern is that we do have cattle and children wander into the fields and it is my concern of their safety and of the ditch also. • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting June 22, 1995 Page 39 Little children and drowning and so on. Thank you. Rountree: Mr. Alleman? Alleman: Just for a matter of clarification they have indicated that I want to clarify that I am presently farming and I plan to continue there. But because of the development around that I feel it is important that I put the input into this but I am not, it is not my intention to divide it, develop it or to sell it. So if that enters into the considerations well then I think I should clarify that for your consideration. Thank you. Rountree: Anyone else? Mick Dauvin, 2820 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Dauvin: My concern is that you are looking at an incomplete plan. You don't have highway studies, you don't have your sewer lines complete. You don't have access defined on here. I think you ought to wait until you get a total plan to look at for this development. Again my other concern is a buffer between agricultural and residential. We have got animals and water and kids don't mix with that very well. Rountree: Anyone else? Seeing none I will close the hearing. We need findings or an action. Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that we ask our City Attorney to draw findings of fact and conclusions of law for this public hearing for zoning and annexation. Hepper: Discussion? Rountree: Not unless it is seconded. Motion dies for lack of a second. Hepper: Can we have discussion now? I think we need to table this until we can get some answers to some of these things. I would like to see what Ada County Highway District has to say about it, about Wingate Lane in particular. Also concerned about the access, it doesn't appear to be access to the property right at the moment. I think they need to alleviate that problem as well. I think the Dove Meadows access is probably a solution to that. We have also got a question about sewer through Mr. Alleman's property I think that needs to be resolved. We have a question about water pressure with City water, the water table. We have a couple of things there that need to be resolved before we can. Alidjani: The reason that I made the motion the way I did is because he could get it done Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 2 CORPORATE PARK PHASE 5 BY RON NAHAS: Johnson: We have a letter that the applicant desires this to be pushed forward, we need to do this to a date certain. The date requested is 8-8-95 which is our next regularly scheduled meeting. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we put this item on table until our next regularly scheduled meeting August 8. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we table item #1 until our August meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED JUNE 22, 1995: ACCESSORY USE PERMIT TO SELL AN OCCASIONAL FIREARM BY JIM COMBE: Johnson: We have a letter from Mr. Combe asking to withdraw this request and withdraw his application. Does that take any kind of action Wayne? Crookston: No, you need a motion to take it off the table and then a motion to withdraw it. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we take item 2 off the table and withdraw per the request of the applicant. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we take this item off the table and approve the request by the applicant to withdraw his application, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED JUNE 22, 1995: PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: At this point I will step down because I have an apparent conflict of interest. Rountree: I need to check with the City Attorney, is it optional to take more testimony. We held it open to receive the testimony of ACHD which we have done and staff comments. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission July 11, 1995 Page 3 Crookston: If those were the only things that is was left open for that is all you can do. Rountree: That is my recollection, if you would check please. (Inaudible) Rountree: We don't we have staff comments. How about I just ask, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to add to their previous testimony or would like to testify on this particular item? Sharp: A couple of things that I wanted to clarify is that on this annexation I wanted to know just what responsibility the City of Meridian might have once that was granted. Would they really be required at that time then to make sure that sewer and water etc. the services would have to be provided? Rountree: Gary, would you answer that please? Smith: I don't know from a technical standpoint if a property is annexed if the City is required to provide services or not. In the past it has been the developer, the applicant that has been required to bring services to their property. In this particular case I had some real concerns as to how they are going to get the services to the property because we have not seen any plans that show how that is to be done. Sharp: So you are saying that this has not been resolved? Smith: I haven't seen any plans as to how the sewer is to be provided to the property. The water reportedly is to come through the number 1 parcel which is to be accessed through an undeveloped portion of Dove Meadows Subdivision for water. I haven't seen any plans for that I understand my assistant has talked to the applicant's engineer about it, but I have not seen any plans. Sharp: I was also interested too in the first plat that we had seen there was no real, there were 2 accesses according to what the Highway Department told me when I called and I talked to 2 people down there, Mr. Joe Rosenlund and Dave Wynkoop, the attorney. Who said they have to have 2 accesses has that been shown that they do have that? If not then I am wondering why they would go ahead an annex at this time. Rountree: My recollection on the preliminary plats as proposed indicate accesses but they do not tie into existing streets at this point in time. As far as why they would request annexation at this time I think that is the developers prerogative to request it. The City will take action on their request. REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION -9.3 L KI - Ste, : �i _ •�� A request for preliminary plat approval must be in the City Clerk's possession no later than three days following the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear the request at the monthly meeting following the month the request was made. After a proposal enters the process, it may be acted upon at subsequent monthly meetings provided the necessary procedures and documentation are received before 5:00 P.M., Thursday following the Planning and Zoning Commission action. 1. Name of Annexation ad Subdivision: Packard Subdivision #2 2. General Location: NWIA Section 5, T.3N., R. 1E. 3. Owners of record: P.N.E./Edmonds Constrution Address: 3131 E. Lanark Meridian, Id , Zip 83642 Telephone 888-7255 Applicant: P.N.E./Edmonds Construction Address: 5. Engineer: Firm: Tealey's Land SurveAa Address: 109 S. 4th St. Boise. Id , Zip 83702 Telephone 385-0636 6. Name and address to receive City billings: Name: P.N.E. Address 3131 E. Lanark, Meridian, Id 83642 Telephone 888-7255 PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST: Subdivision Features 1. Acres 35.23 2. Number of lots 95 (Building sites) 3. Lots per acre 2.69 4. Density per acre 5. Zoning Classification(s) R-4 6. If the proposed subdivision is outside the Meridian City Limits but within the jurisdictional mile, what is the existing zoning classification? 7. Does the plat border a potential green belt? Yes 8. Have recreational easements been provided for? If required by the C4 Council 9. Are there proposed recreational amenities to the City? No Explain 10. Are there proposed dedications of common areas? Yes i's TT 11. What school(s) service the area? Chief Joseph Elementary/ Ustick Elementary Do you propose any agreements for future school sites? No Explain Other proposed amenities to the City _ Fire Department Meridian Other Explain Water Supply Yes Type of Building (Residential, Commercial, Industrial or combination) Residential Type of dwelling(s) (Single Family, Duplexes, Multiplexes, other) Single-family Proposed Development features: a. Minimum square footage of lot(s): 8,000 b. Minimum square footage of structure(s): 1,400 C. Are garages provided for? Yeses attached Square footage: d. Are other coverings provided for? No e. Landscaping has been provided for? Yes Describe The same landscape (2) 0 0 f. Trees will be provided for? Yes Trees will be maintained individual homeowners g. Sprinkler systems are provided for as required by City Ordinance h. Are there multiple units No Type remarks: i. Are there special set back requirements? No Explain j . Has off-street parking been provided for? k. 1. In. Value range of property Type of financing for development Protective covenants were submitted? Date: 16. Does the proposal land -lock other property? No Does it create enclaves? Yes Explain STATEMENTS OF COMPLIANCE: 1. Streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are to be constructed to the standards as required by the Ada County Highway District and Meridian Ordinance. Dimensions will be determined by the City Engineer. All sidewalks will be five feet (5') in width. 2. Proposed use is in conformance with the city of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 3. Development will connect to City services. 4. Development will comply with City ordinances. 5. Preliminary plat will include all appropriate easements. 6. Street names must not conflict with City grid system. (3) SOsI 0661 'IYlwIN .CUI wl '"ON lOBOb< :31v0 �I Tv.r; 'xJ3rq LlrtlO :w9E30 1 owrm 'uN ro rov R'p-vR'eR 'S NOLL035 Y/, MN 3W NI �nl pne Zro6 DMAMAwns GNrI SAME E Z '-N Noiswasas amJVd AO IV7d A3VNlwn38d 6 � ci nAgul LL o Q 3 v Q �m It Y (DW� (P I' �s .04 QJZ o I q�• ZWZ-QQ �y WWWW - F �mt J 1L WOCNN r- 8 d L R I I^ I ^ J ....wv ❑ . _ k 1� R � 6 _ R �" lR _ •M R .� n V •e •� � I I e k � R •�-.-..._ N F fes' � R•i R El - fl R Z _ �) R I(� I , � • � ^• R r. R :It +•' • i , I II YA Li 410 r� D m .LL,zoo v - - n R .. R R R _ IR "1 • „" za R R~ .r$� • y-. R R R S —ii c. e� .• °y jj I �y�l - R Y �_g k �S � I "gR •I tRr � k I � !4d I ^+ •� k.R Ij eg^'• R# R� i •� N_ " 3tl R v N iy •"i W p I _�X siIN1 k X R E � n^� 7 � ILC $i cy=i ap ?R••N k i3 t � � °� •7 I =�• �� •: � ei � � R R B k e R R w' µ, I Rw R R R xR .i�gi G r J - _ c I CS �'•t e� � N J r�i R a R-4 -- SRT !RT - --- L --AT RT RT RT R 1 fiT R-8 J �" tmLo pAev RT SVe _ L fix._ i" -r-" �UBq'AS ON yRl RTi--- �T`�OC+•r!rJR!'Y.y-`'' ''• {� '. •.• � •..s:rT.•v. � Ot.• er•, .J.7_ RT RT t R-4 _ RT L-0 _-; RT +{� RT ' RT R8 RT TREASURE RI PLEACWJ BUSINESS !� i CENIEP. PKWSE I I ! RT. 1 � UEJIV1510� � -- - RT ;t y. RT I -L THIS FORM FURNISHED COURTESY OF: I STEWART TITLE READ do APPROVED BY GRANTEE(S): {2820) •u`IU(i, �'7"u 9Ci5E I'i STEWAM-TMC- '511 SEP` 15 i s ;; rLE __ _J._ _ . REC4i..)! � jLST OF ABOVE MIS LINE FOR RECORDiNO DATA Order No.: 94050999ALF WARRANTY DEED 1: Hz001—U FOR VALUE RECEIVED BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGA?N, SELL and CONVEY unto WIRT EDMONDS AND FRANCES D. EDMONDS, HUSBAND AND WIFE; PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION; ALLEN LEE CENTERS AND DIANNE CENTERS, HUSBMM � GRANTEE(S), whose current address iS: ZTed Sigmont, 3131 Lanark St., Meridian, Idaho 83642, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s), that Grantors) is/arc the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances. EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly m.ldc subject and those made, suffered or dorn by the Grarltee(s); and subject to reser a:ions, restrictions, dedications, easements. rights of Way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: September 12 , 1994 /J IL E BROWN STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA �r L. JOY B WN On this 12th day of September , in the yea: of 1994 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said Slatc; personally appeared BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN known or identiGcdy die person(s) whose names) is/arc subscribed to die within instrument, and acknowledged lWtAp :' 1141s 1�C executed tic same. 0 " ai > z Signature: • ORDER NO. 94050899 LF PARCEL A 11 EXHIBIT "A" 11782001706 A tract of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, .Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 89 degrees 50' West a distance of 335.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance of 876.63 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance of 413.56 feet; thence North 89 degrees 361'58" East a distance of 314.52 feet; thence South 0 degrees 01141" East a distance of 648.17 feet; thence South 89 degrees 31156" West a distance of 979.79 feet; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East a distance of 1,343.62 feet; thence South 86 degrees 30126" East a.distance of 135.83 feet; thence .3outh 58 degrees 35155" East a distance of 99.48 feet; thence South 31 degrees 17159" East a distance of 189.47 feet; thence South 76 degrees 25156" East a distance of 191.49 feet; thence South 86 degrees 38120" East a distance of 154.36 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCEL: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: C04'04ENCING at the Northeast corner or Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50100" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02159" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36158" West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89 degrees 36'58" West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8826671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 13148" West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 89 degrees 36158" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THIS FORM FURNISHED COURTESY OF: STEWART TITLE t%tp READ & APPROVED BY GRANTEE(S): 9#01?33 rJS'I`EIWART TITLE 1911 NSU 16 Pill RECO:,....... J.0�5i Or' ABOVE THIS I NFOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94051807 LF -PB WARRANTY DEED 1807000545 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and EDMONDS NP) CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and ALLEN LEE CENTERS, Afl«�'�J GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: 3131 LANARK, SUITE C, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 o` •L, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly euW described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s), that Grantor(s) is/are the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the Granter(s); and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Diited: :November 14, 1994 BURKE;BORU STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA LI DA G. BORtJPv On this 15th day of November , in the year of 1994 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP known or identified to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/arc subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me tha;\�qtylt,hlty,execnted the same. ,,,, QUO Signature-�e; m o = NOTARY � ' Name: PAMELA J. BIGELOW T = — — ORDER NO. 94051807 LF -PB EXHIBIT "A" 180"1000550 A portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: The South 935 feet of the following described property: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot 2 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian; thence East along the North line of said Lot, 34 1/2 rods; thence South parallel with the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section to the Southwest corner thereof; thence North along the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. TEGLEY'S LAND SURVEYING May 22, 1995 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision #2 - Preliminary Plat Dear Members of the Commission: 109 South 4'h Stro Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 This is an application by Pacific Northwest Electric (P.N.E.y Edmonds' Construction for approval of the preliminary plat of Packard Subdivision #2. Packard Subdivision #2 are 95 real lots located in the northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. Situated on 35.23 acres, Packard Subdivision is bounded on three sides by existing residential development. Surrounding subdivisions include Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place, Chambariain Estates, and Carol's Subdivision. Except Carol's Subdivision, these subdivisions are developing with single-family dwellings on lots between 6,000 square feet and 8,000 square feet. Car ors Subdivision is developed with lots that are approximately one acre in size. Packard SubdivWon #2 is located north of and next to Packard Subdivision #1. Packard Subdivision #2 is an extension and continuation of Packard Subdivision #1, including the landscaping scheme for meet trees. The site of Packard Subdivision #2 is designated for single-family residential development on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Map. Development will be single-fhmily dwellings 1,400 scp m+e feet or larger in size. This development complies with the provisions of the Meridian Zcn ing Ordinance and the goals and policies of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Packard Subdivision #2 contains a variety of lot sizes. Lots range in size from 8,000 square feet to over 15,000 square feet. This will provide a transition between the smaller R8 lots of Chamberlain Estates, Chateau Meadows, and Kearney Place and the larger lots of Carol's Subdivision. As a measure to aid in transition, several large lots have been placed raw to Carnes Subdivision. rid scn #2 Project 1408 - 1 Water service to Packard Subdivision will be obtained from the city of Meridian. Sewer service will be provided by extension of the South Slough Sewer bunk -line. This sewer extension will provide gravity -flow sewer service to the area and will enable Packard Subdivision #1 to remove its temporary lift -station. All streets within this development will be dedicated to the public and maintained by the Ada County Highway District. The Ada County Highway District required a traffic impact study for Packard Subdivisions. Configuration of the roadway system, and connection to existing or proposed streets in the area, was designed following meetings with the Ada County Highway District. Street construction will be to the standards of the Ada. County Highway District. Access to Wingate Lane from this development will be discouraged. A collector -size stub std to the north has been provided near the northwest corner of the development. Future extension of this stub street will provide access to Ustick Road. The site for Packard Subdivision #2 is relatively level. It is bounded on the north side by the South Slough. There are several smaller irrigation ditches that will be tiled or abandoned where appropriate. No other hazards have been identified on the site. No flood hazard area has been identified for this site (F.I.R.M. Panel 0165). The Meridian Comprehensive Plan ids the southern bank of the South Slough as a greenbelt/pathway location. The developers will work with the City toward that goal. Open space lots have been provided along much of the South Slough where it borders this site. In summary, Packard Subdivision #2 is the final development proposal for Packard Subdivisions. The proposal meets the design and development standards of the Meridian Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. It complies with the policies and goals of the Meridian Compf diensive Plan. The lots are 8,000 square feet in size, or larger. Each lot will contain a single -fay dwelling at least 1,400 square feet in size. Water service will come from the city of Meridian as will sewer service. As this last phase develops and the South Slough sewer trunk -line is ex d, a temporary sewer lift -station will be removed. We ask that the Commission recommend approval of this application to the City Council. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying By: Ted Hutchinson Pia Subffivisim #2 X1408 -2- 0 AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST STATE OF IDAHO ss COUNTY OF ADA UWA1T1Tr-MW)TZ-7,sr,TJ09#-MZ Me, Meridian Idaho , (city) (state) 1. That I am the record owner of the property described on the attached, and grant my permission to: Pacific Northwest Electric , 3131 E. Lanark Suite C (name) (address) to submit the accompanying application pertaining to that property. 2. I agree to indemnify, defend and hold Meridian City and it's employees harmless from any claim or liability resulting from any dispute as to the statements contained herein or as to the ownership of the property which is the subject of the application. Dated this 23rd day of May , 19_. Zia A (signat SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the day and year first above written. Notary Public for Idaho �•.• S••••••C0 •,�� Residing at:Se•OTA •••.• .• S My Commission Expires: 'Ly -4 ;* pruj�BL1G p46 ,•,,��'�.;T 8 0419••, • OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P 6 Z Adm. 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 a FAX (208) 887.4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS, RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER 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: June 13, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z _CHARLES ROUNTREE, P2 _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C _BOB CORRIE, C/C _WALT MORROW, C/C _MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: MRY-26-1995 11:06 TERLEY'S SURVEYING P.02 T t Lt Tb LAND toy 5outn 4°' StreBoise, iaano &ituL, RVEYING (2084-0636 a] MMOMM Fax (208) 385-0696 Project No.: 1408 Date: May 25, 1995 FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO 2 BROWN-BORUP PROPERTY/ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in Gov't Lot 3, NW'/ and the NE'/ of Section 5, UN., R.IE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho; more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the North 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North line of said Section 5 North 89044'57" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence along a line 335.00 feet West of and parallel to the North-South center of Section line of said Section 5 South 0027'32" West 876.63 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough said point being THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0027'32" West 404.43 feet to a point on the North line of the NEV4 SE'/4 NW%, of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the NE'/ SE'/4 NW'/, of said Section 5 South 89°32'43" East 335.00 feet to a point on the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0127'32" West 391.14 feet to a point on a line that lies 935.00 feet North of the East-West center of section line; thence along a line 935.00 feet North of and parallel to the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 891140'20" East 569.25 feet to a point; thence along a line 569.25 feet East of and parallel to the North-South center of section line South 0°27'32" West 935.00 feet to a point on the East-West center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 North 89040'20" West 569.25 feet to the center of section of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27'32" East 663.07 feet to a point marking the Southeast corner of the N'/2 SE'/. NW'/4 of said Section 5; thence along the South line of the N'/2 SE'/. NW'/4 of said Section 5 North 89°35'39" West 995.09 feet to a point marking the Southwest corner of the E'/z NW'/, SE'/. NW'/4 of said Section 5; thence along the West line of the E%z NW%4 SE'/4 NW'/4 of said Section 5 North 0026'23" East 663.92 feet to the Northwest corner of the E1/z NW'/4 SE'/4 NW'/. of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the E''/z NW''/. SE'/4 NW'/4 of said Section 5 South 89132'43" East 4.31 feet to a point on a line that lies 991.00 feet West of the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along a line 991.00 feet West of and parallel to the North- South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27'32" East 680.84 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough; thence along the centerline of the South Slough the following courses and distances South 85°59'55" East 132.90 feet (Formerly South 86°30'26" East 135.83 feet) to a point; thence South 58105'24" East 99.48 feet (Formerly South 58°35'55" East) to a point; thence MAY 26 '95 11:00 PAGE.02 TEALEY'S SURVEYING TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING 109 SOUTH 4"STREET. BOISE. IOA110 83702 * (208) 385.0636 Project No. 1408 Date: May 25, 1995 PACKA.RD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 P.03 Page 2 South 30047'28" East 189.47 feet (Formerly South 31°17'59" East) to a point; thence South 75°55'25" East 191.49 feet (Formerly South 76025'26" East) to a point; thence South 86°07'49" East 154.36 feet (Formerly South 86038'20" East) to THE POINT OF BEGINNING, Said parcel contains 35.23 acres, more or less. A. TOTAL P.03 MAY 26 '95 11:01 PAGE.03 MRY-26-1995 11.06 TERLEY'S SURVEYING P.01 �TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYIN% 109 South 4th Street Boise, Idaho 83102 (108) 385-0636 Fax: (208) 385-0696 s6.-- . t r a p s m i t t a to: Cheryl - Meridian City Engineer's Office fax: 1 887-4813 from: I Ted Hutchinson date: May 26,--1995 re: Legal Description for Packard Sub #2 pages; 3 NOTES: Cheryl: Following is the legal description for Packard Subdivision #2. If you need anything else, please let me know. Thanks Ted MAY 26 '95 11:00 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT CHECKLIST INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED THIRTY. (30) DAYS PRIOR TO NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED P&Z MEETING. ITEM DESCRIPTION CO MENTS/DATE 1. Pre -application submittal meeting held 2. ACHD Technical Review Committee approval submitted 3. Thirty (30) copies of the completed and execute written application form, v 4. Proof of current ownership of the real property included in the preliminary plat and consent of recorded owners €'t ti,�1 � 5. Name and address of party to receive billings/con Q / 6. Legal description of subdivision prepared and stam by Registered Land Surveyor 7. Thirty (30) copies of the preliminary plat with dimensions of not less than 24" x 36", drawn to a scale suitable to insure clarity of all lines, dimensions and other data. Preliminary plats shall include: a. Proposed Subdivision Name b. Drafting date c. Sectional location of plat - County ✓ d. North arrow e. Scale of plat (not smaller than 1" =100') f. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of owner, subdivider or subdividers and engineer, surveyor or planner who prepared the preliminary plat; g. Statement of intended use of the proposed subdivision (i.e., residential single-family, two-family and multiple housing, commercial, industrial, recreational or agricultural) RUN. >A LD 30 29 Q` 3 BACK tpo 2 5 ' l°r 24 ].,�] i .... a ,;,. 12 ♦ .z.,�' 22 r ♦ ° r r r 10 ♦ w .. > 21 Am 9 ♦ x,dS � I � , � E'S ♦ e., os�i. SB v iu.e1 .• '. r ~ �xn.] 1 ]e,se ° `� a 20 IFn ♦ usr . ° Z j um eza.. k� % e i ' M,e.& (�a+e. rwM.. `,e :isae/z �r u ♦ �°cei °�F � x,4?" ]A[[�' !!I!.4 a�ir,le •TX1J° j'y4Ae.e f✓•+ T I8 J 9 37 39 li 32 24 10 WA )QW 40 EM .� .ire. . I. •(T: 16 O 26 2 4 42 1.4 ` 3 r3 c 29 27 a 12 E LOCMMEADOw Cl. 14 9 , .ee. Rr•a�.�ff 13 7 8 9 10 a 12 13 ox•. v: 14 15 / O O 3 a 7 12 E. KATELYN DR. v i' f,• �= n w 4 Is 17 1 i� A#NE 1(>L� 2 X 9 11 o z ujN©. 3i2 1 9 10 3p 7 8 0,- 13 Z ��ll 14 3 z A 2 0. s1 9 12 > q I 1 1 p Q C 1 5 10 11 Z 3 O2 C9 - z I E CHATEAU L) t%. 3 PLC N QQ 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 6:30 p.m., on June 22, 1995, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of PNE/Edmonds Construction for annexation and zoning of approximately 35.23 acres of land located in the NW 1/4, Section 5, T.3N,R.1 E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located on South of Ustick Road and East of Locust Grove Road. The Application requests annexation with zoning of R-4. Further Applicant requests Preliminary Plat approval of the parcel of land above described for 95 single family dwelling lots for Packard Subdivision No. 2. 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 30th day of May, 1995. j: RT SRT Ss Ri ��9 ; RT J �C S_ RT C`2 = — - --- - --- C-3 RR RT II PIE;SA'� i �$-- VALE - -`RT� 14 PT pAeK1%0.0 see L R-4 nli RT R1 R I Sion RT SRT � -. �_-- RT RT ; CA PO I' i �i RT RT R ! - ALA4.. ji; SYR 1 ----- , -- RT ,. ...RT • •; ; • •�. ;• RT r• L-0 RT RT 'REASURE- �' V41LE% �'•�`-T.tj .Erp�-iT� -� BUSINESS ---- CEh1EP. PWSE 1I -- -3- s�� R I- -�- ADA PLANNIP;b AS N. AUG 12 ,1994 • �: v >' N I • .11. TA 30 zt 1E BLOGK ` �s G ' h'Q�• 25 '7 / 24 rr \� Jv 12 won 22 10 > 21 211* 2 ♦ ow.i! v.u. ..! an'. ape. " xs_e far. 2� 1S Ll ♦ �� . `. �.'� ,..�.. � "" �� ! !-e,2?' • � tee%• • I r.1%s • 1 �:: � a x+}, � n �'. � ' � • �� � '`��i ;A.• ♦ O`' i ` ' Li Is P. 3710 39 36 32 24 �. n...l. .... I} ! •A tttA MWXA U Qtr = 40If a =� x EXSI z _ — , 4 42 0 26 R,41 T 2 w .. 3 •S 29 2127 7 28 t a E LOCHMER00M C1. 17. 13 7 8 9 I 10 11 2 1 13 4 5 6 :3 14 15 1q / O G 3 a 7 12 E. KATELYN DR. w 4 16 17 1 RC, Aft E 2 o e 11 z W NO. 312 1 g 10 3 7 8CZ) 13 ,4 .3 J r z 0- AR - A 9 12 > 4 1 w I C, 5 10 II Z 3 2 z E CHC,TEkU DR 3 PL C N0 2 A Ci - i --30 30 -�- ASA PLANNI t AS:N. AUG 12 2y ,1994 At _3_ 1, c 3 I I' w ze BLOCK 5 0,1 r H I [6 'Pot • j 25 I I;I 2'7 / 24 - �` ` 14 w / �� II 12 1 22 . 1 1 10 a ?1 9 G) \( \' 2'12 I° 8 SLIF 1 1' W 37 39 3e 32 24 Q� 1 7 10 l Cft TAUZ ao/ A QW mr Q on 16 /f 4 4P J 0 26 R.41 ♦ 11 ,� .. 3 .3 a 29 27 (5 C 2 „ 2e 12 E :OCr MEADOI^ C.T. ` 14 13 M89 10 a i2 13 14 1 4 5 6 3 14 .�•4..• 1�p1rie),'=Q ••�.••• •. 4 ��d6.M11.w.s E asp 15 � 3 a 7 12 E. KATELYN DR. W 4 le 17 1 A� E I�L� 11 , 2 X 0 e11 I z W NO. 312 Got 3 1 Z g 10 7 A e u 13 14 2 1 6 9 12 > 4 I W it 1 C S 10 11 z 3 y (:I-,) E CHATEAU DR. • THIS roPht FURNISIIPD COURTESY OF: N STEWART TITLE �E< U* READ & APPROVED BY GRANTERS): (2820) 9Ci5E I') S'TEWA� jm"r 1311 SEP//'i5 ;,I. ;; B rCE __ _J.. l REC^i..) , . . �S:3T OF ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDINO DATA Order No.: 94050999ALF WARRANTY DEED 1:8zoU1: U FOR VALUE RECEIVED BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGA?N, SELL and CONVEY unto WIRT EDMONDS AND FRANCES D. EDMONDS, HUSBAND AND WIFE; PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION; ALLEN LEE CENTERS AND DIANNE CENTERS, HUSBAND GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: ZTed Sigmont, 3131 Lanark St. , Meridian, Idaho 83642, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantees) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) docs(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s). that Grantor(s) is/arc the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises arc free from all encumbrances. EXCEPT those to which Lhis conveyance is expressly m: do sul-ject and those made, suffered or dor:^ by the Grantee(s). and sulci:-ct to reservxions. res:ri::ions, dedications. easern!nu, rights of uav and agreements, (if any) of record, and general =,!s and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: September 12 , 1994 L6E. BROWN STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA �L 3 Y BFI, WN On this 12ch day of September , in the year of 1994 , before me. the undersigned, a Notan Nblic in and for said Slatc, personally appeared BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN known or identifit!il y ate persons) whose namc(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument. and acknclµ-lcdgcd tcrifip '>S Iw,'s < 'its cxecuted the same. - �--� i cc VP ORDER NO. 94050899 LF EXHIBIT "A" 111"82001-106 PARCEL A A tract of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 89 degrees 50' West a distance of 335.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance of 876.63 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance of 413.56 feet; thence North 89 degrees 36158" East a distance of 314.52 feet; thence South 0 degrees 01141" East a distance of 648.17 feet; thence South 89 degrees 31156" West a distance of 979.79 feet; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East a distance of 1,343.62 feet; thence • South 86 degrees 30126" East a distance of 135.83 feet; thence .south 58 degrees 35155" East a distance of 99.48 feet; thence South 31 degrees 17159" East a distance of 189.47 feet; thence South 76 degrees 25,156" East a distance of 191.49 feet; thence South 86 degrees 38120" East a distance of 154.36 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCEL: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: C0`01ENCING at the Northeast corner or Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50100" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02'59" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36158" West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89 degrees 36f58" West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8826671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 13148." West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 89 degrees 36158" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence ?forth 0 degrees 13'48" East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. :T - THIS FORM FURNISHED COURTESY OP: STEWART TITLE READ & APPROVED BY GRANTEE(S): • 9`f 10133 S 0! S r I �l ,,TEWART TITLE 194 Nell 16 f'14 5i / ABOVE THIS LUIS FOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94051807 LF -PB WARRANTY DEED 1 180 i 000G49 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and EDMONDS •,J� CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and ALLEN LEE CENTERS, A(►'0;1-j GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: 3131 LANARK, SUITE C, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly eu described as follows, to wit: ' i As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s), that Grantor(s) is/are the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the Grantee(s); and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are rot yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dpted: 'November 14, 1994 BURKE;BORUr- i STATE. OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA � LI D A G. BORUP v On this 15th day of November , in the year of 1994 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP known or identified to me to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within, instrument, and acknowledged to me that V'0h'J1 y,�execrrted the same. R ,> ''., Signatures (' »"tI �c� Q— J t4OTAY O� Name: PAMELA J. BIGELt)W _ •+ _ L ORDER NO. 9405180-7 LF -PB EXHIBIT "A" 1807000550 A portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: The South 935 feet of the following described property: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot 2 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 Fast, Boise Meridian; thence East along the North line of said Lot, 34 1/2 rods; thence South parallel with the Kest line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section to the Southwest corner thereof; thencd North along the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. ITY OF, M RIDIAN • "Hub of Treasw Valley" 33 E. Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 888-4433 Customers 197 :> OrderNo. Date Name '� Address Phone: SOLD BY C CASH C.O.D. CHARGE ON ACCT. MDSE. RETD. PAID OUT " ^ ' , \_ 2 20�' uy I I _ I I 1 02 1 ' I 1 I All claims and returned goods MUST b accompani d by t TAX 14t-- TOTAL' F003898 By 14t-- I ZO? i y y G5.204.7 �7 PRINTED U.S.A. t WIRT EDMONDS PACIFIC N.W. ELECTRIC, INC. 0702 3131 LANARK 888-7255 MERIDIAN, ID 83642 (_ 19'7,1 92-1/1241 Pay to the Inn , I vv I C7 t16k,,J$ -2 -L 0-7 4 (A tl12�� a''V'�`.`.r 4-1llei tan '�Dellars ffZYT/�' E* West One Bank, Idaho ni'i�7L IVI/r� Fairview Office 1-0054 P.O. Box 7217 BANK Boisem 83707 1-800-, 221-5511 AA 1: 12 4 1000 191:11000 20 6 50 2940?0 NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., on May 6, 1997, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of PNE/Edmonds Construction, for annexation and zoning of approximately 35.23 acres of land located in the NW % and NE % Section 5, T.3N, R.1 E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located South of Ustick Road, and East of Locust Grove Road. Application requests a zone of R4. Further, applicant requests Preliminary Plat approval of the parcel of land above described for 95 of single family dwellings lots for Packard Subdivision No. 2. 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 18th of April, 1997 WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., I CLERK PUBLISH April 18th and April 25th, 1997. AL1 . RI- 30 -,- ADA PLANNiA b AUG 12% ,1994 29 C 3� I S O'l -r 25 v ' :! 27 I 24 14 �v / 12 1 22 1 10 a 21 .� ♦ 9 ♦ I i O `. 1 Q�0 2 Est 20 1£ 85LLif ♦ r / IH L a 3e - ss - � �• - - J 37 17 39 39 32 24 Q` 10 l C "A rCAU hq A QW40 z t 44 "0 26 29 21 ♦� IS 7 r 12 f E-oc�mrAOOv. C1 9 14 13 T-181-91 10 s 6 14 ' �s iEl r� to-4 Zo 0 C E. KATELYN DR. r�. f• 1 3 W 4 1e 17 E o ? W NO 312 11 1 Z g t i0 3 2 7 g® 13 f I z 6 AR 9 �2 > 4 i 2 E CHt,TEAU Dk. 3 Ci PLC N 201 _ T-) _ Qg 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 7:30 p.m., on November 14, 1995, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of PNE/Edmonds Construction for a Preliminary Plat for approximately 35.23 acres of land located in the NW 1/4, Section 5, T.3N,R.1 E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located on South of Ustick Road and East of Locust Grove Road. Applicant requests Preliminary Plat approval of the parcel of land above described for 95 single family dwelling lots for Packard Subdivision No. 2. 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 26th day of October, 1995. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., LERK OCT -27-1995 10:54 TEALEY'S SURVEYING P.02 IIh° .f1.1 r ,.� n117' '•/. u, 314 M '1Ni O)MR311WIB fillll 'uN NIMINUVIIS UHV-J)Yd dU 1'rid A)irWPR1A)1d G � s 0 N 1 V4 i ca r () aid pt •� s U�6 6§i`gc�e�L*� 1 INp:u ;;I a�HW v i I G a UI 3 U) 1t1o A i I I ur1 W ,g p WL$ J �r0 c i i +'w�• IWw(U7 'iWOi1 a�,yIL uj -{ St ° I 1 77 DO J13 I, •�— �I� i .wF� •� a „j —JJl_c . A•6bLGICSa i . ` 7 a 'o ^�1 '� b 1 �J �r c•_��• I I _ 6, - — _ e• — ..y�C�I_l1 n• t T.SLLL: r e 4 _ t �y�\w =- .9 )- ► / Y ) °&lig • �) 3 24 J. w p j t � �a N ii r.l � ' '�• +W ' �� .o • °v �P ° ,� )'� j� ° i wff � ° I�5 -3•G y ,� ;, �r.... " ..rte c: h. n �\ .i�_.: •! <r R `" b� L x 7 A+ [ � ��Y:+• a_ 11 fear 46 2,1 It OCT 2? '95 10:4? TOTAL P.02 PAGE.02 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE BROWN PROPERTY ANNEXATION 51105244350 & S1105244300 S1105244550 51105212530 & S1105212485 Floyd & Kathy Reichert Fred & Ane Sharp Dixie Roberts 2575 N. Wingate Ln 2445 N. Wingate Ln 2855 N. Wingate Ln Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 S1105212980 51105212900 S1105233782 Robert Minton Vern & Angelina Alleman Kevin & Irene Howell 2035 E. Ustick Rd 2101 E. Ustick Rd 6901 Emerald St Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Boise Id 83704 S1105212810 S1105121040 S1105131450 Cleah Cooper Albert & Mary Dauven Marc & Catherine Perterson (Buyer: Vern & Angelina Alleman) 2820 N. Wingate Ln 2700 N. Wingate Ln 2101 E. Ustick Rd Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 N A 81384290360 R1384300070 rz£ Matthew & Joani Casserino Paul & Lily Lamon 2484 N. Laughridge Ave 2169 E. Lochmeadow Ct } Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300300 R1384300310 81384300290 Jessie Stewart Robert & Melinda Draper Ian & Angela Ishiyama 2506 N. Laughridge Ave 2511 N. Meadowglen PI 2489 N. Meadowglen PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300260 R1384300270 R1384300280 Richard & Robin Toney Jerry & Philene Lewis Joseph Hageman & Amy Miller 2562 N. Laughridge AVe 2525 N. Meadowglen PI 2534 N. Laughridge Ave Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300230 R1384300240 R1384300250 John & Julie Suor Herbert & Adelia Pipkin Gary & Yen Stallones 2550 N. Meadowglen PI 2457 N. Meadowglen PI 2578 N. Laughridge Ave Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300200 R1384300210 R1384300220 Kelly Hibbs & Robin Helm Randy & Eileen Williams Lorri Chapman 2518 N. Meadowglen PI 2530 N. Meadowglen PI 2542 N. Meadowglen PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 • PROPERTY OWNERS 4j WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE BORUP PROPERTY ANNEXATION S1105244550 511051316901 Fred & Ane Sharp Wilbur & Carol Vincent Edffm 2445 N. Wingate Ln 5918 Sterling Dr . . Meridian Id 83642 Boise Id 83703 z 51105131450 J� S1105244300 Marc &Catherine Peterson&PFloyd &Kathy Reichert 2700 N. Wingate Ln _ 2575 N. Wingate Ln (� Meridian Id 83642 Mme, Meridian Id 83642''` R1294550110 R4846540250 R4846540140 Llyod Porter Richard & Sharon Scarr Michael & Katherine Borgaard 2376 N. Devlin Ave 1107 Justin PI 2332 N. Wingate Pl. Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R4846540220 R4846540230 R4846540240 Jeffrey & Jill Feeler Janine L. Bailey Christopher & Lisa Peters 2312 W. Devlin Ave 2334 N. Devlin Ave. 2358 N. Devlin Ave Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R4846540130 R484654 0150;0160; & 0170 R4846540190 Timothy & Shard Bacharach D.W., Inc Paul Jeran 2304 N. Wingate PI 2119 E. Chateau Dr 2311 N. Wingate Pl Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1294550125 R1294550130 R1294550135 Dieter & Celia Wiesemann Jeffrey & Margaret Strother Frank & Barbara Youngstrom 2677 E. Leslie Dr 2655 E. Leslie Dr 2631 E. Leslie Dr Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1294550120 R1294550015 R1294550095 Thadley & Lynn Thomas Marc & Marica Von Huene Douglas & Ranae Mellor 1155 Justin Pl. 2654 Leslie Dr 1035 Justin PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 81294550100 R1204550105 R1294550115 Dennis & Mary Brockway Walter & Virginia Johnson Richard & Mary 1059 Justin PI 1083 Justin PI Peckenscheider Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 1131 Justin PI Meridian Id 83642 84846540180 Steven & Linda Riley' 2347 N. Wingate Pl. Meridian Id 83642 R1384300140 R1384300150 R1384300190 Douglas & Noreen Miller Franklin & Victoriana Stout Michael & Janette Nersveen 2176 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2164 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2498 N. Meadowglen PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300110 R1384300120 R1384300130 Bobby & Sheryl Howe Kevin Martinez Paul & Karissa Peterson 2194 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2190 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2188 E. Lochmeadow Ct Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300080 R1384300090 R1384300100 Jack & Leann Methner Wayne Stacy Delon & Shannon Makinen 2173 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2185 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2197 E. Lochmeadow Ct Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 22 1995 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 4 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING•REQUEST FOR ANNEXA TIONIZONING WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO 2 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS IDAHO POWER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS US WEST: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P 3 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: 0 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 6 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER June 19, 1995 To: Mayor, City Council and Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer , Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 (Annexation/Zoning and Preliminary Plat - By PNE/Edmonds Const.) I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their line in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. C: \ WPWI\(0\GENFRAI.\PACKARD2. P&7. OFFICIALS 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, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P 6 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney 0 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 0 A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 8 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON. Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER 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: June 13 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/ dmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P2 JIM SHEARER, P2 CHARLES ROUNTREE, P2 TIM HEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT _�l 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMA RELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES �• OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMA KS: GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: June 13 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust 'rove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: �> �- 6— YOUR YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: L, /V 8` onV'e— w*4" A)S n,\,ar l y L Awa N, /JPI/�,,� waN WUBOFTREASUREVALLBY COUNCILMEMBERS OFFICIALS RONALD R. TOLSMA A Good Place to Live MAIL NGTON LLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clerk RT 0. CORRIE ROBERT D. NICE L., City Treasurer WALT W. MORROW MY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer CITY OF MERIDIAN iUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. P d Z COMMISSION HN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON. Chairman :NNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt. MOE AUDJANI IARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM SHEARER :NNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief "BILL" Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 88711813 CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER L. GORDON, Police Chief WNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: June 13 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust 'rove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: �> �- 6— YOUR YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: L, /V 8` onV'e— w*4" A)S n,\,ar l y L Awa N, /JPI/�,,� waN SUA. ISION EVALUATION W ET__ - Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB NO. 2 City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 6/01/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final Engineer/Developer Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance. The following existing street names shall appear on the plat as: "N. HICKORY WAY" "E. MEADOWGRASS STREET" "N. DEVLIN AVENUE" "N. DEVLIN WAY" _ "E. LOCHMEADOW STREET" "N. WINGATE AVENUE" The following new streets are in alignment with new streets in proposed subdivisions and therefore shall be named: "N. SIMERLY PLACE" "E. CHALLIS STREET" "E. CARNELIAN STREET" "N. LAPIS AVENUE" "MALACHITE" is reserved for another subdivision and cannot be used unless it is in alignment "TOURMALINE" is a duplication and cannot be used. "QUARTZ" is too close to QUARTZITE and therefore cannot be used. The above street name comments have been representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET must be secured by the representative or his officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE, Ada County Engineer Ada Planning Assoc. City of Meridian Meridian Fire District John Priester Terri Raynor Representative Representative read and approved by the following agency NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures designee in order for the street names to be Date Date Al late NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the AdalCounty Engineer at the time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!! Subindex Street Index 3N 1 E 05 Section NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS K 50ar" T N RI -t ♦ 4P ♦ 1! - �", Via" ♦ / 39 39 32 24 ';A VV Z m A QW V•�" � a � 0 26 3 .g 29 27 2e E-OC�MEaDOM CT � 9 � + _6 . .. • j s a 7 12 E. KATELYN DR. v �• { Ol I W 418 17 p W NO 312 o � � I y 1 IO 3p e 2 13 ,4 .3 - z z A s12 > a ' c ' S to 11 2 E CH4TEAU DR F�t A sig so ADA PLANNP(' AS„N. AUG 12,1994 29 ��-- 3' 0 cE 2 ��E Ii B�GK • 'c)'• [6 ,. I;~I 25 27 i 24 1 �v / 12 22 10 ?1 9 � O � 2 21 1S 8 LJ 18 L 9 a tt ' 10 2 16 • IS � 12 14 I 13 C00 CENTRAL C DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR t- JT Environmental Health Division al Use # Preliminary >nal / Short Plat /e"ra2✓-)a— ❑ I. We have No Objections to this Proposal. Return to: ❑ Boise ❑ Eagle ❑ Garden city �'leridian ❑ Kuna ❑ ACZ ❑ 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: -Ocentral sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines 10 -central water 10. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 13 Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ❑ Waste Disposal ❑ Injection Well rules. ❑ Groundwater Protection This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. 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 —7 ate: % CY--, i:=r r* Reviewed By: Review Shee! TO 10/91 rcb. 7 1/95 J al Use # Preliminary >nal / Short Plat /e"ra2✓-)a— ❑ I. We have No Objections to this Proposal. Return to: ❑ Boise ❑ Eagle ❑ Garden city �'leridian ❑ Kuna ❑ ACZ ❑ 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: -Ocentral sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines 10 -central water 10. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 13 Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ❑ Waste Disposal ❑ Injection Well rules. ❑ Groundwater Protection This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. 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 —7 ate: % CY--, i:=r r* Reviewed By: Review Shee! TO 10/91 rcb. 7 1/95 CENTRAL . 00 DISTRICT 1WHEALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE a 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL a BOISE. ID. 83104-0825 a (208) 3155211 a FAX: 327-W To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our enviro STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECONEWENDATIONS 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) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force . 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada / lase Courtly Office WIC base . Menckin Elmore Coudy Office Elmore County Olbce Valley Courdy Orrice 707 R Am&uV PI. 1606 RoW St. 520 E 8th Sheet N. d Emromwid HedM P.O. box 1441 Boas. 0. 83704-0825 8m. 0. 83705 Manton Harz. ID. 190 S. 4th She nt E. McCa. 0.00 Enwo. Heeft 327.7499 Ph. 334.3355 83641 Ph 5814401 Mountain Home. ID. PR 6341194 For* Plorwq. 327.7:00 324 Merman Rd. 83647 Ph. 5819225 Ynrnrmhoru: 327.7450 Meno w. A. 83642 MOM= 327.7460 Ph. 888-0525 6) WC :27.7488 OFFICIALS 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, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & 2 Adm. 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 a FAX (208) 8874813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON RECEIVE® 3 1 MAY 1955 COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT 0. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & 2 COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER NAMPA A MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 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: June 13 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/ dmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: v Nampa &,Meridian Irrigation District's Finch Lateral courses through the north portion of the project. The right-of-way of the Finch Lateral is 80 feet: 40 feet from.the center each way. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's Stokesberry Lateral courses through the south portion of the project. The right-of-way of the Stokesberry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each way. See Idaho Code 42-1208--RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John P. Anderson or Bill Henson at Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, 466-0663 or 345-2431, for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. d9O/� Bill Henson, Assistant Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 7 June 1995 Tealey's Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, ID 83702 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision #2 Dear Tealey's: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent P.N.E./Edmonds Construction City of Meridian enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P 6 Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney •' HUB OFTRBASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA A Good Place to Live MAX YERRINGTON CITY OF MERIDIAN RIE WALT W. MORROW ROBERT MOOR P & Z COMMISSION 33 EAST IDAHO JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JAM SHLEARERI Phone (108) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 8874813 CHARLIETIMHEPPERREE Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: June 13, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER i4/.+- Iyl 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES YOUR CONCISE S<<b, 4;11 4- J U N 0 1 19915 v or ..c r JUN 12 '95 06:1OPM IPCO BOISE OPERATIONS OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG. Jr.. CRY Clerk JANICE L GABS, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. Gtr Enoineer BRUCE D. STUART. Water works $UDI. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT. WL71e Water Supt. OENNIB J. SUMMERS. Parka Supt. BHARI S. STILES. P l 2 Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS. Fire Chief W. L -BILL" GOROON. Pollee Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR,. Attorney • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • A Good Place to Live P.1/1 COUNCIL ME B P8 RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON RODERT O. CORRIE OF MERIDIAN WALT W. MORROW CITY P 6 i COM 13510N 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN. IDAHO 83642 Phonc (208) 8884433 a FAX (208) 8874813 JIM JOHNSON, C" ruse MOEAUDJANi -' EARER .. s�- �_ •:y/ � jam,. JIMSHEAAER CHARLIE R TIM HEPPEROUNTE PER Public Works/Buddingrtinmt (208) 887-2211 �Pa t ll ' I 77 J !� � 3 w •.: GRAM' P. KINGSFORD Maps 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: June 13 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5126/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST:, AnnexationlZoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road, East of Locust " 1 JOHNSON, P2 )E ALIDJANII P2 1 SHEARER, P!Z ARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z I HEPPER, PM ANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NALD TOLSMA, C/C e CORRIE, C/C &T MORROW, C/C X YERRINGTON. C/C ►TER DEPARTMENT WER DEPARTMENT IILDING DEPARTMENT tE DEPARTMENT :LICE DEPARTMENT rYATTORNEY JUN 12 '95 18:09 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. Tim Adams Idaho Power 322-2047 s PAGE. 01 OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG, Jr., City Clark JANICE L GASS. City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE 0. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMERS. Parks Supt. SHARI S. STILES. P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS. Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GOROON. Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR.. Attorney S HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • j A Good Placa to Live CITY OF MERIDLAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (2D8) 888-433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Budding Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT O. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER 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: June 13. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: South of Ustick Road. East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P2 MOE ALIDJANI, P2 JIM SHEARER, P2 CHARLES ROUNTREE, P2 TIM HEPPER, P2 GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PREUM & 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMAMON(PREUM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: U S WEST REQUEST A 10' EASEMENT ALONG FRONT AND REAR PROPERTY LINES. AND A 5' EASEMENT ALONG ALL SIDE LOT LINES. THANK YOU A.J. CARLSON JUN 22 195 16:39 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN 208 027 4613 TO 3850696 P.02i02 • •t P&Z Commission, Mayor and Council June 22, 1995 Page 2 10. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall he indicated on the preliminary plat. 11. Easements shall be provided as required by City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.A. 12. Any changes to existing natural features shall meet the approval of the City of Meridian and the appropriate public agency prior to any Construction activity taking place. 13. Pressurized irrigation is to be supplied to all lots within this subdivision. ** TOTAL PAGE.02 x* JUN 22 '95 16:39 FP, CITY OF MERIPIAJ 208 EO? 4813 TO 3850656 • , HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY • OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG. Jr.. City Clark JANICE L GASS. Cny Tresswer GARY 0. SMITH, I.E. City Engineer BRUCED. STUART, Water Wwhs 6upt. JOHN T. SNAWCROF'T, Wute Water Supt. DENNIS J. SUMMM, PWM Supl. SHARI S. STILES, P a Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire CNet W. L -IMLL" GOROON, Police Chief WAYNE G-CROOKSTON, JR., Allonwy MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: A Good Place to Uve CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (209) 88"33 a FAX (X)6) 8674813 Public Workt/Bud&r4 Department (m8) 887.2E 1 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and Council Shari L. Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator June 22, 1995 P.01/02 COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAYYERRINGTON ROBERT D. COR RIE WALT W. MORROW ►azCOMMIB6192, JHI JOHNSON, CANr"lan MOE AL104ANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER Annexation and Zoning with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 2 by PNE/Edmonds Construction Applicant should schedule meetings with surrounding property owners to keep them informed and gather input on neighborhood concerns. There has been a lot of animosity expressed about the attitude of the developers toward adjacent property owners. 2. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. With over 75 acres proposed for annexation in Packard Subdivisions Nos. 1 and 2, open space appears inadequate to mitigate the impacts of the subdivisions. 3. The South Slough is designated as a future pathway. Construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Pathway Plan and City requirements. Any relocation of the South Slough will negate its classification as a "natural waterway" and will require tiling. 4. Perimeter fencing will he required prior to obtaining building permits_ The South Slough Shall be fenced with non-combustible fencing outside of existing/required easement. 5. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 6. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 7. No access is available to this site at this time. The Dove Meadows plat has expired, and the timing of Chamberlain Estates is unknown at this time. Utilization of Wingate Lane is a major concern. There seems to be a lot of confusion and differing opinions about the ownership of the lune. 8. All corner lots shall have a minimum of 80 feet of frontage. For purposes of calculating frontage, the line length plus one-half of the curve length is used. Some lots will need arrows indicating the direction the house must face (e.g., Lots 1, 3, 4 and 6, Block 7, etc.). 9. Lot square footages are to be determined exclusive of irrigation easements. CFOw �n 'c rM.:T 3ti •' ]Y.l DMOAmns ON1l f.aival Z -\ ROIL MUSAS ag"JVd dO ind Avv%awniad pp u 3 a y� E'ue, r. LL 3 -1 u",�6,1'T ty w LL o 3' U z O r :� iz� c a p Z L /�� 0 a o� ry ! ' %{�• i� WT VI4 U I�L'�.3iuu _i� IaL' d W Yui ja n � � R • f4' :.00 • - .i .z h _,, ��'� �'=r % a ` 'I � � I � x-� -li •3 � ',;P '� � •t'� -r � -i 3 - t R aIV - 0 r{E � • /I s Jx �5�..`. b X II 10R i R FSR' �. j��a 1 t �R: :t -s •� 2•? •>, tugf;•+ '� E t y� �2 MI " , II !9G _ ;�'1. m'» •ILII R � ��i � � x 1 / S,'r..�se.�. m -C-2.- r -- I C-3 AT -- 11 PT RT FLEA,&A',T VA -LE -WT• P7 4 ) RT T SRT L-� T RT I IF lit PT R-4 R1 $)ON RT f -L RT Ri 7— RT RT SOB tip RT L-0 RT ST 8GSs*%ESS CEN'TEP PmASE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE BROWN PROPERTY ANNEXATION S1105244350 & S1105244300 S1105244550 S1105212530 & S1105212485 Floyd & Kathy Reichert Fred & Ane Sharp Dixie Roberts 2575 N. Wingate Ln 2445 N. Wingate Ln 2855 N. Wingate Ln Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 S1105212980 S1105212900 S1105233782 Robert Minton Vern & Angelina Alleman Kevin & Irene Howell 2035 E. Ustick Rd 2101 E. Ustick Rd 6901 Emerald St Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Boise Id 83704 S1105212810 S1105121040 51105131450 Cleah Cooper Albert & Mary Dauven Marc & Catherine Perterson (Buyer: Vern & Angelina Alleman) 2820 N. Wingate Ln 2700 N. Wingate Ln 2101 E. Ustick Rd Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 S110513.1550 R1384290360 R1384300070 PNE Matthew & Joani Casserino Paul & Lily Lamon 3131E Lanark .Suite C,11 2484 N. Laughridge Ave 2169 E. Lochmeadow Ct Meridian Id 53642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300290 R1384300300 R1384300310 Jessie Stewart Robert & Melinda Draper Ian & Angela Ishiyama 2506 N. Laughridge Ave 2511 N. Meadowglen PI 2489 N. Meadowgien PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300260 R1384300270 R1384300280 Richard & Robin Toney Jerry & Philene Lewis Joseph Hageman & Amy Miller 2562 N. Laughridge AVe 2525 N. Meadowglen PI 2534 N. Laughridge Ave Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300230 R1384300240 R1384300250 John & Julie Suor Herbert & Adelia Pipkin Gary & Yen Stallones 2550 N. Meadowglen PI 2457 N. Meadowglen PI 2578 N. Laughridge Ave Meridian Id 83642 -Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300200 R1384300210 R1384300220 Kelly Hibbs & Robin Helm Randy & Eileen Williams Lorri Chapman 2518 N. Meadowglen PI 2530 N. Meadowglen PI 2542 N. Meadowgien Pl. Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 0 0 R1384300140 R1384300150 R1384300190 Douglas & Noreen Miller Franklin & Victoriana Stout Michael & Janette Nersveen 2176 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2164 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2498 N. Meadowglen PI Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300110 R1384300120 R1384300130 Bobby & Sheryl Howe Kevin Martinez Paul & Karissa Peterson 2194 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2190 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2188 E. Lochmeadow Ct Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1384300080 R1384300090 R1384300100 Jack & Leann Methner Wayne Stacy Delon & Shannon Makinen 2173 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2185 E. Lochmeadow Ct 2197 E. Lochmeadow Ct Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 • PROPERTY OWNERS • WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE BORUP PROPERTY ANNEXATION S1105244550 S1105131690 51105427900 Fred & Ane Sharp Wilbur & Carol Vincent Edmonds Construction & PNE 2445 N. Wingate Ln 5918 Sterling Dr 3131 Lanark Meridian Id 83642 Boise Id 83703 Meridian Id 83642 S1105131450 S1105212820 S1105244300 Marc & Catherine Peterson Edmonds Construction do PNE Floyd & Kathy Reichert 2700 N. Wingate Ln 3131 Lanark 2575 N. Wingate Ln Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R4846540250 R1294550110 R4846540140 Llyod Porter Richard & Sharon Scan Michael & Katherine Borgaard 2376 N. Devlin Ave 1107 Justin Pl 2332 N. Wingate Pl. Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R4846540220 R4846540230 R4846540240 Jeffrey & Jill Feeler Janine L. Bailey Christopher & Lisa Peters 2312 W. Devlin Ave 2334 N. Devlin Ave. 2358 N. Devlin Ave Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R4846540130 R484654 0150;0160;& 0170 R4846540190 Timothy & Sham Bacharach D.W., Inc Paul Jeran 2304 N. Wingate Pl 2119 E. Chateau Dr 2311 N. Wingate Pl Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1294550125 R1294550130 R1294550135 Dieter & Celia Wiesemann Jeffrey & Margaret Strother Frank & Barbara Youngstrom 2677 E. Leslie Dr 2655 E. Leslie Dr 2631 E. Leslie Dr Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1294550120 R1294550015 R1294550095 Thadley & Lynn Thomas Marc & Marica Von Huene Douglas & Ranae Mellor 1155 Justin Pl. 2654 Leslie Dr 1035 Justin Pl Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 R1294550100 R1204550105 R1294550115 Dennis & Mary Brockway Walter & Virginia Johnson Richard & Mary 1059 Justin Pl 1083 Justin Pl Peckenscheider Meridian Id 83642 Meridian Id 83642 1131 Justin Pl Meridian Id 83642 R4846540180 Steven & Linda Riley' 2347 N. Wingate Pl. Meridian Id 83642 TIM Mi NI FURNMIEDCOURT6SYOr-: STEWART TITLE READ & APPROVED BY MANTEE(S): (2820) J(('. V • %U0 �I U 0 v7Cjj 11 0 SCiSE I't 5~TEVVIIRT iR1-� '511 SEP 15 I l: ;; B rrE :�.. _ RECC•i.":� . � . . '..::ST OF ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDINO DATA Order No.: 94050999ALF WARRANTY DEED 1: SZ001070 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto WIRT EDMONDS AND FRANCES D. EDMONDS, HUSBAND AND WIFE; PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION; ALLEN LEE CENTERS AND DIANNE CENTERS, WJSBAND & GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: ZT'ed Sipont, 3131 Lanark St., Meridian, Idaho 83642, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantees) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantcc(s), that Gr2ntor(s) is/arc the oumer(s) in fee simple of said premises: that said premises are free from all ercumb ances. EXCEPT Oose to vrhich this crn%cyar..c is expressly rnndc sutject and those taade, suffered or do: n by the Gran: e(s). and subj!' t to r=s^r,a:irt;. res:ri::ors. devi=.-ons. ease.:.er:s. rights of Nay aad agreements. (if any) of record, and general t:ilc:s and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments. if any) for the current year, which arc not yc! dic and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: September 12 , 1994 1 E BR04:N STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA L. JCY BIZ,• t+N On this 320 day of Septenber , in U;c )ca: of 1994 , before mc, the undersigned, a Notar_ Public in and for said Statc; personally appcaccd ! : l Lj E W. Bi:0W14 AND L. JOY BROWN known or identi(i+!J �h�'s; *c�.a:.�'ic p=r -n' t) %%lirkc na"'c(`) is/arc subscribed to the within instrument, and ac►:no"•!cc'Fcd lqi r .0 llr's cxcc,,.. .i tip 0� • ORDER NO. 94050899 LF EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A • 1—t82001-106 A tract of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, I<ange 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada Count,•, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 89 degrees 50t West a distance of 335.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 02059" East a distance of 876.63 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance North 89 degrees 36158" East a distance South 0 degrees 01141" East a distance South 89 degrees 31156" West a distance North 0 degrees 13148" East a distance thence South 86 degrees 30126" East a distance .south 58 degrees 35155" East a distance South 31 degrees 17'59" East a distance South 76 degrees 25156" East a distance South 86 degrees 38120" East a distance REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. of 413.56 feet; thence of 314.52 feet; thence of 648.17 feet; thence of 979.79 feet; thence of 1,343.62 feet; of 135.83 feet; thence of 99.48 feet; thence of 189.47 feet; thence of 191.49 feet; thence of 154.36 feet to THE EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCEL: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, nore particularly described as follows: C0.10.ENCING at the Northeast corner or Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50'00" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02159" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36'58" West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89 degrees 36158" West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8826671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 13148" West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 69 degrees 36158" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. '-T -'i4 C THIS FOPM FURNISHED COURTESY OF: STEWART TITLE READ k APPROVED BY GRAN TE4). 0 9'1101'1.33 S 0; 5 r I e,TEWART TITLE 199 iiLU 16 P1, S1 RECc•:..: . .. .Ji5i OF ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94051807 LF—PB WARRANTY DEED 180:000549 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and COIv'VEY unto PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and EDMONDS �/ CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and ALLEN LEE CENTERS, A A"'�,�•� GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: 3131 LANARK, SUITE C, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly C„ described as follows, to wit: / As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantce(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Gr antee(s), that Grantor(s) is/are the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the Grantee(s); and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are rot yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dptcd: November 14, 1994 Y �B'JP3(E;EORU LI DA G. BORUP STATE OF IDAHO ) COUNTY OF ADA ) On this 15th day of November , in the year of 1594 before me, the undcrsigncd, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP known or identified to me to be the persons) whose name(s) is/arc subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that � qpJsghM); exccitted the same. NOTAAName: PAKEL.A J. BIGELOW _ •• Y r = — 0 ORDER NO. 94051807 LF -PB F4 EXHIBIT "A" 1801000550 A pof tion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 5 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: The South 935 feet of the following described property: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot 2 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian; thence East along the North line of said Lot, 34 1/2 rods; thence South parallel with the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section to the Southwest corner thereof; thenc4 North along the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. We, ROBERT CASSELL AND WILLA J. CASSELL, of Meridian, Idaho, owners of the property described in Exhibit "A", consent to the annexation through the application by PNE/Edmonds Construction Co. for the property known as Packard No. 2 Subdivision and consent to be bound by findings of facts and conclusion of law and to be bound by the ordinance for annexation for the parcel known as Packard No. 2 and agree to pay any fees associated with the annexation. In witness whereof, we have executed this consent this day of , 1997. RECRIZED -S ROBERT CASSELL ,AT'Y ENCR*ER WILLA J. 4SSELL STATE OF IDAHO ss. County of Ada ) On this day of 192 , before me, the undersigned, a notary publid in and for said state, personally appeared ROBERT CASSELL and WILLA J. CASSELL, known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within and foregoing 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 in this certificate first above written. Notary F 5wi Yc for loan Residing at Boise, Ida My Commission Expires_ RECEIVED APR 111W MERIDIAN CITY ENGINEER Or:DER NO PARCEL B 95054697 • EXHIBIT "A" • A parcel of land situated in the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township._3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,.Ada County, Idaho; more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50100" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02159" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36158" West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence -continuing South 89 degrees 36158" West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8836671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 13148" West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 89 degrees 36158" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C Easement for Ingress and Egress more particulary described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50100" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02159" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence North 89 degrees 36158" East 314.52 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 01141" West 50.00 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36158" West 677.03 feet to a point; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East 50.00 feet to a point; thence North 89 degrees 36158" East 676.85 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING We, ROBERT E. COBURN AND MICHELE L. CHESWORTH of Meridian, Idaho, owners of the property described in Exhibit "A", consent to the annexation through the application by PNE/Edmonds Construction Co. for' the property known as Packard No. 2 Subdivision and consent to be bound by findings of facts and conclusion of law and to be bound by the ordinance for annexation for the parcel known as Packard No. 2 Subdivision and agree to pay any fees associated with the annexation. In witness whereof, we have executed this consent this Z ` q t" -day of kCXRZ%) , 1947. RECEIVED APR 1 1 1997 MERMAN CITY ECA EER STATE OF IDAHO ss. County of Ada f. ROBERT E. COBURN MICHELE L. CHESWORTH On thi s Zge--, day of %''o)ec*� , 19?7, before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for said state, personally appeared ROBERT E. COBURN and MICHELE L. CHESWORTH, known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within and foregoing 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 in this certificate first above wri tten. +� otar u c for Idaho R e s i d g a t My Commission E x p i rk s 1U -1U -MZ) NO. 95055239& PARCEL I e EXHIBIT "A" A parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Townghip 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the North Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 27132" West 1,673.35 feet to a point; thence along a line that is 935.00 feet North of and parallel with the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 40120" East 182.20 feet to a point; thence leaving said parallel line South 0 degrees 26123" West 80.77 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0 degrees 26123" West 119.58 feet to a point on the right-of-way line representing the location of a future road; thence along said future right-of-way line North 89 degrees 33137" West 159.29 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a curve to the right whose radius is 20.00 feet, whose central angle is 90 degrees 00, 00", whose length is 1,831.42 feet, and whose long chord bears North 44 degrees 33137" West 28.28 feet to a point of tangency; thence North 0 degrees 26123" East 99.58 feet .to a point; thence leaving said future right-of-way line South 89 degrees 33137" East 179.29 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL II An easement for ingress, egress, and parking described as follows: A parcel of land situated in the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the North Quarter corner of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 27132" West 1,673.39 feet to a point; thence along a line that is 935.00 feet North of and parallel with the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 40120" East 182.20 feet to a point; thence leaving said parallel line South 0 degrees 26123" West 63.77 feet to the POINT OF - 1 - • Continuation of Exhibit A Order No. ST -95055239 EN BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0 degrees 26123" West 15.00 feet to a point; thence North 89 -degrees 33137" West 182.25 feet to a point on the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0 degrees 27132" East 15.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North-South center of section line of ' said Section 5 South 89 degrees 33137" East 182.24 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. -2- I APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION APPROVAL & ZONING OR REZONE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FILING INFORMATION I. GENERAL INFORMATION Packard Subdivision #2 (PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION) NW % Section 5. T 3 N R I E (GENERAL LOCATION) See attached (LEGAL DESCRIPTION - ATTACH IF LENGTHY) Pacific Northwest Electric (P N E )/ Edmonds' Construction 888-7255 (OWNER(S) OF RECORD) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) 3131E Lanark Suite C Meridian (ADDRESS) jq-�- 2'SIF Pacific Northwest Electric (PN E 1/ Edmonds' Construction 888-725 (APPLICANT) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) 3131E Lanark Suite C Meridian (ADDRESS) Tealey's Land Surveying 385-0636 (ENGINEER, SURVEYOR OR PLANNER) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) l; # '11: • Will 00 (JURISDICTION(S) REQUIRING APPROVAL Residential - Single-family (TYPE OF SUBDIVISION - RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) 35.23 ACRES OF LAND IN CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP. (ACCEPTED BY:) (FEE) f Q •1 0 REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION A request for preliminary plat approval must be in the City Clerk's possession no later than three days following the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear the request at the monthly meeting following the month the request was made. After a proposal enters the process, it may be acted upon at subsequent monthly meetings provided the necessary procedures and documentation are received before 5:00 P.M., Thursday following the Planning and Zoning Commission action. 1. Name of Annexation id Subdivision: Packard Subdivision #2 2. General Location: NW % Section 5, T.3N. , R. 1E. 3. Owners of record: P.N.E./Edmonds Constrution Address: 3131 E. Lanark Meridian. Id , Zip 83642 Telephone 888-7255 4. Applicant: P.N.E./Edmonds Construction Address: 5. Engineer: Firm: TPA y's band Sn_ryWnng Address: 109 S. 4th St. Boise' Id , Zip 83702 Telephone 385-0636 6. Name and address to receive City billings: Name: P.N.E. Address 3131 E. Lanark, Meridian, Id 83642 Telephone 888-7255 PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST: Subdivision Features 1. Acres 35.23 2. Number of lots 95 (Building sites) 3. Lots per acre 2.69 4. Density per acre 5. Zoning Classification(s) R-4_ 6. If the proposed subdivision is outside the Meridian City Limits but within the jurisdictional mile, what is the existing zoning classification? 7. Does the plat border a potential green belt? Yes 8. Have recreational easements been provided for? If required by the City Council 9. Are there proposed recreational amenities to the City? No Explain 10. Are there proposed dedications of common areas? Yes Explain LandsQapcd en way and streets 11. What school(s) service the area? Chief Joseph Elementary/ Ustick Element= Do you propose any agreements for future school sites? No Explain Other proposed amenities to the City _ Fire Department Meridian Other Explain Water Supply Yes Type of Building (Residential, Commercial, Industrial or combination) Residential Type of dwelling(s) (Single Family, Duplexes, Multiplexes, other) Single-family Proposed Development features: a. b. C. d. e. Minimum square footage of lot(s): 8.000 Minimum square footage of structure(s): 1,400 Are garages provided for? Yes, attached Square footage: Are other coverings provided for? No Landscaping has been provided for? Yes Describe The same landscave (2) • .r f. Trees will be provided for? Yes Trees will be maintained individual homeowners g. Sprinkler systems are provided for as r iced by City Ordinance h. Are there multiple units No Type remarks: i. Are there special set back requirements? No Explain j. Has off-street parking been provided for? Explain k. 1. In. Value range of property Type of financing for development Protective covenants were submitted? Date: 16. Does the proposal land -lock other property? No Does it create enclaves? Yes STATEMENTS OF COMPLIANCE: 1. Streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are to be constructed to the standards as required by the Ada County Highway District and Meridian Ordinance. Dimensions will be determined by the City Engineer. All sidewalks will be five feet (5') in width. 2. Proposed use is in conformance with the city of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 3. Development will connect to City services. 4. Development will comply with City ordinances. 5. Preliminary plat will include all appropriate easements. 6. Street names must not conflict with City grid system. (3) - T&, -:TS LAND SURVEYING May 22, 1995 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision #2 - Preliminary Plat Dear Members of the Commission: 109 South 4* Streto ,Ise. Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 This is an application by Pacific Northwest Electric (P.N.E.)/ Edmonds' Construction for approval of the preliminary plat of Packard Subdivision #2. Packard Subdivision #2 are 95 residential lots located in the northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. Situated on 35.23 acres, Packard Subdivision is bounded on three sides by existing residential development. Surrounding subdivisions include Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place, Chamberlain Estates, and Carol's Subdivision. Except Carol's Subdivision, these subdivisions are developing with single-family dwellings on lots between 6,000 square feet and 8,000 square feet. Carol's Subdivision is developed with lots that are approximately one acre in size. Packard Subdivision #2 is located north of and next to Packard Subdivision #1. Packard Subdivision #2 is an extension and continuation of Packard Subdivision # 1, including the landscaping scheme for street trees. The site of Packard Subdivision #2 is designated for single-family residential development on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Map. Development will be single-family dwellings 1,400 square feet or larger in size. This development complies with the provisions of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance and the goals and policies of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan_ Packard Subdivision #2 contains a variety of lot sizes. Lots range in size from 8,000 square feet to over 16,000 square feet. This will provide a transition between the smaller R8 lots of Chamberlain Estates, Chateau Meadows, and Kearney Place and the larger lots of Carol's Subdivision. As a measure to aid in transition, several large lots have been placed next to Carol's Subdivision. Ped.md suM.mw #2 Prow 1409 - 1 - Water service to Packard Subdivision will be obtained from the city of Meridian. Sewer service will be provided by extension of the South Slough Sewer trunk -line. This sewer extension will provide gravity -flow sewer service to the area and will enable Packard Subdivision #1 to remove its temporary lift -station. All streets within this development will be dedicated to the public and maintained by the Ada County Highway District. The Ada County Highway District required a traffic impact study for Packard Subdivisions. Configuration of the roadway system, and connection to existing or proposed streets in the area, was designed following meetings with the Ada County Highway District. Street construction will be to the standards of the Ada County Highway District. Access to Wingate Lane from this development will be discouraged. A collector -size stub street to the north has been provided near the northwest comer of the development. Future extension of this stub street will provide access to Ustick Road. The site for Packard Subdivision #2 is relatively level. It is bounded on the north side by the South Slough. There are several smaller irrigation ditches that will be tiled or abandoned where appropriate. No other hazards have been identified on the site. No flood hazard area has been identified for this site (F.I.R.M. Panel 0165). The Meridian Comprehensive Plan identifies the southern bank of the South Slough as a greenbelt/pathway location. The developers will work with the City toward that goal. Open space lots have been provided along much of the South Slough where it borders this site. In summary, Packard Subdivision #2 is the final development proposal for Packard Subdivisions. The proposal meets the design and development standards of the Meridian Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. It complies with the policies and goals of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The lots are 8,000 square feet in size, or larger. Each lot will contain a single-family dwelling at least 1,400 square feet in size. Water service will come from the city of Meridian as will sewer service. As this last phase develops and the South Slough sewer trunk -line is extended, a temporary sewer lift -station will be removed. We ask that the Commission recommend approval of this application to the City Council. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying By: Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision #2 Project 1408 - 2 - e 3,nxa - Y ONANAYO4 OMt1 t.AMML 'mss KOIFtAlUBaS U8"Jvd d0 Ivid =V.%IR173Md (� U i � � r o O • T Z �^ % � U •, � �1 �I�JN 1 7 ;< Y r o 1 o t'te u iI' r • 1Cy�J'j Ul ,� eui y W Q oI �F�i•W yU�LU '� W7•�: R _ ISL U z s , , _ Vii,•"aa�`, � til ``-Y,I �--�= t(OFI 7st ✓� � 1 T — .�a: �� • R R - lw d� �F � I • f' �i � I � J AI 1 ' _I - II`_� i ; J iN� 'f x-L �ilY •� ty', �J •�-4 .� __ tat � r Tj �E• ••',IIE.6' f! h+ =3 MI el a hair ..; S}raa: ! i�- • i -3 n a3• LSEdtI to •tt � i/ �.• � d s; � \e- t��t ;ice 3 f�•! •�' �R F p It its i 1 1*:.i ; 1. '.�� 'fes I�! � i .� F/• �F �-�-�F �_ I '1 �' e" '� �y� s� '\��� ;•E �v—_-_. I j�,l i •� I� •Y �,•i ' ( ��' I's'` *�,' Ems. R /• p. r. eR F {\ R• \ r'. ~k IJ' L.Y E �e'T-'-� I•-1 A13F �l.►� J��' R R x 9 ! F i Iri' / f g R-4 RT ; •: SRT I RT To A RTRl ' J - -- - � L g .Ss w RT r— COOL' R RT RT R 1 1 �T R-8 Pole- V. loto l� RT see --L_ ; �— ��BogwSro� M1 a RT RT -��t• {?!�~ ~I' �R7.'? "- �� • •• • 7 I • •• s • RT lb �.�. ..� – • 3 • ii • .� • • • i • • • • R-4 RT L-0 _ , i, �_ RT ` RT 7T -- R I,: RT C-3 R8 RT RI i— F L E:,W, T i BUSl%. ESS r '! CENIEP. PM/SE I ' . /S,_ �� ,:E71vtStOn i� -- RT -- ---y-- -- f-= P7 V--"5 T-- --- A C R I 30 -, ADA PLANNPZ§ AS -N. I AUG 12 ,1994 29 }� + 3i -3- o *v 25 24 y �• 14 • .jjG �f J}�— 7 ., .s�—�r It �• Y l aw • xio. wig.. \ -�-��.... 111 �.• � �v �x 2 41 22 ♦ I,... 1 c ,,I d1:J. ..r .se . ter. 3i+te. .,:•. E. TL1Rh1LME ST10 . 1 m.e a•Y / yat. . raaa y > 21 .,n.x a ," i..,�. ...::. .». ..... � „• 9 1 nm. A. x..h �s, .. �'.c .y,. sir. . . v~s. •i �<'•�` xael x...e I (lay:. ' 211) 1C Ll 1 ,,. / � a»,sa �� � i'' 4 ie,!?" r�tlr • t+!+ • +ett., ; a}Yi r. � , ' � x i!�e Li 37 cr '� I -r � a.39 38 32 24 K. ,..al. .. ' j �i 10 Z a. nA TAU a WA QW40 EA 16 /, 442 0 26.i%� aiw: Jjl. IF I. •\'` ' i`�a •a. , II 3 .3 Q 29 2712 7 x'a I •i 15 26 Z •cc, i y E IOCMMEt00va Ct 14 al .,•tee 9 •� 13 7 B 9 t IO u 2 IJ 14 }cl N I 1� ��b0• ♦�4f�4f14 S 6 3 14 TZ 9! Tp L l 1 lJ 3 a 7 12 E. KATEIYN DR. I n W 4 is 17I AgE 2 x 8 11 o ? Et! 1 9 10 32 7 8® 13 a -i - i f Z 14 J 4 +y� • l z A : I I I 9 12 0 4 1 w C I S 10 If Z 3 ` 2 z E CHGTELJ OR 3 1 PLC N a '� /',TlG'Kjgj t N I ♦ ♦ 1 , ♦ ♦ 1 37 39 3e 32 24 C! to VV Z � A QW W ol of 4 4' 0 26 3 .3 a 29 27 ♦� 26 F E SOC-mEtDOM C7. 9 n M89 10 a ;2 13 ti i 4 5 6 3 14 15 It"r TC ` • • ! • O ,2 E. K AT ELYN DR. v F' • 3 a 7 W 4 is 17 ;� A� E �L • 2 " a 2 ui NO. 3" o � e1 g ;0 3c 2 ! �p 13 _ 14 3 Z _.� 2 6 A 9 12 4 W C 5 10 li z 3 "? 4 z E CHATEAU DR. 3 Q P N a 7—) A Ci ._ 30 ADA PLANN196 AU -N. 12,1994 Ze► ,1 C �o 3� ze BLOCK 25 27 24 ,) `_14 a CA / 12 22 10 ?I 9 20 I° 8 U► S W 18 ; 9 J - a IT 10 l .'n 16 12 14 13 y S6 uw LA 'F E 4 a A- TI115 FORM FVRNISIIF.D COURTESY OP: I� 1 STEWART TITLE READ &APPROVED 8Y GRAMEF(S): {2820) •' f 00 '1 01 (SriSE i'1 ,1TEWART'TMC_ '311 SEP `i5 r i; _5T OF SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDING DATA Order 11o.: 94050999A LF WARRANTY DEED 17,8Z001 7 U FOR VALUE RECEIVED BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGA?N, SELL and CONVEY unto WIRT EDMONDS AND FRANCES D. EDMONDS, HUSBAND AND WIFE; PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION; ALLEN LEE CENTERS AND DIANNE CENTERS, HUSBAND & GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: %Ted Sigmont, 3131 Lanark St., Meridian, Idaho 83642, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantees) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantcc(s), that Grantor(s) is/are the oumcr(s) in fee simple of said premises. that said premises are free from all er.:umbrances. EXCEPT L'lose to which t! -.is conveyan:e is expressly rn: do su!�Ject and those r:adc. suffered Cr dc: -A k%- th.- Grant e(s). a, -Id Su�'j.". t i0 Ie5^fy2 iAti, reS'rl::Ors. d viC3'.:C 15. ease:,r�riu. rights Of K'ay ,�7', agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessment;. if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: September 12 , 1994 1LL E BROWN STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA L. JOY BROWN - -- — On this 12ch day of Septenber , in the year of 1994 , before ric, the undersigned, a Net. -. Public in and for said State; personally appeared BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN known or identified #2 ^ ,+h''tlie persons) whose nimc(s) is/arc suhscribcd to the within instnlment, and ac►nc��!_`'led lcrrfiP Itr, h":kezecuted the same. O t V, ORDER NO. 94050899 LF EXHIBIT "A" 1.7 8zool i Qui PARCEL A A tract of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada Count,•, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 89 degrees 500 West a distance of 335.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 0215911 East a distance of 876.63 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance of 413.56 feet; thence North 89 degrees 36'58" East a distance of 314.52 feet; thence South 0 degrees 01141" East a distance of 648.17 feet; thence South 89 degrees 3115611 West a distance of 979.79 feet; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East a distance of 1,343.62 feet; thence South 86 degrees 30126" East a distance of 135.83 feet; thence South 58 degrees 35'55" East a distance of 99.48 feet; thence South 31 degrees 17'59" East a distance of 189.47 feet; thence South 76 degrees 25156" East a distance of 191.49 feet; thence South 86 degrees 38'20" East a distance of 154.36 feet to THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCEL: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: CO!Q. ENCING at the Northeast corner or Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50100" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02159" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 36'5810 West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89 degrees 36,158t1 West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8826671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 1314811 West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 69 degrees 36'58" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence !north 0 degrees 13'48/1 East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THIS FORM FURNISHED COURTESY OF: STEWART TITLE READ R APPROVED BY GRANTEEiS): s C, • 911101 ?33 MWART TITLE 'S`I Iri,U 16 PI'1 51 i:ECC•:... .. /..J�5i Or ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94051807 LF—PB WARRANTY DEED 1507000545 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and EDMONDS .,/v CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and ALLEN LEE CENTERS, Arrl',J' GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: 3131 LANARK, SUITE C, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 A` the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly tu� described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s), that Grantor(s) islare the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the Grantec(s); and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: November 14, -1994 V iBUPKE,BORU� LI DA G. BORUP STATE OF IDAHO ) COUNW OF ADA ) On this 15th day of November , in the year of 1994 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared BURYE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP known or identified to me to be the person(s) whose narc(s) is/arc subscribed to Ole widdr. instrument, and acknowledged to me tha\\f{plo jlt}gk��exernted the same. O%� Signature.- NOT�y Name: PAMELA J. BIGELOW _ e ORDER NO. 94051807 LF -PB EXHIBIT "A" 180/000350 A portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: The South 935 feet of the following described property: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot 2 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian; thence East along the North line of said Lot, 34 1/2 rods; thence South parallel with the west line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section to the Southwest corner thereof; thenck- North along the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. 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 March 11, 1997, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of PNE/Edmonds Construction, for annexation and zoning of approximately 35.23 acres of land located in the NW % and NE % Section 5, T. 3N, R.1 E, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and which property is generally located South of Ustick Road, and East of Locust Grove Road. Application requests a zone of R-4. Further, applicant requests Preliminary Plat approval of the parcel of land above described for 95 of single family dwellings lots for Packard Subdivision No. 2. 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 21st of February, 1997 ,RAI ► r' v PUBLISH February 21 and February 28, 1997. 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 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor Planning & Zoning Commissioners: RE: Packard Subdivision No. 2 Application COUNCIL MEMBERS WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M.ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman KEITH BORUP JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY February 13, 1997 As you know a portion of the land contained in this application is contiguous to my personal residence at 1083 N. Justin Place. Because of the proximity of the proposed development and because of my personal perception of the developers involved, I believe a definite conflict of interest on my part does exist. Therefore, I am requesting that Greg Oslund assume my role as Chairman on all future considerations of this proposed project. Sincerely, Jim Chairman cc: Mayor City Attorney Planning & Zoning Administrator OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney 0 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 6 A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW PAZ COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER RECEIVED CHA TRLIE IMHEPPERREE GRANT P. KINGSFORD MAY 2 6 1995 Mayor CITY OF MERIDIAN 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: ,lune 13, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5/26/95 1 HEARING DATE: 6/22/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zonina/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision No T BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: -South of Ustick Road East of Locust Grove Road JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z _CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C _WALT MORROW, C/C _MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) —X -CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: MAY-26-1995 11:06 T LtY"5 LAND tog 5outn 4- Street t3oise, ioano u3fuz (20 5-0636 RVEYING Fax (2385-0696 Project No.: 1408 Date: May 25, 1995 DESCRIPTION FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO 2 BROWN-BORUP PROPERTY/ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in Gov't Lot 3, NW'/4 and the NE'/4 of Section 5, UN., R.IE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho; more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the North 1/4 corner of said Section 5; thence along the North line of said Section 5 North 89°44'57" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence along a line 335.00 feet West of and parallel to the North-South center of Section line of said Section 5 South 0027'32" West 876.63 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough, said point being THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 0°27'32" West 404.43 feet to a point on the North line of the NE'/4 SE'/4 NW% of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the NE'/4 SE'/4 NW'/4 of said Section 5 South 89°32'43" East 335.00 feet to a point on the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 South 0127'32" West 391.14 feet to a point on a line that lies 935.00 feet North of the East-West center of section line; thence along a line 935.00 feet North of and parallel to the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 South 89040'20" East 569.25 feet to a point; thence along a line 569.25 feet East of and parallel to the North-South center of section line South 0°27'32" West 935.00 feet to a point on the East-West center of section line of said Section 5; thence along the East-West center of section line of said Section 5 North 89°40'20" West 569.25 feet to the center of section of said Section 5; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0027'32" East 663.07 feet to a point marking the Southeast corner of the N'/: SE'/4 NW'/4 of said Section 5; thence along the South line of the N'/z SE'/4 NW'/d of said Section 5 North 89°35' 39" West 995.09 feet to a point marking the Southwest corner of the E'A NW'/, SE'/< NW'/4 of said Section 5; thence along the West line of the E'/z N W% SE'/. NWI/4 of said Section 5 North 0126'23" East 663.92 feet to the Northwest corner of the EV7. NW'/d SE'/. NW'/4 of said Section 5; thence along the North line of the E% NW'/• Sl:'/4 NW'/4 of said Sections South 89°32'43" East 4.31 feet to a point on a line that lies 991.00 feet West of the North-South center of section line of said Section 5; thence along a line 991.00 feet West of and parallel to the North- South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27'32" East 680.84 feet to a point on the centerline of the South Slough; thence along the centerline of the South Slough the following courses and distances South 85059'55" East 132.90 feet (Formerly South 86°30'26" East 135.83 feet) to a point; thence South 58105'24" East 99.48 feet (Formerly South 58°35'55" East) to a point; thence PAGE. 02 F-1 L-A TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING 109 SOUTH 4" STREET. BOISE. IDAHO 83702 * (208) 385-0636 Project No. 1408 Date: May 25, 1995 PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 Page 2 South 30°47'28" East 189.47 feet (Formerly South 31017'59" East) to a point; thence South 75°55'25" East 191.49 feet (Formerly South 76025'26" East) to a point; thence South 86°07'49" East 154.36 feet (Formerly South 86038'20" East) to THE POINT OF BEGINNING, MAY 26 '95 11:01 Said parcel contains 35.23 acres, more or less. TOTAL P.03 PAGE.03 • 0 APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION APPROVAL & ZONING OR REZONE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FILING INFORMATION I. GENERAL INFORMATION Packard Subdivision #2 (PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION) NW 1A Section 5, T 3 N, R 1 E (GENERAL LOCATION) See attached (LEGAL DESCRIPTION - ATTACH IF LENGTHY) Pacific Northwest ElectricP( N E )/ Edmonds' Construction 888-7255 (OWNER(S) OF RECORD) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) 3131 E. Lanark Suite C. Meridian (ADDRESS) Pacific Northwest Electric (P N E. )/ Edmonds' Construction 888-7255 (APPLICANT) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) — 3131 E. Lanark Suite C. Meridian (ADDRESS) Tealey's Land Surveying 385-0636 (ENGINEER, SURVEYOR OR PLANNER) (NAME) (TELEPHONE NO.) G • 0o. (JURISDICTION(S) REQUIRING APPROVAL Residential - Sin a -farm y (TYPE OF SUBDIVISION - RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) _35.23 ACRES OF LAND IN CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP. (ACCEPTED BY:) (FEE) May 22, 1995 TWETS LAND 109 South 49, Stro Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 E. Idaho St. Meridian Id 83642 RE: Annexation Request - Packard Subdivision #2 Dear Members of the Commission: This application by Pacific Northwest Electric (P.N.E.)/ Edmond's Construction is seeking annexation of 35.23 acres. Located in the northwest quarter of. Section 5, Township 3 North„ Range l East of the Boise Meridian, Ada. County, Idaho, the parcel adjoins the city limits along its western boundary. Currently zoned RT (Rural Transition) under Ada County regulations, we are asking that the site be annexed into the city with a zoning designation of R-4. The site consists of two (2) parcels. Part of the site, previously owned by Bill and Joy Brown, was submitted for annexation in September of 1994. That application was tabled until a development proposal was submitted. Since September of 1994, P.N.E./ Edmond's Constnution have purchased additional land. The total annexation package is 35.23 acres. Presently, both parcels are in limited agricultural uses. Each parcel contains a single-family dwelling and outbuildings. The dwellings will be incorporated into the subdivision proposal accompanies this annexation request. It is the intention of the applicant to development a si family residential subdivision on these parcels. Under the jurisdiction of Ada County, the parcels are presently zoned RT (Rural Transition). county demon limits the amount of development until urban services and other development extends to the parcel. Urban services and urban development have extended to western boundary of these properties. The applicant seeks an R4 zoning designWw for the parcels upon annexation. Much of the area surrounding the site has already developed. Chamberlain Estates, Chateau Meadows, Kearney Place and Card's Subdivision are next to the site. Except Carers Sub&n which is zoned R1, all of the surrounding subdivisions are zoned R-8- There are a few small agricultural parcels lying north and east of the site. Those parcels range is sine from tree to raawd &Mvisim #2 - army ria 1409 - 1- f • • 1i i� i c acres. Each has a single-family dwelling. Annexing and, zoning this parcel to R-4 is with the existing and planned development in the area. With an R-4 zoning designation, development of the site will provide a transition between those subdivisions that are zoned R-4 and the larger lot development east of the site. The site is close to the center of Meridian. Annexation of this site provides an orderly, logica extension of the city limit. Following the annexation is the extension of sewer services. Development will be a consistent extension of the Packard Subdivision #1. Development of t site for residential purposes is consistent with the goals of the Meridian Comprehensive. The Comprehensive Plan Map shows this area as designated for single-family residential developn In summary, the parcel is contiguous to the current city limits. The Meridian Cove designates the area for residential development. our proposal is consistent with the developt pattern in the area and provides the transition between R-8 development and large: lots is the area. Extension of the South Slough sewer -trunk will progress with the development of the This proposal meets the requirements for annexation in both the Meridian City Code and the Idaho Code. We ask that the Commission make positive findings of fact and recommend approval of this application to the City Council. Respectfully, Patrick A- Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying Teti Hutchinson Packard 3ub&vWm #Z - AmexMim -2- Pro ed 1408 AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST STATE OF IDAHO ss COUNTY OF ADA Meridian Idaho , (city) (state) fiM defy .warn Bpm 1. That I am the record owner of the property described on the attached, and grant my permission to: Pacific Northwest Electric , 3131E Lanark Suite C (name) (address) to submit the accompanying application pertaining to that property. 2. I agree to indemnify, defend and hold Meridian City and it's employees harmless from any claim or liability resulting from any dispute as to the statements contained herein or as to the ownership of the property which is the subject of the application. Dated this 23rd day of SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the day and year first above written. Notary Public for Idaho N• D. Off; Residing at:. .•'� 1� • T A ••,• 0 My Commission Expires: y -% p� 0, UBLic ,��''•� T8 Off' 19.'x',. I 1 • 1, Walter T. Signorrt , certify that I personally posted a NOTICE FOR PUBLIC HEARING near 2795 North Wingate Lane and 2640 North Wingate Lane notifying the public that these properties were the subject of an annexation and zone request. This notice was posted not less than one (1) week prior to the public Walter T. Sigm/ont U Pacific Northwest Electric 3131 East Lanark Suite C Meridian Idaho 83642 TIM FORA( FURNISIIED COURTESY OF: 1 STEWART TITLE READ & APPROVED BY GRANTEE(S): (2820) STEINAM -TMC- '911 SEP IS � l B rEE � _J.. _ 13-6-IL-La-11c, RECC4.0_, . . •..:L5T OF ABOVE MS LINE FOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94050999ALF WARRANTY DEED 17"NZ001705 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BILLIE W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto WIRT EDMONDS AND FRANCES D. EDMONDS, HUSBAND AND WIFE; PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION; ALLEN LEE CENTERS AND DIANNE CENTERS, HUSBAND b GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: CTed Sigmont, 3131 Lanark St., Meridian, Idaho 83642, the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantec(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) docs(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantec(s), that Grantor(s) is/arc the owmcr(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises arc free from all encumbrances. EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly Ins -de subject and those rnsde, suffered or da^r by the Grantx(s): and subject to rescrvxions, res:H ions. dedica,ions. ease...ents. rights of way sad agreements, (if any) of record, and general =,!s and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are not yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dated: September 12 , 1994 /BII E BROWN STATE Of IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA JOY BROWN On this 12th day of September , in the yea: of 1994 , before me. the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said Statc;-personally appeared BILLIE• W. BROWN AND L. JOY BROWN known or identi(ie - cq >✓h ate persnn(s) whose namc(s) is/arc subscribed to Ole within instrument, and acknow1c0red ItrtfiY IV, "s tl�gcxccutc;i the same. • ORDER NO. 94050899 LF EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A r: 1:8UU1I A tract of land situated in the Northwest quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 3; thence South 89 degrees 501 West a distance of South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0 degrees 02159" East a distance North 89 degrees 36158" East a distance South 0 degrees 01'41" East a distance South 89 degrees 31'56" West a distance North 0 degrees 13'48" East a distance thence South 86 degrees 30'26" East a distance .south 58 degrees 35'55" East a distance South 31 degrees 17'59" East a distance South 76 degrees 25'56" East a distance South 86 degrees 38'20" East a distance REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. 335.00 feet; thence of 876.63 feet to THE of 413.56 feet; thence of 314.53 feet; thence of 648.17 feet; thence of 979.79 feet; thence of 1,343.62 feet; of 135.83 feet; thence of 99.48 feet; thence of 189.47 feet; thence of 191.49 feet; thence of 154.36 feet to THE EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCEL: A parcel of land situated in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: CO;�'ENCING at the Northeast corner or Government Lot 3; thence along the North line of said Section 5 South 89 degrees 50'00" West 335.00 feet to a point; thence leaving the North line of said Section 5 South 0 degrees 02'59" East 1290.19 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees 3615811 West 362.33 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 89 degrees 36'58" West 300.00 feet to a point on the West line of the Brown property, said property is referred to in Instrument No. 8826671; thence along said West line South 0 degrees 13'48" West 217.81 feet to a point; thence leaving said West line North 69 degrees 36'58" East 300.00 feet to a point; thence North 0 degrees 13148" East 217.81 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Ask 91101233 THIS FORVI FURNISHED COURTESY OF: STEWART TITLE s�. READ & APPROVED BY GRANTEES): ;i C!:; I r) OTEWART TfTLE 1911 11LU 16 Nil 5i ' 11ECC-n...... .JcST Or ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDING DATA Order No.: 94051807 LF -PB WARRANTY DEED 1807 IUU545 FOR VALUE RECEIVED BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP, HUSBAND AND WIFE GRANTOR(S), does(do) hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY unto PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and EDMONDS .,1 CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION and ALLEN LEE CENTERS, A M"';,r GRANTEE(S), whose current address is: 3131 LANARK, SUITE C, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 the following described real property in ADA County, State of Idaho, more particularly C� described as follows, to wit: As set forth on the attached EXHIBIT "A", which by this reference becomes a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with their appurtenances unto the said Grantee(s), and Grantee(s) heirs and assigns forever. And the said Grantor(s) does(do) hereby covenant to and with the said Grantee(s), that Grantor(s) is/are the owner(s) in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are free from all encumbrances, EXCEPT those to which this conveyance is expressly made subject and those made, suffered or done by the Grantor(s); and subject to reservations, restrictions, dedications, easements, rights of way and agreements, (if any) of record, and general taxes and assessments, (including irrigation and utility assessments, if any) for the current year, which are rot yet due and payable, and that Grantor(s) will warrrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. Dpted: :November 14, 1994 IBURKE;BORU� STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA LI DA G. BORUP v On this 15th day of November , in the year of 1994 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared BURKE BORUP AND LINDA G. BORUP known or identified to me to be the person(s) whose namc(s) istarc subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that \� Pulfty,,execiitcd the same. � QP�r" ,O NOTARY O " Name: PAMELA J. BIGELOW i ORDER NO. 94051807 LF -PB EXHIBIT "A" 180"1000550 A portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: The South 935 feet of the following described property: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Lot 2 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian; thence East along the North line of said Lot, 34 1/2 rods; thence South parallel with the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the South line of the Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence West along the South line of said Southwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of said Section to the Southwest corner thereof; thence North along the West line of the Northeast Quarter of said Section to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. SOrI 5661 '«�yvn .Mi - ,I MI • -0« 1�3�ONd '.31v'J Tv:.; n3�0 llrlq :6nf.� - o«r6�'ux�a vv. .'3W ' a 311 NCI Ng1 �,y .•p,y 'E :35 ' /I' !•H 31UW 'JNAI ONIAiAYf18 ON11-1 C.Ai-jvil Z '-N No1S1AI0811s QBtlH3tld d0 1Y7d ANYNINI.19Md U O � kLi�� U- z° N N LL kx Amo a�•'W� �^ a Z� s � i"9Y�o W .�'k10' y Q � 1 •�� yWj j Q j a R I I I•~ �NnLl IL y F �L IN V N 8 4 l % R •1 n R + R � +RI I % j .s e4F— • I � •� a � • i 1fi �_ R5t_'�t R a R �A y-; _ iR .g .a • :1 o w ^$I II I % Q R � § � R _.crrmr E. '%� !� r a n� •qa •� � O-� a % % IL Al +$a$ � '� 1R 3 •RE �1 - .� e� A� iii �g' " OOyyll & R SIt 7 N • z � k k� z a R W % J F-9 � Y111tl3116 N— 'IC_- • k 1 R *q It cy It �R� • 1 � .� • _ i — . -' k ..fix �` `� SS w A I X e ^9 % % • C 1 F R 2V • LL a,•.,r,,, . y00.0 a z y 1 � 1 � � � � R S � % -� • r � ; R-4 RT rRT RT {y. R.1 :i IRT _ --- i�T P��,NNi116-A RT ; RT r-- cswcL ti jl i I RT RT R RT R-8►ice-- -- r 1 —r J 1 \ Ft Last FIT too RT FT 7y� 3 -c -rt rte'-�- ••. • . '! FIT lb e R-4 _. RT ; L-0 h— 1 RT RT C-3 RT ; TREASURE _. RI J PLEAGA,4,T i BUSINESS S ...t I ; F— CENTER ;e PKSE 1 VT ii — - RT — --1-- - r POOL y;, U RT f 1-L MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Mav 6 1997 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 10 REQUEST: DISCUSSION OF PACKARAD NO.1 SUBDIVISION CONDITION OF APPROVAL ITEM 3 AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. April 10, 1997 TEALETS LAND 109 South 41" Street Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Attn: Mayor and City Council TT S PACKTliD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 _ CONDITION OF APPROVAL ITEM 3 :LA • L't'_L Dear Mayor & City Council; The developer of Packard Subdivision No. 1 would like to address the condition of approval item no. 3 at your next available meeting. In a letter from Shari Stiles dated April 4, 1997 (attached) we were made aware of this condition and wish to revise it. Item 3 apparently states that "ALL ditches would be tiled prior to beginning construction and not left to be done in phases." This was never the intention of the developer, they will tile the ditches in conjunction with the phases of the subdivision as is the standard practice. Thank you for your consideration on this subject. If we can be of any assistance please call at the earliest convenience. R pectfully, W 4 -LAY Patrick A. Tealey Tealey' s Land Surveying P.L.S. No. 4347 APR 04 '97 14:59 FR CITY OF MERIDIAN 200 887 4813 TO 3850696 OFFICIALS HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY NILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L SMITH, City Treasurer GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROF7 Waste Water Supt- DENNIS uptDENNIS J. SUMMERS. Parks Supt. SHARI L. STILES, P a z Administrator PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Rrs Chief W.L. "SILL' GORDON. Police Chet WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney April 4, 1997 Pat Tealey, L.S. Tealey Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Re: Packard Subdivision Dear Pat: A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888.4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 P61ie Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor VeMcle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor P. 02/02 COUNCIL MEMBERS WALT W. MORROW, President RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M.ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P_A Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chaimtan TIM HEPPER JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY It was brought to our attention that item 3 of the Final Plat comments from the P & Z Administrator stated " applicant testified in presentations to the City Council that all ditches would be tiled prior to beginning construction and not left to be done in phases". Following your testimony at the Final Plat hearing the City Council moved to approve the final Plat subject to all staii'conditions. There was nothing in the motion to indicate to staff that Item 3 had been modified or deleted from the staff conditions. Therefore unless we are instructed by action of the City Council, Item 3 will be considered as a condition of the Plat approval. Per my discussion with David Marks April 4, 1997 we feel that the preconstruction conference may proceed, with the condition that an irrigation plan will be developed and submitted for review with construction to follow prior to Plat signature by the City Engineer. In the event that you have any information contrary to the information in our file please promptly notify me. Sincerely; I� Rick Clinton cc: Councilman Morrow Gary Smith, P.E_ Shari Stiles File SI 62. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: June 3, 1997 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 11 & 12 REQUEST: TIME EXTENSION FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. May 19, 1997 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Attn: Shari Stiles TEALEY'S LAND 109 South 41' street Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 TIME EXTENSION Dear Shari; RECIPIVED MAS 1 1 W7 CITY OF mEHIDIAN The developers of Packard Subdivision No. 1 are hereby requesting a time extension for the plat of Phase 1 of Packard Subdivision No. 1. The subdivision is being constructed at this time, the pressurized irrigation system is complete and sewer construction has started. However, we will not be able to complete road improvements by the June deadline. Please place the request for time extension on the next available council meeting. Also, per .our phone conversation, Phase 2 will also require a time extension. Please call at your earliest convenience if you should have any questions. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying P.L.S. No. 4347 �AQFFICIALS WILLIA G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L. SMITH, 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 February 13, 1997 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 works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 Mr. Pat Tealey, PLS Tealey's Land Surveying 109 S. 4" St. Boise, Idaho 83702 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 Final Plat Dear Pat: COUNCIL MEMBERS WALT W. MORROW, President l' RONALD R. TOLSMA CHARLES M.ROUNTREE GLENN R. BENTLEY P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman TIM HEPPER JIM SHEARER GREG OSLUND MALCOLM MACCOY As you and I have recently discussed, I don't have any particular problem with you locating a temporary sewage lift station in the proposed Packard No. 2 Subdivision and pumping into the gravity sewer line system in the Chamberlain Estates Subdivision. This location is much more palatable to me by putting the Packard Subdivision sewage into the designated drainage basin, which contains the South Slough sewer interceptor. It will, of course, be necessary for your sewerage system design plans to reflect this revision. You will need to include details for construction of an "all-weather" graveled access road above the sewer lines and to the lift station site. As you outlined in the most recent Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, there will be some lots in Packard No. 2 Subdivision that cannot be developed because they are not sewerable, by gravity, to the lift station location. Additionally, provisions will need to be made at the pressure line discharge manhole to protect downstream concrete materials from the destructive effects of the hydrogen -sulfide gas released from pumping of sewage. The Packard Subdivision developer has returned a proposed lift station maintenance agreement, which I have not yet reviewed. It is my understanding that he used a copy of an agreement we have in place for another subdivision as a model for this subdivision. Si --rely, Gary D. Smith, PE City Engineer cc: File Mayor Council Planning & Zoning bL/k7�11y74 1L: 5b 2UbbblibbU B PAGE 02 1089 Justin Place Meridian, ID 83642 March 10, 1997 Anna Doty Meridian city Hall 33 E. Idaho St. Meridian, ID 83642 P&CEIVED MAR 1 0 1997 CffY OF MERIDIAN Re: PNE/Edmonds Construction proposed annexing, zoning and preliminary plat hearing scheduled for March 11, 1997. Dear Ms. Doty, Since I cannot be at the meeting, I wish to have this letter entered into testimony. I insist that the developer be required to provide perimeter fencing of the solid, six feet high type around the entire project. Also the open ditch(es) that cross or border the project will have to be tiled and covered. Further, I feel that specific limits on the times that noise- and dust -making machinery are allowed to be in operation should be made part of the approval, if granted. Si ely, nis W.Br4ockwatr MAR 10 '97 08 20 2088871680 PAGE.02 March 8, 1997 To: Meridian Planning and Zoning From: Residents of Wingate Lane Meridian, Idaho The following issues have been raised by residents who reside on Wingate Road as concerns that we would like to have considered when reviewing the Packard Subdivision zoning proposal at your meeting on March 11'x. Wingate Lane has served the residents of the adjoining properties since July 9,1913 when a private road agreement, Instrument Number 49375, was subscribed and signed before a notary public. This document established an easement for the Sharp property and has continued to provide right of ways for the homeowners living on the lane. In 1990, Ada County Zoning Board ruled that the Peterson property should be the last new residence to be allowed access on the lane. Ada County Planning and Zoning addressed concerns of Wingate Lane residents when declaring that no more egress to new homes would be allowed due to heavy traffic on a private lane while considering a proposed home site on property owned by the Holladays. That lot was ruled to have access only off Ustick, not Wingate Lane. We question if the selling off of the two existing homes and their respective lots on the Brown and Kirkpatrick properties were legal. Isn't that illegal subdividing when no subdivision has been approved. Since 1994, we have opposed any development that would change the status of our rural setting and impact the traffic on our road. We have attended endless Planning and Zoning and Ada County Highway meetings to defend our land and our rural way of life. We now resubmit our proposal that the properties of Packard Subdivision be denied any use of our lane and ask for denial of annexation of this property. Should Packard Subdivision be approved, we would like to have our privacy insured by the following requirements: 1. Berms and fencing around the subdivision. 2. A gate across the Nampa -Meridian Easement. 3. Any work on irrigation laterals be completed in the irrigation off-season (October - April). Irrigation rights will be maintained and not interrupted for homeowners of Wingate Lane. 4. Gates wherever public roads stub up to Wingate Lane to be erected immediately upon the commencement of work on the subdivision. These gates will be of sufficient quality to discourage outside automobile and foot traffic. 5. No access on Wingate Lane for construction workers and/or their equipment. 6. Access for residents will not be impeded by work on sewer or other construction. 7. We would like assurance that covenants of Packard Subdivision will prohibit the dumping of refuse and grass clippings over their fences onto Wingate Lane. .2 97- <- zz� ADMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW OFFICE IDAHO OF TEXAS KENNETH O. KREIS ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION P.O. BOX 4811 BOISE, IDAHO 83711 6901 EMERALD, SUITE 207 BOISE, IDAHO 83704-8660 October 18, 1995 Helen and Dale Sharp 2445 Wingate Lane Meridian, Idaho 83642 TEL: (208) 322-5530 FAX: (208) 322-5540 RE: Review of Private Road Agreement Dated June 13, 1913 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sharp: I have had the opportunity to review the Private Road Agreement identified as Instrument Number 49375 dated June 13, 1913 concerning that certain private road bordering your property situated in Meridian, Idaho and legally described in the attached true and correct copy of said Private Road Agreement. Upon review of said document, and after conducting some research at the Idaho State Law Library, I have made an assessment as to the validity of said Agreement and the legal ramifications of construction of a road across the private road herein for the purposes of building and expanding a subdivision utilizing said crossroad. Initially, I would indicate the Private Road Agreement on its face appears to be a valid legal contract binding all the parties who executed said Agreement. The legal question arises as to the binding effect of said Agreement on successors in interest inasmuch as this Agreement was executed over 80 years ago. The Agreement lacks a clause in which the parties agree to bind themselves, their successors and assigns so that it has an inherent weakness in reference to the failure to include such a provision in the Agreement when drafted in 1913. However, even acknowledging such limitation, it appears that the practical effect of the Agreement, the continuing consistent interpretation placed upon the Private Road Agreement by the parties and their successors in interest and the continued use of said road by the parties bordering said road would likely signify that all parties to the Agreement and their successors in interest effectively recognize the existence of an easement by necessity for use of the private road even aaaaming that the court were to declare the Private Road Agreement not binding or enforceable against any current lot owner bordering said private road. In essence, an easement by necessity arises wherein part of a tract is conveyed as a result of a severance of a portion of the tract, and the part conveyed or retained is deprived of legal access to a public road. The proof of an easement by necessity requires a unity of ownership Helen and Dale Sharp October 18, 1995 Page 2 prior to division of the land, a necessity for the easement at the time of the severance and a great present necessity to continue the easement therein. It appears from my understanding of the facts that all of these elements are satisfied by the situation involving the private road in question so that even if the Private Road Agreement was not enforceable, you would have the legal right to enforce an easement by necessity and/or other alternative easement rights in court. The establishment of a crossroad which effectively divides your private road by actions of one of the adjacent property owners for purposes of developing the Packard Subdivision would conceivably constitute a violation of the easement and entitle you to seek injunctive relief in court inasmuch as such action would greatly overburden the existing easement and would also violate the intent of the Private Road Agreement in any respect. In reference to the issue as to whether or not the private road could be construed as a public road, it appears evident that there is no statutory basis pursuant to Idaho Code Section 40-202, and relevant Idaho case law, including Cox v. Cox 84 Idaho 513,373 P2nd 929 (1962), to support the idea that the proposed crossroad to be built across the private road would in any way satisfy the test for being a public road so that unless the County or Highway District undertook some affirmative action to declare the road a public road and/or record same as a public road in compliance with said statute, your private road would remain a private road and you would retain the right to enforce same in court. Based upon the facts as represented to me, it appears that there is no satisfaction of statutory criteria to declare the private road a public road in any respect under the current factual situation. As such, it appears that you would have valid legal grounds upon which to bring a legal action against the developer or any other adjacent land owner who attempts to build a road crossing your existing private road for purposes of building a subdivision which would significantly expand the use and/or interference with your easement and/or Private Road Agreement. Furthermore, I believe that you would have a very good chance of prevailing in court and obtaining injunctive relief against said developer or parties. I hope that this brief assessment assists you in your review and consideration of this matter and the course of action that you intend to take herein. Sincerely, Kenneth O. Kreis KOK/tb ,�)S3 C C- VV%c 1� 4 , 2 1 t 3o WRO�Y ..RiIIaY 66s�- u.� .�.�.-..r..�.�-. �._. ,�.�....-'.L[iylil JLiiL�.•-�wL.t.v.. .. InstruaarA Nu-ber 49375. A;,-r0e5ont r: i 'Cynthia Aldrich et al ,rY•*Yfff Nf YYN• ffffYN NYYs Private road a,p�-eersnt. This Ar et-cnt•:►is day m6i b,, arrl bit•ueen the parties her -oto ss follow t•o-uit eihoreas wo Syr:hla Aldrich by Fred Adams, Harry. L. Yost, C.i:.Ven Auker, L.A.Laais,)n, h.A. Yahla, b9':n;; or4i&rs of -V,.0 several tracts of lan,' •:onititutin- And boriering nn tt,o o4st lire o, the E^st half )f the North ',Yost quartor of Socticn5 Townhip 3 F;orth of Rarcc 1 F.a,•t of Boiso uerid:any end b3 de5ir6ns-.o, openin; anri mainta3nlnj o arivar.o r4.ri alor� t`te said lit'A baCin^.cY a the public Fl;,way forming tho north line or Maid i section 5, a:zi rennin; soul 1 alon3 the said F&Rt line of the Bald Fj'F of tho N*4: of •aid Seo. 5 beirc the half sectior, lino, to the ;south -:aat corror of the aald JrF- of •aid 3oction 53 thr3 n -id road to to 15 'eot in ;ridth. Now Cr,ere"ore we the urriersitziarl r.o i horoby agreo %n and with each other and bind oure•31ves and our mucenssors as orrno" of t), aeroral tracts abuttin.;; on the swirl half rection .lino, that wo will open an1 r ;intaict a , priva,•.^ roars 15th feet in wA."th, the half -section lire eoratitutir►d the east .Ino of �A acid rood, that t) -A said roars !::all be forlt)-a use of all o' the otirors of the said tra,;ts With equal ri.:ita'as to the u A of the same, in Nitta .. Vhnreof we have hercu nto -Ret our hands and affixed our see Is thio 12th day of Jung, 1913., Harry.L,Yost • C,Y..Van Auker '^;fithis. Al -+rich by Frnri Adikms. H.•J.Liahla 1r. A.or, Ruboerired in =V prusence and sworn to boPoru me by C.K.Van Auker this 13t -h dry of June 1y73., 1 i Edward Stq in, (Baal) Notary publi:. Subsori to d in prise ro a aryl xxorn to bot oro me by Harry, I,,Yost, Frei A. &= $ H.J. r Hahla and L.A.T.,eulson this 9th day of July 1;-,13,, � >:.C.Pfaffle. Notary Public, Racordod at the request of H+rry Yoat at 2:25 p.m. July 25th, 1413 Fee 601.•, OFFICIALS HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk A Good Place to Live JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN GARY D. SMITH, RE., 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 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE MEMORANDUM Mayor TO: Mayor and Council .V FROM: San tiles, P&Z Administrator DATE: June 18, 1996 COUNCIL MEMBERS 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 SUBJECT: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 1 PNE/Edmonds Construction This final plat generally conforms to the approved preliminary plat. 1. Applicant to submit detailed landscape plan for common areas for approval prior to construction. A letter of credit, cash, or appropriate bonding will be required for these improvements prior to signature on the final plat. 2. Permanent perimeter fencing is required to be in place prior to obtaining building permits. 3. All ditches on the site are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a variance is granted by the Meridian City Council. Applicant testified in presentations to City Council that all ditches would be tiled prior to beginning construction and not left to be done in phases. 4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. An agreement has not yet been drafted for this subdivision. Details of the lift station, pressurized irrigation, and ditch tiling are of particular concern. This should be executed and approved prior to approval. 5. I have not yet seen a copy of the proposed restrictive covenants for this subdivision. This was requested during the preliminary plat stage. 6. Where is the proposed lift station to be located? 7. Submit letters of approval from the Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District and downstream water users. 8. I believe required changes need to be made prior to approval of the final plat; Applicant should also address all issues he assured the Council would be taken care of prior to final plat submittal. RECE'NEO JUN 17 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN WerA� FRIFWAN SUNt !7) tgl(c (/ b� � I -1'�I �P� !-K' Lt f S � I P� � G! l� y! CQS� Wit L� tU tb►J'Qi2�ti� ��"� boe, �flfC�is�S., �� 4_�f S cif llf:-b t, IS h1 64-' Tr ! a /I l%/ A I L n rr� Gln_ ....w- .. -L ..- , f i 1 _1 . _ n ( • - - - •..Ae.l �.lBd�nlJ 1� neC f..rO. th �1.� !lti' ..' � _ .t _ ^�_,1 w i 1( r ors . t4- (�eer,_i Pia C1 �s f r�rn��r� y P.470 ____--- ---- - PjisA71t"� Ove KJS,aL2 ,11f.1 (�'I(%�'1 ti �r�2 t �P= L'Ql� LAilt �MP �f'Olc-" < rE3�r1"- 01 i � �tN� r + O = _ ; 0 cL i � -i n► t� -� 2 i 4 JUN -04-1996_5:05 kT$ Ei Project No.: 1290 June 4, 1996 Shari Stiles City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 1EHLEY'S SURVEYiNU 1 tALtY", LANU SURVEYING c�- RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 Dear Shari; iu9 6outn 4-�rreei worse, iaano ooive (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 WcesviEo JON 0 4 Ctrl OF-WERIDtAn� F. dg� We would like to request a deferral on the meeting you have on tonights agenda regarding Packard Subdivision No. 1 final plat. As we understand it, the information you requested was brought in to you this morning by the developer Mr. Ted Sigmont and we did not think this gave you adequate time to review the information. Because of this, the developer, Mr. Ted Sigmont is requesting that Packard Subdivision No. 1 be deferred until the June 18. 1996 meeting. Please call as if you have any questions. Respectfully, e'atric Tealey Tealeys Land Surveying P.L.S. No. 4347 TOTAL P.02 JUN 04 '96 15:10 PAGE.02 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 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 City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 14, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/29/96 HEARING DATE: 5121 /96 REQUEST: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No.1 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision No. 2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z ,MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z GREG OSLUND, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z ROBERT 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: ,QR CONCISE REMARKS: ? i.W 1 199E 41El?tDlAl� ..; ► NUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ' COUN IL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President CITY OF MERIAN ID RONALD R. TOLSMA C GLENN R. BENTLEYEE 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83"2 P & Z COMMISSION Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (2t98) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman Public Works/Building Departrnemt (209) 887-2211 TIM HEPPER Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 8$8-4443 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 City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 14, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/29/96 HEARING DATE: 5121 /96 REQUEST: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No.1 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision No. 2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z ,MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z GREG OSLUND, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z ROBERT 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: ,QR CONCISE REMARKS: ? i.W 1 199E 41El?tDlAl� ..; ► i'IM 1 -G1-1770 1 f • YJL �% q Project No.: 1290 May 21, 1996 Shari Stiles City of Meridian 33 Bast Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 1 a"L-M 1 J JDumva 1 1IVU r YJG 1 tALt T Z0 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 Dear Shari; RECEIVED I MAY 1995 CIT` ()F ERIDINN Per our conversation of Monday, May 20, 1996, we were unable to assemble all the information requested by Bruce Freckleton of the City of Meridian. Because of this, the developer, Mr. Ted Sigmont is requesting that Packard Subdivision No. I be deferred until the June 4, 1996 meeting. Please call us if you have any questions. Re ectfiy, �--'OJ2 ill Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying P.L.S. No. 4347 TOTAL P.02 Project No.: 1290 1 tALt T ;D L-A1ru SURVEYING (208) 385-0635 Fax (208) -385-0696 Ayy 3� May 21, 1996 Shari Stiles City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian. Idaho 83642 RE: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 Dear Shari; Per our conversation of Monday, May 20, 1996, we were unable to assemble all the information requested by Bruce Freckleton of the City of Meridian. Because of this, the developer, Mr. Ted Sig mont is requesting that Packard Subdivision No. 1 be deferred until the June 4, 1996 meeting. Please call us if you have any questions. Re ectfuully,, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying P.L.S. No. 4347 TOTAL P.02 MAY 21 '96 17.04 PAGE.32 It i M"HUN CITY QU"L VCLUNTM HET UMAETMM r 716N.14MDIAN-M3MUN,MA90 83642 . ■ FHONE (2084M1234) FAX (108.8874813) DECEIVED May 21 1996 MAY 2 1 1996 T0: Bruce F. Meridian .City RADIAN CRY B+IGI w �EcEwED FROM: Meridian Fire Dept. RE: Parkard Sub . MAY 2 1 1996 Meridian Fire Dept. will not have a problem with CITY ov.-ERIDIAh the island on Justin way. There can be no parking on the island side for vehicles or other equipment. Since the island has been put in there will need to have a turn=around at the end of Justin way. Ken W. Bowers Fire Chief 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: MAY 21, 1996 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 6 REQUEST: FINAL PLAT: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: "REVIEWED" CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS MERIDIAN POST OFFICE.- FFICE:ADA ADACOUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian OFFICIALS 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. WOLFKI EL, DMV Supervisor KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor To: Mayor, City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 (Final Plat - By PNE/Edmonds Construction) COUNCIL MEMBERS 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 May 16, 1996 I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: 1. Any existing inigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. 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. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions, as prepared by a soil scientist, with street development plans. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for review by the Meridian City Attorney. 5. Provide a statement as to whether the pressurized irrigation system in this development is to be owned and maintained by the Irrigation Dist. or the Homeowners Assoc. C:\OMCE\WPWIMGENCRAL\PACKRDI.C-C Mayor and Council May 17, 1996 Page 2 6. Indicate any FEMA Flood Plains affecting the area being platted, and detail plans for reducing or eliminating the boundary. 7. Please address in writing, each of the General and Site Specific Comments, within this memorandum, to the City Clerk's office prior to the scheduled hearing. 1. This Plat generally conforms to the previously approved Preliminary Plat map. 2. Please submit a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's approval letter for the Subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform. 3. Lot 3, Block 2, Lot 2, Block 3 and Lots 6, 7 & 9, Block 4 don't meet the minimum 80 foot street frontage required in an R-4 Zone. The northeasterly end of Lot 1, Block 3 needs to be revised to be perpendicular to the 27.79 foot leg. This line can also be adjusted southwesterly to increase the lot frontage to the minimum required 80 feet. Lots 4 & 5, Block 3 should be combined into one lot since the ownership and maintenance responsibility will remain with the Homeowners Association. 4. Please add or revise the following notes: (1.) Building setbacks and dimensional standards in this subdivision shall be in compliance with the applicable zoning regulations of the City of Meridian. (2.) ...time of resubdivision, or as allowed by Conditional Use. (4.) The Developer and/or Owner shall comply with Idaho Code Section 31-3805 or it's provisions that apply to irrigation rights. (5.) Adjacent to all lot lines common to the exterior boundary of Packard Subdivision No.I is a ten (10) foot wide permanent public utilities, drainage, and irrigation easement, unless dimensioned otherwise. (Graphically show the areas that would be applicable to have five (5) foot wide easements, ie. the rest of the lots bordering the exterior boundary that will be adjacent to future lots in Packard Subdivision) (6.) Each side of the interior lot line have a five (5) foot wide permanent public utilities, drainage, and irrigation easement, unless dimensioned otherwise. C:\0Fr10E\WPW1MGENERAL\PACKRD 1. C -C Mayor and Council May 17, 1996 Page 3 (7.) (Add Lot 4 combined with Lot 5, Block 3, and Lot 4, Block 4 to the list of lots. The Homeowners Association will retain ownership of these two lots as well as be responsible for the maintenance of the surface landscaping. Create a blanket easement over the lots in favor of the Ada County Highway District for the Heavy Maintenance of the drainage facilities.) (10.) Responsibility for all drainage and/or irrigation facilities outside of public right-of- way is held with the lot owner(s) whose land said drainage and/or irrigation facilities are located, unless such responsibility is assumed by an irrigation/drainage district. 5. Show the data of record for the north -south center of section line (Record bearings and distances of Wingate Place Subdivision No. 1) 6. Change the adjacent platted subdivision name _ to the name of record "Wingate Place Subdivision No. V. 7. Add the labels; SW Comer NW 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 5, S 1/4 Comer Section 5, SE Corner Section 5, SE Corner NE 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 5, and E 1/4 Comer Section 5 to the appropriate locations on the plat map. Add the appropriate symbol from the legend to the SE Corner NE 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 5. 8. Provide evidence that a sixty (60) foot wide Hickory Way access easement or dedicated public right -of way, acceptable to the Ada County Highway District, has been secured from the record owner of the property between the northerly terminus of the existing Hickory Way in Dove Meadows to the southerly boundary of this development. 9. Record owner will be required to grant an easement to the City of Meridian for access & maintenance of the temporary sewage lift station. The developer shall be required enter into a maintenance agreement with the City. 10. Complete the information in the note regarding additional survey information. 11. Revise the domestic water service origin note in the Certificate of Owners to indicate that this development is to be served by the City of Meridian, Not United Water Idaho, Inc. 12. Execute the Certificate of Owners and accompanying Acknowledgments. C:\OFFICE\WPWINIGENERAL\PACKRDI . C -C Mayor and Council May 17, 1996 Page 4 13. Execute the Certificate of Surveyor. 14. Add Certificates for the APPROVAL OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL and APPROVAL OF MERIDIAN CITY ENGINEER. 15. The Meridian Fire Department and Meridian School District need to approve the travel way widths proposed around the island, Lot 1, Block 6, . since this lot was not included on the approved Preliminary Plat. C:\OFFICENWPWIMGENERAL\PACKRDI.C-C OFFICIALS 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 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 Works/Building Depernnent (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 8884443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS 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 City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 14, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/29/96 HEARING DATE: 5/21 /96 REQUEST: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 1 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision No. 2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z _GREG OSLUND, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _ROBERT 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 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER 4ILLIAM 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 Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS 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 City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City C)erk by: May 14, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/29/96 HEARING DATE: 5/21 /96 _ REQUEST: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 1 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision No. 2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT _GREG OSLUND, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION _TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN 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 & FINAL PLAT) _GLENN BENTLEY, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) _WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) _SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES / _BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: _POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY zj I p wl M - — CITY ENGINEER — CITY PLANNER lC p f C'Lera2 u i i�riiyci /S f r•f,� / MAY 110 7 i99 ME41DIAr RFccF—'vE0 MAY 1 3 199E SUPERINTENDENT Bob L. Haley May 9, 1996 City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Re: Packard Subdivision Dear Councilmen: I have reviewed the application for Packard Subdivision and find this development will accelerate the need for Joint School District No. 2 to construct additional classrooms and/or to adjust school attendance boundaries. However, Meridian School District No. 2 will grant approval of this request. We would like to note the developers of Packard Subdivision have worked with the school district and have graciously donated an easement from this development to a future school site off Eagle Road. Sincerely, 14&-- ' 6`-�7 Jim Carberry Administrator of Support Programs JC: gr BOARD OF TRUSTEES Larry Andrews • Wally Hedrick • Holly Houfburg • Jim Keller • Steve Mann CCENTRAL •• DISTRICT �ITHEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Environmental Health Division REGE'vEQeturn to: MAY 0 9 1996 ❑ Boise ❑ Eagle CffY OF MERIDIAN ❑ Garden city Conditional Use # Meridian Prelimina Final Short Plat ❑ ACZ ry 1?'9C/�1� JSt/X�/r'r ! 7on1 /t/J . ❑ I. 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. ,K 8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ,K—central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage �" entral 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 IMAM FEM INS Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Stormwater disposal systems shall be reviewed by relative to: ❑ Waste Disposal ❑ Injection Well rules. ❑ Groundwater Protection 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 Dace: /�f[ti`�1-� ?/�d✓/�/�fE I'/%L�%'/�— % Reviewed By:fC1�✓ a4 7J774C11zE7 CDHD 10/91 «b, rer. I/9S Review-�tleet �1 CENTRAL •• DISTRICT OWHEALTH DEPARTMENT= MAIN OFFICE - 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL a BOISE. ID. 83704 • (208) 375.5211. FAX: 327-M To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 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: J) 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 ORSTORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT. Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada / Babe Cm* Oft* WIC Boise • Meridian &nore Coady 0MCe orme Coady Office Vaky Cwty Me 707 N. Armstrong PI. 1606 Roberts 520 E. 8th Sheet N. d EnrirarnvM Hedth P.O. Box 1448 Bose. 0. 83704 Boge. 10. Manton Hone. ID. 190 S. 4th Street E Mccol• 0. 83638 Efrm. HeaBtt: 321.7499 83705 Ph. 3343355 83647 Ph. 581-4407 Montan Horne. 0. Ph. 634-7194 Fort* Plo y*V. 327.7400 324 Merid an, tD. 83647 Ph 581-9225 tnmxr eatbru: 327.7450 83642 Ph. 888-6525 LIS _5 OFFICIALS 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 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS 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 City Council, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: May 14, 1996 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 4/29/96 HEARING DATE: 5/21 /96 REQUEST: Final Plat for Packard Subdivision No. 1 BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision No. 2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z _GREG OSLUND, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _ROBERT 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: TEALETS LAND 53 SURVEYING April 19, 1996 Shari Stiles, Administrator Meridian Planning and Zoning Department 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Final Plat Application Packard Subdivision #1 Dear Ms. Stiles: 109 South 49' Street Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 This is the final plat application for Packard Subdivision #1. Attached, you will find thirty (30) copies of the final plat; four (4) copies of the construction plans; ten (10) copies of a map at 1 300'; and a copy of the current deed to the property. The final plat meets the approved preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision. It also complies with the conditions of approval. As required by City Ordinance, the plat was drawn according to the standards for development in the R-4 Zone and the appropriate notes are on the face of the plat. This plat also complies with acceptable engineering and surveying practices and local standards. Please review the attached information and schedule it for public hearing before the City Council. If you have any questions or want additional information, please let me know. Thank you for considering this request. I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Sury ying c - Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision #1 Project 1290 0 208 323 9075 KISER-PIPKIN RE 'ost-tt'" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 r or gages . rororty w r �� �a. Co. Dep- Phone r 37�- rnG Fox 3g5—p6ri6 Fur GRANT OF TEMPORARY EASEMENT 06/23/95 12:53 f(22UOL114, David Leader and Mary Lader. husband and wife, for good and va'.:_cte considerat on. the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby Cant unto Robert C. Packard and Talmadge Packard, husband and wife. Edmonds Construct cn. Inc., and pacific Northwest Electric, Inc , a temporay easement for ingress and egress „fon any portion of the road described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto tying in the Southeast Ou=-r_er of the S0Ut"lwest Quarter of Section, 5, Township 3 North. Range t East, Boise Meridian. Aca County, Idaho. This temporary easement shall terminate automatically without fur, -=r action by any party upon the dedication of the publi; road more particularly described o- Exhibit 'A" attar hed hereto and incorporated by this reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. Dav,d Leader and Mary Leader, %s -and and wife. have hereunt bscribed +.heir names to this Grant of Temporary Easeme-; --,s ,L3 day of 1994. STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. COUNTY OF ADA ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me. an of :: • duly authorized to take acknowledgments. personalty appeared David leader and Mary Lea_er. to me known to be the persons who executed the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and state +est aforesaid this 1-3 Cay Of -1994 !T i Notary Public - I Residing at. ���dc.s-+cam My Commission exp! -es TEALETS LAND SURVEYING 109 South 4" Street Boise. Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Project No. 1165 Date: December 21, 1993 S DESCRIPTION FOR OVE EADOWS PHASP_; 50 FOOT iJIDEACCESS EASEHENT_{HICRORY AVE -Z A 50 foot wide ingress -egress easement situated in the SW 1/4 Of the S£ 1/4 and the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the boundaries of which are located 25 feet right of and 25 feet left of the following described centerline: Commencing at a brass cap marking the Southeast orner of said Section 5; thence along the South?rly boundary of said Section 5 North 89048153" West 1735.02 feet to a point; thence North 0002414511 East 46.90 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-way line of Fairview Avenue, also said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 00°24'45" East 30.96 feet to a point narking a point of beginning of curve; thence along a curve to the left 200.58 feet, said curve having a central angle of 6305014311, a radius of 180.00 feet and a long chord bearing North 31'30136" West 190.36 feet to a point of ending of curve; thence N:►th 63025158" West 136.49 feet to a point of beginning of curve; thence along a curve to the right 77.50 feet, said curve having a central angle of 24°40105", a radius of 180.00 feet and long chord bearing North 51°05'56" West 76.90 feet to a point of ending of curve; thence North 38045153" West 192.86 feet to a point of beginning of cuzve; thence along a curve to the left 260.83 feet, said curve having a central angle of 3702114211, a radius of 400.00 feet and a long chord bearing North 57926144" West 256.24 feet to a point of ending of curve; thence North 76'07135" West 138.84 feet to a point of beginning of curve; thence along a curve to the right 32.18 feet, said curve having a central angle of 16°01'54", a radius of 115.00 feet and a long chord bearing North 68°06138" West 32.07 feet to a point of eliding of curve; thence North 60005142" West 104.24 feet to a point of beginning of curve; thence along a curve `_o the right 155.78 feet, said curve having a central angle of :�2°1815111, a radius of 175.00 feet and a long chord bearing North 33°56116" West 154.29 feet to a point of ending of curve; thence North 07046'51" West 105.75 feet to a point of beginning of C 208 323 9075 KISER-PIPKIN RE 06/23/95 12:56 P02 T£ALEYfS LAND SURVEYING �ws,.n.cn.wucia.oam•ra asee� Project No. 1165 Date: December 21, 1993 DOVE MEADOWS No. 1 50 FOOT ACCESS EASEMENT Page 2 curve; thence along a curve to the right 85.57 feet, said curve having a central angle of 2800015811, a radius of 175.00' and a long chord bearing North 06013138" East 84.72 feet to a point of ending of curve; thence North 20°14107" East 280.63 feet to a point an the North boundary of the said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 Which point bears South 89044146" East 31.92 feet from the Northwest corner of the said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, said point also being the POINT OF ENDING of the said 50 foot wide ingress -egress easement. .e 4347 c 0 OF�`�13 rLY'J DR 1 T17 � K3 A.� > NO. 3iJ3- .� 7 8 ? �' �a A 5 9 Z ' ' W Ia PL'Cl G �7 9 y � Q IZ 6 5 I iAc E. MEADJN 'w 6D DW _ z • Eck 3 _ �_� �.�� �. PACKARD E. MEADOW wp SUBDIVISION #1 2-- il C. J + RT SPS ♦ !��' �6,�� a�6 0 g 7 6 5 4 3 2 y 8 6 P. %APPIC I Cr ITY Of 5 .6 17 16 14 'I I ! 02 2 5 Z / �' , 3 4 I I J �Ie 5, 1,3 - �31 ' N ER D/A N E GRAPEWOOD DR. ORY 42 3 12 !' J 9 8 7 6, 5 4 RI ♦ REQUEST FOR SUBDMSION APPROVAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION "11i1%1M=61_tW11j A request for preliminary plat approval must be in the City Clerk's possession no later than three days following the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear the request at the monthly meeting following the month the request was made. After a proposal enters the process, it may be acted upon at subsequent monthly meetings provided the necessary procedures and documentation are received before 5:00 P.M., Thursday following the Planning and Zoning Commission action. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name of Annexation aad Subdivision: Packard Subdivision 2. General Location: -north of Dove Meadows Subdivision• south of Carol's Subdivision #2 3. Owners of record: PNE/Edmonds Construction Address: 3131 Lanark Meridian , Zip 83642 Telephone 888=7255 4. Applicant: Same Address: 5. Engineer: Firm: 'Te ey's Land Surveying Address: 109 S 4th St Boise , Zip 83702 Telephone 385-0636 6. Name and address to receive City billings: Name: PNE/Edmonds Construction Address 3131 Lanark Meridian Telephone 888-7255 PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST: Subdivision Features 1. Acres 39.87 2. Number of lots 126 fbuildablel 3. Lots per acre 3.16— 4. Density per acre 5. Zoning Classification (s) R-4 6. If the proposed subdivision is outside the Meridian City Limits but within the jurisdictional mile, what is the existing zoning classification? An annexation request was na of the .r. .0 a1212lication. 7. Does the plat border a potential green belt? No 8. Have recreational easements been provided for? No 9. Are there proposed recreational amenities to the City? No Explain 10. Are there proposed dedications of common areas? No Explain The common areas will be landscaped areas that are owned by the Homeowners Association. 11. What school(s) service the area? Chief Joseph Elementary Do you propose any agreements for future school sites? No Explain 12. Other proposed amenities to the City Water Supply City of Meridian Fire Department City of Meridian Other Explain 13. Type of Building (Residential, Commercial, Industrial or combination) Residential 14. Type of dwelling(s) (Single Family, Duplexes, Multiplexes, other) mangle -family 15. Proposed Development features: a. Minimum square footage of lot(s): 8 -WO b. Minimum square footage of structure(s): 1.400 c. Are garages provided for? Square footage: d. Are other coverings provided for? (2) e. Landscaping has been provided for? _Yes Describe The -ntry nays will be landscaped as well as an inte * y covenant r each lot— f. Trees will be provided for? Yes Trees will be maintained by Homeowners and the Home Owners Association. g. Sprinkler systems are provided for as required by City Ordinance h. Are there multiple units No Type i. Are there special set back requirements? To Explain j. Has off-street parking been provided for? Explain k. Value range of property 1. Type of financing for development M. Protective covenants were submitted? Date: 16. Does the proposal land -lock other property? No Does it create enclaves? No STATEMENTS OF COMPLIANCE: 1. Streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are to be constructed to the standards as required by the Ada County Highway District and Meridian Ordinance. Dimensions will be determined by the City Engineer. All sidewalks will be five feet (5') in width. 2. Proposed use is in conformance with the city of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 3. Development will connect to City services. 4. Development will comply with City ordinances. 5. Preliminary plat will include all appropriate easements. 6. Street names must not conflict with City grid system. (3) r� 0 z o m d FZ Zp k g o= a ao s� � R orb o i� � •rod �' �"' A �R Amo Ci � �o ���`w W� U moo •�� �z >a ] J aj dl9 rim m��i � � ..�g� Ht 9Cm F� Nq <R 2E LO Z` aQ VL U X��€ a g a Na riYGiS C W U5N n M�1 m V 3 R of � Z i �W$ cl'tst _-m..4l4LOO s --- �W'YL9L F d FZ Zp k g o= a ao s� � R orb o i� � •rod �' �"' A �R Ci � �o ���`w W� U moo •�� �z >a ] dl9 rim m��i � � ..�g� Ht 9Cm F� Nq <R ji aQ R§ <n «M X��€ a g a Na riYGiS a^ x A es AJC o �a QVO?I 2nf)V3 HXHON Ili ,OL..LOo s ,hi'sOCL Z = g 0 < w S n _..._._._..___...-,rovLVL.....__......... ..__._._. .. L Ora MOIMAJOH 31tlE)01•i!:i•. H io m i s I $ 7{in I Iri $Ir'o )•L6 s LOO s sos iso I I _I CZE az. i azz. -I + SL'Lh 4d!; ro 5oa e } .si 1 � Zy. ifs sd 1` 1 �-A E OL 17 i w N©. 3'Z 7 8 �% I= � �a 3 — . A - 5LLJ 9 2 > 4 1 to �` zI a z tJ PIC2T3 �♦ 1 DR. � �_ d I31 1♦ E. MEADOW WO.:: 7E 2 J 0 i W � Jnr z � - P�'S� �A6 Y, .J A T : 4 7 ,- J N� 740 SUBDIVISION #1 4o RT 4W 4W 410 4W 40.4p 4W 4W 40140- 6 S I 4 e : �/ o R. E AQR� ITY OF E AFPIC07 G' `LT f Cr 5 I5� ;6 17 16 is 2 \ H, ER i J I 9 cf 7� 0 5 4 3 _ J Al. ! C v;A N 4 E GRAPEWOOD DR. z } 2 I! J 9 B 7 6 5 4 • iC � 'w � lf.� 4/33 /e- -T .LT c�r�� �.k Trz.cs Gln L.7 745 �E C % ts ]Z (mss A- Te ?'6` LC, -)%f LE ST 1 v e Za^-T� L IF -•� L 7-�'h1 Q c y- !nr2 a co TtA R -i -s'' C ors rT �j.� IFd t p T i S 4.11I?-< i" VI. G ey- Tcetvic a .2,o rr 6 R,gA.Sk-P 7'rtp-ICj:c. , V 4'' G'3- UL S -.%dV C FIC. L v� ) P'x4tr- A b ^ --r4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JULY 18 1995 APPLICANT PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 7&8 REQUEST; ANNEXATION20NING/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: P & Z MINUTES FROM 4-11-95 CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS 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: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 23 conclusions of law (inaudible) Rountree: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this application, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION, 126 LOTS BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This is Packard No. 1, 1 will now open the public hearing. Would the applicant like to address the Commission, you need to be sworn again, it is a new public hearing. Ted Hutchinson, 109 South 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, now we are to the meat of the annexation parcel. We are proposing to subdivide the parcel which we were just discussing the annexation on. This is a residential development we are proposing R-4 the lot sizes in this development are 8,000 square feet and larger. As indicated in the prior public hearing a number of the lots we have it broken out on this particular diagram, again from 8,000 to 10,000 square feet, from 10,000 to 15,000 square feet and then from 15,000 to on up. This includes the open space areas, in this particular proposal there is landscaped entry ways, and as you come in it would be on both sides of Hickory Way with an open area as soon as you got into the development. Then there are drainage lots and a couple of small open space lots within the development. Then we are proposing as well a landscaped easement that will affect all of the lots within the development so that there will be a 15 foot wide landscape easement which will contain street trees, and additional landscape treatment as well as entryway treatment for each of the individual lots. Mr. Richard Pavelic is here tonight as a consultant on this, he has done the landscape layout proposal to give you an example of what we are proposing for this particular development to move this development into an upper scale better than moderate price development for the City of Meridian. Again, the issues that have risen concerning the sewer. This particular development standing by itself would use a temporary lift station, however we have picked up additional properties and that property will be coming to you as Packard subdivision No. 2 and we have provided a copy of that plat to you, I believe that is in your packets. We picked up the Borup property which is immediately adjacent to north or our property which lies between the Sharp property and is adjacent to Carol Subdivision on the west side. We then picked up the Brown property which the annexation request has already been submitted on the Brown property it was tabled pending the development Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 28 egress and ingress out of these properties, planning for the irrigation right of ways that go through there. It is very confusing to us to even respond to these kind of applications when we don't see how they connect. I think we have a lot of references that are potentially going to happen and connections here. It seems to me it would make a lot more sense if we try to plan them all in sort of a group. Because there are a lot of contingencies that I am hearing, both in the connection of the roads, connections of the sewers, how it affects people's right of ways on private lanes. I would suggest that the approval of one piece which is contingent on too many future pieces is not a wise thing to do. I think I agree with a lot of the comments that have been said is that we are making decisions in a piece meal way and we are going to pay for it in the long term. Johnson: That is kind of a definition of Planning and Zoning, is piece meal. Miller: But does it need to be? Johnson: Yes it does because we are not Brigham Young, we don't have that luxury of planning a whole city at once. Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, was swom by the City Attorney. Brian: Since this is concerning a preliminary plat I would like to bring up the ditches again and make sure they are tiled with the project or before the project and it doesn't get caught up in different phasing like has happened at Dove Meadows which we have lost the final phase of Dove Meadows and the ditches are still open and a mess. This property, the ditch, my water feed, if I can step over to the map. My live water comes from this border all the way (inaudible) perimeter. I would like to see that all get taken care of before they do the whole project or with phase 1. So they don't do phase 1 and have a nice entry here, is this the entry at the comer? Where is my head gate? (Inaudible) Like I stated I would like to see that all get tiled at the initiation of the project so that is taken care of and we don't have to deal with it later, 2 years down the road when they do phase 3 or 4 or whatever. Johnson: You made reference to losing the last phase of Dove Meadows, could you elaborate on that? Brian: Dove Meadows development went in 2 years ago, it started through Planning and Zoning 2 years ago and is going in 3 phases or 2 phases. They have done phase 1, the final phase is where my ditch comes in which they are required to bury all the ditches that cross their property. They have not buried that ditch because it is in the final phase, well that final phase of that project ran out of time. They have lost the final plat, so it has to go through again. So nothing is being done with my ditch out there and it is an ongoing Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 29 problem. We have had meetings down here at City Hall concerning that very thing what we need to do. As they develop these properties they wait until the certain phase to bury these ditches so you have problems with those ditches and no man's land that no one takes care of them unless you pursue the developer to make sure they are cleaned and taken care of which is a hassle in itself and then when you get that many developers down the line I have to find 4 or 5 different people to get the ditches cleaned. If they go in before the development starts and do that ground work first and get it out of the way then they don't have to wont' about me coming here and (inaudible). That is all I need to bring up, any questions? Johnson: Any questions for Mr. Brian? Thanks Don, anyone else? Jon Barnes, 1034 Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Barnes: I am just a developer and I can't read 9 and 10 and I don't want to be redundant. I would just recommend approval, I would suggest, I like all the landscape treatment that they are doing but I would strongly encourage the developer to put a larger kind of a park like an acre park in there. I would like to have them held to a 30 foot rear yard setback on those lots that boundary us on the north there, those deep 140 lots and a fence on the north side. I encourage you'to do this, thank you. Johnson: Thanks Jon Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I would recommend that they disapprove this (inaudible) we don't have the sewer accessibility, we don't have the access down Wingate Lane. And what they proposed to us and they came and talked to us and they came and talked to me and I have the chart right at home what they said. They said they wanted to come from Hickory Lane across and over Wingate Lane and block me off there. As far as, how are you going to stop those people from in these subdivisions from going down Wingate Lane are you going to fence them off or are you going to put berms and fences up there and stop that, well they should. Shearer: Is Wingate paved? Johnson: No it is a gravel road. Shearer: I doubt anybody is going to drive up a gravel road when they have a paved one. Sharp: I disagree with you there, I live there and they do drive up that gravel road. We would like to have 30 foot setbacks on these lots down closer to us too. Just because they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 30 live in (inaudible) doesn't mean they should have any more rights than what we do. I know that Jon is a developer and of course (inaudible) as far as that goes I just think (inaudible) schools to support the subdivisions like this and so I recommend (inaudible). Johnson: Thank you, I saw a hand over here. Craig Thompson, 2950 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Thompson: First of all I have been here for awhile, I have been trying to understand what is happening and I am completely confused. We are involved with this we live on Wingate Lane and when they say it is going to make Wingate Lane accessible to the Sharp's how are they going to do that, are they going to build an overpass over Wingate Lane. If they intersect it we are vulnerable because the traffic is going to pass there. We pay for the road, we pay for the gravel that goes on it and I really don't want anybody else to drive on it except the ones that live there. They mentioned about bringing trees in and rock this and that and I like it just the way it is. I just hope that they leave it that way. Thank you. Johnson: Thanks Craig, anyone else? Anybody have any other questions of the Developer? Wayne, can we act on this or should this item be tabled until we handle No. 9? Crookston: It should be tabled until you have acted on #9. Johnson: We needed to take the testimony and at this point we really need to table the item don't we. Hepper: I have a question for the developer, the park issue was brought up. I was just wondering originally there was a lot of park area designated in this and I guess we are little bit sensitive. There was so much there the first time and now there isn't any. What is the feasibility of having a small neighborhood park in the area, is there any particular reason why there couldn't be or shouldn't be? Hutchinson: Mr. Hepper, as I indicated earlier in fact we have no net gain in the number of lots, in fact we lost a couple of lots in the design. Part of the reason that the land was taken up is the new configuration of the streets it doesn't lend itself really to that large of a park area and still be able to yield a development that is going to be economical for total development. We have looked a couple of designs, we have toyed with working this out whether or not we can get a couple of smaller pocket parks within the development. We will have to sit down with the developer and see if there is a proposal in there that might work. We recognize the need for open area for the people in the development. We were a little dismayed at the response to our previous development proposal when we did get Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 31 further down the public hearing process. We thought that 5 acre park was an extremely nice amenity given the location. But whether or not we can come up with something that will be feasible again we will have to push the numbers and the configuration past the developer and see if they think it is possible. Hepper: Since this will probably be table 1 just wanted to point out right in the middle of the project there appears to be 2 very odd shaped lots, one is almost 18,000 - 19,000 square feet and the other is 17,000, it would be Lot 10 and Lot 29. Between the 2 of them that would be 35,000 square feet which would be almost 3/4 of an acre. Hutchinson: We also recognize that those lots the way they are configured in this drawing they need (inaudible) changing the flag so it didn't go onto the culdesac it would go onto Justin Way which is the street in the middle. So there would be some reconfiguration there. We may be able to configure to provide a pathway from the culdesacs to Justin way but again we have to look at this in a little more detail. I think your information and input here tonight is going have a great deal of impact on pushing that through to see what we can come up with. Hepper: I don't think a small neighborhood park would be out of the question. I guess the economics and feasibility of it dictate whether you are willing to do it or not. We would have to look at it. Hutchinson: We will sit down with the developer on this thing and make sure that is one issue that we go over quite heavily. Johnson: Anyone else? I will now close the public hearing. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting on May 9th. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we table this item until the May 9th regular meeting of Planning and Zoning, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: For those of you that might be confused as to what is going on in this (inaudible) this item, the findings of fact and conclusions of law on item #9 will be at our May 9th meeting at that time those findings of fact will incorporate the testimony we took tonight plus how the application legally stands with our ordinances, then we will act on that on Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 32 May 9th and then it will go for another public hearing to the City Council when it can be on their agenda which will probably either the last regular meeting in May or the first one in June. So you will have another opportunity to a public hearing and that is the purpose of me explaining that. FIVE MINUTE BREAK ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS ADDITION NO. 3,6 LOTS BY MAWS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to address the Commission. Ted Hutchinson, 109 South Fourth Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Members of the Commission, this is an application for a 7 lot subdivision, I believe your staff report or something on the original application said 6 but there are 7 residential lots and one drainage lot. This is the final addition to Maws Addition subdivisions at Pine Avenue and Locust Grove Roads. This is going to be north of Pine with frontage on Adkins Lane. Each of these lots have been designed to comply with the zoning requirements of the R-8 zone. The lots are, when they were originally proposed as part of the master plan for the Maws Additions they were proposed at 60 foot wide lots, however the approval expired before the last phase could be submitted and we have redesigned these to comply with the current zoning standards. They are at least 65 feet in width and I believe they are about 6500 square feet, they are about 100 feet deep. This will be the final phase for Maws Addition, I think it is compatible with what has been approved and constructed in the area. We would ask that you recommend approval of this application to the City Council. With that are there any questions that I might answer for the Commission? Johnson: Thanks Ted, any questions for Mr. Hutchinson? Hepper: Does that street go on to the north, where does that street terminate at? Hutchinson: Mr. Hepper, Adkins Lane terminates up there, it simply dead ends I believe Danbury Fair, Shari said Danbury Fair is the subdivision to the north. They haven't quite worked out what they are going to do as far as access to Adkins Lane whether or not they are going to access it or not. The last conversation we had with the Highway District about Adkins Lane we'd be required to do improvements and possibly a temporary turn around but again the temporary turn around would be at the end of the current street. Whether or not that becomes a through street will depend on Danbury Fair's ultimate decision whether OFFICIALS 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. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: To: From Re 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. COP.RIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning April 6, 1995 Annexation and Zoning of R-4 with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision by PNE/Edmonds Construction We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-104A. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and profile the subsurface soil conditions. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 5. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. 6. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 7. Coordinate the fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 8. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 2 9. Please submit information detailing the traffic impact on existing or adjacent roadways and intersections. 10. Indicate any floodplain boundaries as determined by FEMA and measures to amend this boundary. 11. Horizontal location and spacing of sanitary sewer manholes to be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. 12. Show all proposed or existing utilities, including, but not limited to, storm and sanitary sewers, irrigation laterals, ditches, drainage, bridges, culverts, water mains, fire hydrants, streetlights, and pressurized irrigation. 13. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimension and purpose of such. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. The Preliminary Plat map contour lines need to be tied to an established Benchmark. 2. Please submit, to the Public Works Department, a master street drainage plan including method of disposal and approval from the affected drainage district. 3. Streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. These will be installed at the subdivider's expense. 4. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. 5. The legal description submitted this Platsapplication of Record the Bearing and slat tandistance that follow the boundaries of the ad'a adjacent don't match should be referenced as "Information of Record". Please clear up these discrepancies and resubmit a new legal description per Resolution 158 (Aug. 16, 1994). 6. 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. 7. Government Corners referenced in the legal description need to be shown on the Preliminary Plat map. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 3 8. A temporary sanitary sewage lift station will need to be installed to service this property. Details for the placement and configuration of this temporary lift station need to be worked out with the Public Works Department. 9. The lots adjacent to Carol's Subdivision range in size from 0.3 acre to 0.42 acre. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Applicant has submitted a proposed plan of future phases of Packard Subdivision for review. 2. This subdivision was previously submitted as a 128 -lot subdivision with a 5 -acre park. As a result of redesign, two building lots and the park have been absorbed. Some small "pocket" parks remain. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. 3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. 4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 6. Block lengths exceed 1,000'. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided to minimize walking distances. For example, walkways will be required from Chandra Way through to Meadow Wood Court. Applicant should also install lighting system for the walkway for safety purposes. 7. Frontage on several of the lots do not meet the 80' minimum. Some corner lots will need arrows indicating front of lot. 8. Existing natural features along the northerly boundary could possibly be lost if this sub - lateral is tiled. 9. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat. cCENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # REVIEW SHEET Environmental Health Division Return to: ❑ Boise ❑ Eagle #;? ?' ❑ Garden city Meridian I- Cond,tional Use # ,� ❑ Kuna Preliminary Final / Short Plat _ADZ tpo �c/��Y/�%li�ri� ❑ ACz ❑ I. We have 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. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: Qcentral sewage community sewage system ❑ community water well interim E] sewage central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: �entral sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines central water 7 Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. 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 ❑ 13. Date: 3 Reviewed By: I CDHD 10/91 «b, rev. 11/93 COip ENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE e 707 N, ARMSTRONG PL. s BOISE, ID. 83704-0825 e (208) 375-5211 e FAX: 327-8500 To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 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) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, -Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada I Boise County Office WIC Boise - Meridian 707 N. Armstrong PI, 1606 Robert St. Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Boise, ID. 83105 Enviro. Health: 327-7499 Ph. 334-3355 Family Planning: 327-7400 324 Meridian Rd. Immunizations: 327-7450 Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrtion: 321.7460 Ph. 888.6525 WIC: 327-7488 Elmore County Office Elmore County Office 520 E. 8th Street N. of Environmental Health Mountain Home, ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. 83647 Ph. 587-4407 Mountain Home, ID. 83647 Ph. 587.9225 Mot Vasey County Office P.O. Box 1448 McCall, ID. 83638 Ph. 634-7194 June 9, 1995 TEALETS LAND 109 South 4'- Street Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Gary Smith, City Engineer City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian Id 83642 RE: Comments and Conditions for Packard Subdivision #1 Dear Mr. Smith, RECEIVED J u N U 91995 MERIDIAN CITY ENGMM Thank you for taking time on June 6, 1995, to meet with us regarding the Packard Subdivision #1 proposal. I apologize for the delay of these responses as I was unaware of your new policy requiring written response to your subdivision comments. On April 6, 1995, Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles sent a memorandum to the Mayor, City Council, and Planning and Zoning, concerning Packard Subdivision #1. Regarding those "General Comments," we offer the following: 1 As required by City Ordinance 11-9-605.M, irrigation/drainage ditches included in this project will be tiled. The tiling will be done under the supervision and approval of the appropriate irrigation district. 2 There are no existing domestic water wells or septic systems within this project boundary. 3 Test holes were dug on the site (6/5/95) to find the seasonal high ground water elevation. 4 The developer is preparing restrictive covenants. 5 Attached is a copy of the Ada County Street Name Evaluation form and a copy of the County Engineer's letter approving the subdivision name. 6 As shown on the preliminary plat in the typical street cross-section, a five foot (5') sidewalk will be installed. Packard Subdivision #1 Pmjed 1290 - 1 - 7 I contacted Bruce Stewart of the Meridian Water Department concerning placement of fire hydrants. The locations recommended by Mr. Stewart have been incorporated into the preliminary plat drawings and will be used in the construction drawings. 8 The preliminary plat has been stamped by a licensed surveyor. 9 A traffic study for this site was prepared and submitted to the Ada County Highway District. A copy of that report is attached. 10 There are no flood hazard areas shown on F.I.R M. panels #0165 or #0251 that would affect this project. 11 Location of sanitary sewer manholes will be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. Those locations will be shown on the shown on the preliminary plat. 12 All proposed or existing utilities are now shown on the preliminary plat. 13 Statements of dedications to the public are provided on the final plat. Locations of proposed easements and public streets are shown on the preliminary plat. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Public Works Department, we are providing the following responses: The contour lines on the preliminary plat are tied to an established Benchmark referenced to the southwest corner of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian. This is an elevation of 2607.14. This datum is the same datum used for the aerial photography done for the city of Meridian by J.U.B. Engineers. 2 The master street drainage plan will be prepared before the construction phase following the approval of the preliminary plat and before submitting the final plat for approval. Estimated runoff directions and locations of retention areas have been identified on the preliminary plat. Location of street lights is shown on the preliminary plat. Specific locations for street lighting will be approved by the Meridian Public Works Department before installation by the developer. 4 Has your computer model for hydraulic analysis been performed to evaluate this proposal? 5 A revised legal description is attached. 6 Any plans for supplemental water supply for irrigation purposes will be submitted to your office for review and approval. Packard Subdivision #1 Project 1290 _ 2 7 The Government Corners referenced in the legal description are shown on the preliminary plat. 8 Location for the temporary lift station has been identified on the preliminary plat. We will work closely with your department to ensure that the lift station meets your criteria. 9 No response. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Planning Department, we are providing the following responses: 1 No response. 2 A minor redesign of this project has yielded two (2) smaller park/open space areas for this development. These will be private open space lots maintained by the homeowners association for use by the residents of this development. Perimeter fencing will be installed for each phase before requesting building permits. 4 A development agreement will be submitted by the developers. 5 The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will not necessarily attend the nearest neighborhood school. 6 Few intervening streets or natural breaks occur around the boundaries of this plat. This makes long blocks necessary. The internal block lengths have been interrupted by access to the pocket parks. These accesses also provide internal pathways through the subdivision for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7 The eighty foot (80') frontage requirement has been met for all lots that are not fronting on a cul-de-sac or are not flag lots. Those lots meet the minimum standards for cul-de-sac or flag lot frontages. 8 The developer will work with the city of Meridian to protect the existing natural features along the northern boundary of this development. Most of those features are, however, not on the developer's property. But, anywhere the nature features exist on-site, protection of those features will be attempted. Otherwise, the waterway will be tiled according to City Ordinance. 9 Phase lines have been included on the preliminary plat. Padcard Subdivision #1 Pmjed 1290 - 3 - Many comments and concerns expressed by your department will be addressed as part of receiving approval for a final plat. Construction drawings, engineering, and other costly preparations are not made until after the preliminary plat is approved. Developers are hesitant to expend money for those costs if there is a possibility that their project will not be approved. However, the developer is willing to work with you and your staff to address those items to your satisfaction. We look forward to working with you and your department in the completion of this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, please let me know. Thank you again for taking time to meet with us. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying B - Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision #I Pmjed 12% -4- OFFICIALS 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, Parka Supt. SHARI S. STILES, P & Z Adm. 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 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: (Supplemental) To: Mayor, City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION (Annexation and Zoning) COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER June 15, 1995 I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following supplemental comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their line in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. C:IWPWIN60\GENERAL\PACKARDI. C -C F BEFORE THE MERIDIAN G PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ANNEXATION AND ZONING NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 5, T 3N., R 1E B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on April 11, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing through Ted Hutchinson, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two ( 2 ) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for April 11, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the April 11, 1995, 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. 2. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is 39.87 acres in size; it is located between Locust Grove Road and Meridian Road and between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road; surrounding subdivisions are Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, Kearney Place Subdivision, Chateau Meadows Subdivision, which are in the City of Meridian, and Carol Subdivision, which is not in the City; the South Slough, also known as the Finch Lateral, runs along the North boundary of the proposed subdivision. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County RT (Rural Transition) and the proposed use is requested to be for R-4 Residential development. 4. Most of the general area surrounding the property is either developed or is proposed to be developed. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant is shown on the subdivision application to be the owner of record of the property. 7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property is for one house and for agricultural uses; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property is for an COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page - 2 R-4 type subdivision use with lots ranging from 8,000 to over 18,000 square feet; that the Applicant did submit a request for approval of a subdivision plat at the time of submitting the application for annexation. That after the public testified the Applicant, through Ted Hutchinson, stated that Wingate Lane would not be affected by this development and it was not their proposal to utilize Wingate Lane, he explained the situation with larger lots being next to Carol Subdivision but not next to the lots where the Sharps and others live, that the developer would like to extend the South Slough sewer to serve the development but they will have to use temporary lift stations. He also stated that the irrigation water would be protected. 10. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: a. Helen Sharp testified that there were already difficulties with lgr, that the density was already too high in Meridian and that there was no need for additional houses, that there were water drainage problems that need to be addressed, and that she was apposed to the high density. b. Jon Barnes testified that the redesign of the subdivision was much improved, that he understood that there was going to be a 30 foot setback on the lots next to his in Carol Subdivision when the lots are already 140 deep, that he would like a fence between the new homes and Carol Subdivision and that a neighborhood park would be nice. c. Vern Alleman testified that his concern was over parks and that not enough of them are provided in developments, that impact fees are possibly the best and fairest solution to need created by additional development, and his additional concern was the use of lift stations for sewers. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 3 d. Douglas Miller testified that he was concerned about privacy, that the idea of berms, fences and setbacks was very good, that the density was fairly high in regard to the other areas where people had already built, and that the design was much improved. e. Dale Sharp stated that she was opposed to the subdivision because of the school and traffic problems; that he did not want Wingate Lane cut off; he questioned where the sewer was going to come from; that he had the same problems as Mr. Barnes, but nothing was being done for him and his land. f. Bob Golse testified that he questioned by such high density would be allowed with only two accesses and that there would be too many cars coming in and out of the subdivision for the limited access. g. Don Bryan testified that he was concerned with the irrigation water, that he wanted know what was going to be done with the head gate on southwest corner, which is his headgate and it needed to be addressed in this development. h. John Schey testified that he was in agreement with the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Sharp and that he was concerned about the traffic and stated that the subdivision did not have sufficient access. 11. That the property is in an area marked on the Generalized Land Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family residential area; that in the Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per acre. 12. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. 13. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. 14. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines and constructs and installs necessary equipment and facilities. 15. The Assistant to the Meridian City Engineer and Meridian City Planner did submit comments and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. That some of the comments of the Meridian Planning Director were that perimeter fencing is required prior to construction; that a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation; that the previous plat showed a 5 -acre park but the subdivision was redesigned with some small "pocket" parks; that there is no school capacity to serve the subdivision; that some block lengths exceed 1,000 feet; that pedestrian walkways will be required from Chandra through to Meadow Wood Court with a lighting system; and that frontage on several lots does not meet the 80 foot minimum requirement for R-4. 16. That the Assistant to the City Engineer commented and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that some of the general comments were that any existing irrigation ditches crossing the property shall be tiled; that the high seasonal ground water needed to be established; that water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis; that sidewalks to meet City ordinance must be constructed; that perimeter fencing is required prior to obtaining building permits; existing wells and/or septic systems will have to be removed and that the wells may be COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 used .for non-domestic and irrigation purposes; determine high seasonal ground water; provide sidewalks in accordance with Meridian ordinance; the preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by a land surveyor. That the site specific comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, some of which were that the legal description does not follow the boundaries of adjacent plats and correction needs to be made; that a temporary sewer lift station will need to be installed; and that a master street drainage plan needed to be submitted. 17. That the Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire and Police Departments, Meridian School District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Central District Health Department, and other agencies submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows: R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only Single Family Dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential Development and public schools. The purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of -residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four ( 4 ) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square feet to be included in houses in that zone. 19. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows: "Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-family, multi -family, town houses, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities." 20. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows: "Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided . 21. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows: "Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan." 22. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Housing, Housing Policies, at page 66, it states as follows: "1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes, multi -family, town houses arrangements), ." "1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background." "1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged." 23. That there is a population influx into the City of Meridian at the present time which has been going on for some time and is likely to continue; that the land is relatively close to Meridian and economic conditions are making it difficult to COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 continue farming in the area. 24. That the City Engineer has previously submitted comment in different applications that a determination of ground water level and subsurface soil conditions should be made; that such a comment is equally applicable to this Application. 25. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning in this area the Zoning Administrator has commented that annexation should be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park site to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an approved development agreement. 26. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 27. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 28. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide." 29. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 30. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 31. That Section 11-9-605 R states as follows: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 9 "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi - improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 32. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 33. That Section 11-9-605 M, PIPING OF DITCHES states, in part, as follows: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 10 34. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That 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 Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That 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. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 11 the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, PNE/Edmonds Construction, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land, if annexed, 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, Piping of Ditches, and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation; that the Applicant would be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the development of the property would be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance; that, as a condition of annexation the Applicant is 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 the inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, M, and prior comments of the previous Planning Director, Wayne Forrey, relating to the lack of adequate recreation facilities and that land set aside for a future park would be desirable, that the City is in need of land set -asides for future public service use; that the development agreement shall, as a condition of annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 12 executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City; that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be subject to de - annexation and loss of City services, if the requirements of this paragraph are not met. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property has not been shown and the Applicant must work to obtain better access. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in an area marked as a single family residential area, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies; however, there are very large lots in the Wingate Lane area and in Carol Subdivision and they shall be buffered by the Applicant and the subdivision covenants shall let•the home owners in the proposed subdivision know that those lots are there and that the buffering must remain; that this matter shall be addressed in the development agreement. 12. That the development of R-4 as suggested by the Applicant would be compatible to the homes across Wingate Lane and in Carol Subdivision if they are buffered as required above; that R-4 development would be compatible with the lots and homes in Chateau Meadows, Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, and Kearney Place Subdivision. 13. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and evidence, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 13 Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned and the zoning of the property should be R-4 Residential; that the conditions would be those stated above if the property is eventually annexed and zoned; that the annexation would be orderly development and reasonable if the necessary buffering is completed between this subdivision and the lots in the Wingate area and in Carol Subdivision; that the property shall be subject to de -annexation if the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not met. 14. That it is concluded that a fence should be placed along Wingate Lane to prevent home owners on this land from gaining access to Wingate Lane, particularly because it is a private lane, until . 15. That the South Slough runs along the north boundary of the property, and as a condition of annexation the South Slough must be landscaped to fit into other improvements that have been made along the slough with a pedestrian and bike path or it must be tiled; that the South Slough shall be addressed in the development agreement. 16. That all ditches, canals, and waterways required to be tiled by City Ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 17. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 18. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property should not annexed. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 14 19. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) RECOMMENDATION VOTED �~ VOTED A C� VOTED VOTEDf VOTED The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the Application for annexation and zoning be granted under the terms and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law and any other requirements set by the City Council; if the Applicant shall not meet these conditions, the Application shall be denied or the land shall be de -annexed. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 15 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RETION &�INAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: � '-7 - YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: /; RIEGEi ED MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG. JR., City Clerk JANICE L. City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. SMITH, GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer D RRCv. WALT W. MORROt^; BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. Planner 8 Zoning Aommisva:c KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888.4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning S Z2^ gig Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RETION &�INAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: � '-7 - YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: /; RIEGEi ED MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: 0 7' A.i f ,&- f-� •JL o F F OF I'►') .a 4d)o'-< _, CU 006jj Alv i) 1-01L ## /a OFF D/= h a,v k A LJ M i c• HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City lerk MASS, CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT 0. ARY 0L. P.E.City City Engine GARY D. SMITH, . City Engineer WALT W MORROV BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. Planner Zoning Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L.''BILL'' GORDON, Police Chief J IM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 8874813 Chairman - Planning & Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: 0 7' A.i f ,&- f-� •JL o F F OF I'►') .a 4d)o'-< _, CU 006jj Alv i) 1-01L ## /a OFF D/= h a,v k A LJ M i c• JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary TO: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION 3131 LANARK STREET MERIDIAN, ID 83642 FROM: Karen Gallagher, Ci at Development Servic s si n SUBJECT: PACKARD- PRELIMINAR RECS I, Yse s.s'i APRtU " ��� ill iii NtL�.x✓;.._ April 6. 1995 On APRIL 5, 1995, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called "District") took action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report. In order that the Final Plat may, be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall cause the following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification and endorsement: 1. Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District. 2. If public street improvements are required: Prior to any construction within the existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District: a. Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by an Idaho Registered Professional Engineer, together with payment of plan review fee. b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services. C. Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or execute Surety Agreement between the Developer and the District to guarantee the completion of construction of all street improvements. ada county highway district 318 East 37th 9 Boise, Idaho 83714 - Phone (208) 345-7680 April 6, 1995 Page 2 3. Furnish copy of Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local Government Agency having such authority to_ eg ther with payment of fee charged for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs, as required. 4. If Public Rights -of -Way Trust Find deposit is required, make deposit to the District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the District. 5. Furnish easements, agreements, and all other datum or documents as required by the District. 6. Furnish Final Plat drawings for District acceptance, certifications, and endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner's and Land Surveyor's certification. 7. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. An extension of one year will be considered by the Commission if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration date. Please contact me at 345-7680, should you have any questions. KG cc: Development Services Chron John Edney TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY CITY OF MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat and Annexation - Packard Meridian Packard is a 126 -lot residential subdivision on 39.9 -acres. The site is located 1/4 -mile north of Fairview Avenue and 1/4 -mile west of Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 1204 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development are: FAIRVIEW AVENUE - Arterial street with a bike lane designation - Traffic count 16,470 in 1990 EAGLE ROAD - ITD jurisdiction - Arterial street - Traffic count 12,000 from traffic study (350 trips will be added) HICKORY AVENUE - Collector street with no pathway designation (1,200 trips added) packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 USTICK RD. I SITE o I pE 41 TAZ 265 (Y TAZ 144 Z 1 D /// W g Q DOVE DOWS Q SUBD'" W FAIRVIEW AVE TREASURE VALLEY BUSINESS PARK O Y TAZ 145 I J i I------ i TAZ 266 --- -- PINE ST. I I FRANKLIN RD. packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 U RI•-+wro[ C•.• '._vrJi .TI 'tnW1. 'tA7t TLL JD 3 o Ift'g ; .OLL�7S /t t/t N1 Au siumuns ain s Amvu NOISIAIa8:15 auy.movd do .LV_ld .l?ItlNIIYCIT32id U _0 U p � l F J ul E i M • � � F tug Ln LU a wZo 68� ., z Ll 2 .. NQ' u 1 I Q' r t* W w u 1.W3� LL' ? S if d •, L �w� J r Z YI "a _ - z uy} Q V` e � J Sr y I \ I� I ex S + tea. sA i w- w� • ='� 4 y w .rt ar-� i 141 \ ; _ .!'�'.�waa..�.ti • =.�a ' • { •.;yam. "�t•!n � �I /� 1 fI q v ` ✓ •� -� is off .N • r \ _ • .u�}i /S \ • ', 4N, \'U\1\ i 6 i� � `•. �' t a. � `� � : r • .1= Q •eI/, .� s d� � �MirA Q _ I s � 1 •� _ I I v � :.� .% .� ice— _ .am rAterc �r y/ +a •� �. � � RI � I� `. i i � � ^t A m .i ♦ \ i.i ✓V j '& ti`s r I t • •'i , � � d : 1 _ �•j ",�4� ��' j s ii s 1� vt + 9 y F _ •G I k4 1 : t• .Y- is .� : '.` t �I ♦' :« sib. I r.: � °g } °x s -s ',^ -i •g } i �A -i i 's =, i _ i .A } - lo As lo �^`•"� •� GCItI9 N .GLLE. 9 u N � l F J p ^6 a u �,a 2 a NQ' a aa; Q' r W W p L w u 1.W3� LL' if d •, L �w� J r Z YI "a _ - z uy} 3 tf! o Oil Sa>m i¢w > p'"•''33 HOZ a jz d CLml�m Z I�1u YOW °Jw• Q V` e � J Sr y I \ I� I ex S + tea. sA i w- w� • ='� 4 y w .rt ar-� i 141 \ ; _ .!'�'.�waa..�.ti • =.�a ' • { •.;yam. "�t•!n � �I /� 1 fI q v ` ✓ •� -� is off .N • r \ _ • .u�}i /S \ • ', 4N, \'U\1\ i 6 i� � `•. �' t a. � `� � : r • .1= Q •eI/, .� s d� � �MirA Q _ I s � 1 •� _ I I v � :.� .% .� ice— _ .am rAterc �r y/ +a •� �. � � RI � I� `. i i � � ^t A m .i ♦ \ i.i ✓V j '& ti`s r I t • •'i , � � d : 1 _ �•j ",�4� ��' j s ii s 1� vt + 9 y F _ •G I k4 1 : t• .Y- is .� : '.` t �I ♦' :« sib. I r.: � °g } °x s -s ',^ -i •g } i �A -i i 's =, i _ i .A } - lo As lo �^`•"� •� GCItI9 N .GLLE. 9 Facts and Findings: A. General Information R-4 - Zoning 126 - Lots 39.9 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Hickory Avenue Collector with no pathway designation 60 -feet of frontage on the future right-of-way that has been approved as a preliminary plat 60 -feet of right-of-way to be platted (30 -feet from centerline) 60 -feet required right-of-way for the extension of Hickory Avenue (30 -feet from centerline) Hickory Avenue is improved with a 41 -feet street section south of the site; the improvements do not reach the site, but will with the completion of a later phase of Dove Meadows. B. This is a modification to the original preliminary plat submittal. No action was taken on the original submittal. Staff has had several meetings with the representatives of this subdivision to discuss stub streets and traffic flow. Staff supports the stub streets as proposed. C. A traffic study was submitted and review for this subdivision. The traffic study was completed for 135 residential lots; the number of lots has been reduced to 126 buildable lots. D. Staff recommends that Hickory Avenue continue as a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with a 60 -foot right-of-way from the south boundary to the first internal intersection. Direct lot access to Hickory Avenue will be restricted. The preliminary plat shows Hickory Avenue with 60 -feet of right-of-way with a landscaped median. Both travel lanes of Hickory Avenue should maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet between backs of curbs. E. Staff can accept culdesacs having a 29 -foot street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and a 42 -foot right-of-way for those culdesacs generating less than 200 -trips per day. The 29 -foot street section restricts parking on one side. Staff discussed the 29 -foot street section with the applicant and supports the reduced street section on two of the culdesacs, Chandra Way and Mindy Place, since the loss of parking on one side of the street would directly effect only one lot in each of those cases. F. Unless otherwise specified, staff recommends that all internal local streets be constructed as Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 2 37 -foot street sections and 4 -foot minimum (5 -foot required by Meridian) with a 40 -foot right-of-way. G. Several curves are shown the preliminary plat with radii less than 100 -feet. If the turn or curve is a right-angle a lesser radii can be accepted. Staff recommends that the streets be modified to maintain a minimum radii of 100 -feet unless the curve delta is at or near a right- angle. H. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shown are deep enough that a median island should be required to focus traffic. A minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb is necessary. There are four stub streets proposed in this subdivision, one in each direction. The northern and eastern stub streets extend into undeveloped land. No additional stub streets are being proposed or recommended by staff to the south since the property to the south is 25 acres of property held in contiguous ownership by the Capitol Christian Center Inc. and can be accessed from Hickory Avenue to the south. J. A residential collector road (41 -foot street section with no direct lots access) is anticipated to be extended from Eagle Road to Chandra Way when the intervening property is developed. K. Staff recommends that only the 126 -lots of Packard Subdivision be approved in this area until additional streets are constructed that connect to the other three stub streets and eventually to arterials. Development of more lots than this will cause the generation of traffic in excess of that allowed on a residential collectors (Hickory Avenue) by District Policy. L. A portion of the funds allocated to Ada County Highway District from the Highway Distribution Account are predicated on the number of improved road miles (under the District's jurisdiction) that are located outside the limits of any incorporated city. Consequently, annexation of subject lands will adversely affect a major revenue base of the District without any compatible decrease in the District's responsibility to continue to maintain those public roadways located within the annexation area. M. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 11, 1995. The following requirements are provided to Meridian City as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Construct Hickory Avenue to a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 3 a 60 -foot right-of-way. If a landscaped median is constructed, maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet from back of curb on both sides of the median. 2. Direct lot or parcel access to Hickory Avenue is prohibited, in compliance with District policy. Lot access restrictions shall be stated on the final plat. 3. The District will not sign the final plat for any part of this subdivision until the adjacent street system that it connects to, Hickory Avenue, becomes part of the public street system. 4. Construct all other internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot (Meridian width requirement) and a 50 -foot right-of-way. 5. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services Division. 6. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners association. 7. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves having other than 90 -degree angles of deflection. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 3. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 4. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 4 5. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public. 6. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. Purchase street nave signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff. 7. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no obstruction higher than 36 -inches will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street construction plans of these restrictions. 8. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 9. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel. 10. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required). 11. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system. 12. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with District standards and policies. 13. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 14. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 5 ACRD. 15. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff Submitting Dae of Commission A val: APR Karen Gallagher Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 6 AF? 1 4�ZIJ SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET CITY OF MERIDIAN Proposed Development Name PA KARD SUB City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 3/30/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final Engineer/Developer Tealey's Land Surveying _/ PNE & Edmonds Contruction The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance. The following existing_ street names shall appear on the plat a "N. HICKORY WAY" "E. MEADOW WOOD COURT" "E. CHATEAU DRIVE" "N. JUSTIN WAY" "BISON" is a duplication and therefore cannot be used. "SWEETGRASS" is reserved for another subdivision and cannot be used unless it is in alignment "MINDY" sound too much like MENDI and therefore cannot be used. "CHANDRA" sounds too much like SANDRA and therefore cannot be used. "NIKKI" sound too much like DICKY and therefore cannot be used. Please choose 5 new street names and have them approved by the street name committee. The 4b^ -.vs Jt1^V• ^a:^e comments have bee^ read and approved boy the fo;lo..ing agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee irk order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COM Ada County Engineer John Priester Ada Planning Assoc. Terri Raynor Meridian Fire District Representati ENCY RVRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES z Date Date 31 z 3G �S— Date 3/3�jq5-1 NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Alda time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed Street Index NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BL County Engineer at the !!!! Sub Index NOISLuOH:IS 423` X,- Ao ly-ld .i2I �':�INS I"I32idvs T_ 7MA3Ains awi t-kmvu LL Z y{ d) 6i a X c � 9 V 51 S7 Z p� Q L] i "' • � W SCI p st Q 8 III .a ne Op 9 c {y (Smog - inOi �J•• ': al¢Oo OFFICIALS 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. KENNY 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. COPRiE WALT W MORRON: SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Atlministra:C, JIM JOHNSON - Chairman - Planning & Zon-; L !J \i' .J Nr^.f,jPA � ME! 7 -!A N . TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVUOrW1VIROJECTS 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 Hail, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P2 MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR =NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation POLICE DEPARTMENT District's Stokesberry Lateral courses along the north CITY ATTORNEY boundary of the project. The right-of-way of the Stokes - CITY ENGINEER berry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each CITY PLANNER way. See Idaho Code 42 -1208 --RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John Anderson or Bill Henson at 466-0663 or 345-2431 for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. This District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. ' lfiCO Bill Henson, Assistant Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 30 March 1995 Tealey's Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, ID 83702 i / / 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision Dear Tealey's: - - Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. You were previously sent a complete packet of information concerning Land Use Change, urban irrigation, and exclusion. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent PNE/Edmonds Construction ✓City of Meridian enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 APR -04-95 TUE 04:10 PM IDAHO PWR SRVC 20t36222E062 HUB OF TREsASC/RE VALLEY OFF1CiAL8 A Good Place to Live WILLIJAWC L.OASO.CityTCItY01°rk JANIGE L. GA59, CITY Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN GARY D. SMITH, P.E. Clty Engineer BRUCE O. STUART, Water Works SUDI. 33 EAST IDAHO JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt, KENNY W. BOWERS. FiteCnlel MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL" GOADON, Pollee 01110I Phone (208) 888443 • FAX (208) 887-4813 WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR, Attorney Public Works/Building DePartment (208) 987.2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor I,. 0J COUNCIL MEMBEPS RONALD R.TOLSMA MAX YEAAINGTCN ROBERT 0 CCAAIE WALT W. MORROW SHAM STILES Planner 8 Zoning Adminiatrat or JIMJOMNSON Chairman - Planning i Zoning 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: April 4 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3120195 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, so.Juth of Carol's Subdivision 2 JIM JOHNSON, PIZ MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/O —MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT `POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY 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 81 FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. Tim Adams Idaho Power 322-2047 ''rGJ ADA -&15 �1-44"5 APR 04 '95 17:00 2083222032 PAGE.03 SETTLERS' IRRIGATION DISTRICT P.O. BOX 7571 • BOISE, IDAHO 63707 PHONE 344-2471 MA1? 2 3 March 22, 1995 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 33 E Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: The above referenced subdivision lies within the Settlers Irrigation District; however, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District delivers the water for us. We are pleased to see that this development will comply with Settlers' policy by providing a pressurized irrigation system for the homeowners. If you have any questions, please phone me at 343-5271. A Sincerely, Troy L. shave, Manager Settlers Irrigation District TLU/vrk Pa6Ka'd Svbd.v+s;vn N0. 2101 r;. Ustick Ad. tleriuian, Idaho 85642 .June 2u, 1995 honorable Aayor and Uity Gouncll iyiembers iieriuian, Idaho 85642 JUN 2 0 `there is a need for parks and schools as indicat4d in the findings of Fact and Qonclusions of Law of Planning and Coning for this subdivisi4no uriginally there was a five -acre park planned wtiich has now been redesigped with some small "pocket" parkso 1 don't think these small "pocket parks are ttie answer. `here neeas to be larger areas to accommodate sports activities in particular. This location is centrally located for this section, which is desirauleo the time to address this need for parks ana schools in this area is now rather than later. At least the set aside of land for these snoulCL be done now . 1 am concerned and worried that if this is not done now, after the fact, you will corse to we and say we have to have your land for this. .'lease don't do this - 'T halt you. sincerely, Vern alleman Please act prudently now. Cw,2a ? MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: AUGUST 1. 1995 APPLICANT PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 7 REQUEST; ORDINANCE #709 FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ORDINANCE NO. 709 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NW 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 5, T.3N., R.1E., B.M. 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: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described as: A parcel of land being the NW 1/4 SE 1/4 of Section 5, T.3N., R.1E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly -described as follows: Commencing at the South 1/4 corner of said Section 5, a point marked by a brass cap; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27'15" East 1312.52 feet to the Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 0°27'15" East 1312.52 feet to the Northwest corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the North line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 South 89°40'20" East 1324.78 feet to the Northeast corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the East line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 South 0°30147" West 1310.88 feet to the Southeast corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the South line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 North 89°44'36" West 1323.43 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4 Residential; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 1 Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for annexation and zoning. Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de - annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant is required to connect to the 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, 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 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 and other matters. 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, and 11-9-605 M. which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. f. 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 if Applicant shall fail to meet the above conditions the property shall be subject to de -annexation, which conditions subsequent shall run with land and also be personal to the owner and Applicant. Section 4. 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 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 2 within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Amended Ordinance. Section 5. 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. PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of August, 1995. APPROVED: MAYOR -- GRANT P. KINGSFORD ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. -- CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO,) . ss. County of Ada, ) I, WILLIAM BERG, 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 PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NW 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 5, T.3N., R.lE., B.M. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.", passed as Ordinance No. 709 , by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the day of August, 1995, as the same appears in my office. DATED this day of August, 1995. City Clerk, City of Meridian Ada County, Idaho ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 3 STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) On this th day of August, 1995, 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. SEAL Notary Public for Idaho Residing at Meridian, Idaho ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 4 Y63 d ? MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: AUGUST 1. 1995 APPLICANT PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 8 REQUEST; PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: P8Z MINUTES 4-11-95 CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS OF FACTS 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: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION; SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 23 conclusions of law (inaudible) Rountree: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this application, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION, 126 LOTS BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This is Packard No. 1, 1 will now open the public hearing. Would the applicant like to address the Commission, you need to be sworn again, it is a new public hearing. Ted Hutchinson, 109 South 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, now we are to the meat of the annexation parcel. We are proposing to subdivide the parcel which we were just discussing the annexation on. This is a residential development we are proposing R-4 the lot sizes in this development are 8,000 square feet and larger. As indicated in the prior public hearing a number of the lots we have it broken out on this particular diagram, again from 8,000 to 10,000 square feet, from 10,000 to 15,000 square feet and then from 15,000 to on up. This includes the open space areas, in this particular proposal there is landscaped entry ways, and as you come in it would be on both sides of Hickory Way with an open area as soon as you got into the development. Then there are drainage lots and a couple of small open space lots within the development. Then we are proposing as well a landscaped easement that will affect all of the lots within the development so that there will be a 15 foot wide landscape easement which will contain street trees, and additional landscape treatment as well as entryway treatment for each of the individual lots. Mr. Richard Pavelic is here tonight as a consultant on this, he has done the landscape layout proposal to give you an example of what we are proposing for this particular development to move this development into an upper scale better than moderate price development for the City of Meridian. Again, the issues that have risen concerning the sewer. This particular development standing by itself would use a temporary lift station, however we have picked up additional properties and that property will be coming to you as Packard subdivision No. 2 and we have provided a copy of that plat to you, I believe that is in your packets. We picked up the Borup property which is immediately adjacent to north or our property which lies between the Sharp property and is adjacent to Carol Subdivision on the west side. We then picked up the Brown property which the annexation request has already been submitted on the Brown property it was tabled pending the development Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 27 it did cross and it zig-zagged. They wanted to put trees at the end of the lane so they could down the lane, if we have access from our end of the lane down to the end of the land would that not give everybody on the lane access to Wingate Lane too. We have been told by several people that who did or did not sell on the lane and we find out they did not. We were getting conflicting stories from developers and (inaudible). If you open the door and give them what they want then they could do what they want with the next piece which is the Borup's (inaudible) sewer again. They don't have that yet, they don't have it and they are still talking about a temporary lift station, are they talking 6 months or 6 years or 60 years. I think we need to get something in concrete and I think like I say we are showing a shiny penny to overlook that dull quarter. Johnson: Well I know now why I came home from Grandma's house with shiny pennys in my pocket, I never figured it out before, now I know why. My whole life is a dull quarter. Let's display those drawings over there as best we can so the public can see them. Doug Miller, 1035 Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: One of the concerns I have that I think has already been brought up but I would like to reinforce it is it appears to me that we have very much a piece meal planning process. Case in point is my property apparently bounds on both of these developments, both of these proposals being discussed under 9 and 10. 1 have seen no information about the one which is directly west of my property and that is part of the reason we have had some confusing testimony here because we are not clear on how these things connect. Johnson: Let me clarify something for you that might help you a little bit. We don't actually have anything on that piece of property directly to your west, but what we do have in our application is a requirement that if they are aware of any development or any pending development that is adjacent or contiguous to an application then they are to disclose that to us. Because we want to know what the ramifications are and the proximity of a speck application. So you are right in what you say, but on the other hand they are following our guideline mentioning what is down the road perhaps. Does that kind of help you a little bit? Miller: It helps a little bit but I think the issue is still there. Johnson: It is 2 separate applications, that is the distinction you need to make. Right now we are looking at the one that is south of your property. Miller: And what is planned for the one west of the property. I keep hearing references to that sewer connection, road connection, irrigation connection. I think it reinforces the point that we need to see a big picture both in terms of planning for the sewer, planning for the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 28 egress and ingress out of these properties, planning for the irrigation right of ways that go through there. It is very confusing to us to even respond to these kind of applications when we don't see how they connect. 1 think we have a lot of references that are potentially going to happen and connections here. It seems to me it would make a lot more sense if we try to plan them all in sort of a group. Because there are a lot of contingencies that I am hearing, both in the connection of the roads, connections of the sewers, how it affects people's right of ways on private lanes. I would suggest that the approval of one piece which is contingent on too many future pieces is not a wise thing to do. I think I agree with a lot of the comments that have been said is that we are making decisions in a piece meal way and we are going to pay for it in the long term. Johnson: That is kind of a definition of Planning and Zoning, is piece meal. Miller: But does it need to be? Johnson: Yes it does because we are not Brigham Young, we don't have that luxury of planning a whole city at once. Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, was swom by the City Attorney. Brian: Since this is concerning a preliminary plat I would like to bring up the ditches again and make sure they are tiled with the project or before the project and it doesn't get caught up in different phasing like has happened at Dove Meadows which we have lost the final phase of Dove Meadows and the ditches are still open and a mess. This property, the ditch, my water feed, if I can step over to the map. My live water comes from this border all the way (inaudible) perimeter. I would like to see that all get taken care of before they do the whole project or with phase 1. So they don't do phase 1 and have a nice entry here, is this the entry at the comer? Where is my head gate? (Inaudible) Like I stated I would like to see that all get tiled at the initiation of the project so that is taken care of and we don't have to deal with it later, 2 years down the road when they do phase 3 or 4 or whatever. Johnson: You made reference to losing the last phase of Dove Meadows, could you elaborate on that? Brian: Dove Meadows development went in 2 years ago, it started through Planning and Zoning 2 years ago and is going in 3 phases or 2 phases. They have done phase 1, the final phase is where my ditch comes in which they are required to bury all the ditches that cross their property. They have not buried that ditch because it is in the final phase, well that final phase of that project ran out of time. They have lost the final plat, so it has to go through again. So nothing is being done with my ditch out there and it is an ongoing Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 29 problem. We have had meetings down here at City Hall concerning that very thing what we need to do. As they develop these properties they wait until the certain phase to bury these ditches so you have problems with those ditches and no man's land that no one takes care of them unless you pursue the developer to make sure they are cleaned and taken care of which is a hassle in itself and then when you get that many developers down the line I have to find 4 or 5 different people to get the ditches cleaned. If they go in before the development starts and do that ground work first and get it out of the way then they don't have to wont' about me coming here and (inaudible). That is all I need to bring up, any questions? Johnson: Any questions for Mr. Brian? Thanks Don, anyone else? Jon Barnes, 1034 Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Barnes: I am just a developer and I can't read 9 and 10 and I don't want to be redundant. would just recommend approval, I would suggest, I like all the landscape treatment that they are doing but I would strongly encourage the developer to put a larger kind of a park like an acre park in there. I would like to have them held to a 30 foot rear yard setback on those lots that boundary us on the north there, those deep 140 lots and a fence on the north side. I encourage you to do this, thank you. Johnson: Thanks Jon Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I would recommend that they disapprove this (inaudible) we don't have the sewer accessibility, we don't have the access down Wingate Lane. And what they proposed to us and they came and talked to us and they came and talked to me and I have the chart right at home what they said. They said they wanted to come from Hickory Lane across and over Wingate Lane and block me off there. As far as, how are you going to stop those people from in these subdivisions from going down Wingate Lane are you going to fence them off or are you going to put berms and fences up there and stop that, well they should. Shearer: Is Wingate paved? Johnson: No it is a gravel road. Shearer: I doubt anybody is going to drive up a gravel road when they have a paved one. Sharp: I disagree with you there, I live there and they do drive up that gravel road. We would like to have 30 foot setbacks on these lots down closer to us too. Just because they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 30 live in (inaudible) doesn't mean they should have any more rights than what we do. I know that Jon is a developer and of course (inaudible) as far as that goes I just think (inaudible) schools to support the subdivisions like this and so I recommend (inaudible). Johnson: Thank you, I saw a hand over here. Craig Thompson, 2950 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Thompson: First of all I have been here for awhile, I have been trying to understand what is happening and I am completely confused. We are involved with this we live on Wingate Lane and when they say it is going to make Wingate Lane accessible to the Sharp's how are they going to do that, are they going to build an overpass over Wingate Lane. If they intersect it we are vulnerable because the traffic is going to pass there. We pay for the road, we pay for the gravel that goes on it and I really don't want anybody else to drive on it except the ones that live there. They mentioned about bringing trees in and rock this and that and I like it just the way it is. I just hope that they leave it that way. Thank you. Johnson: Thanks Craig, anyone else? Anybody have any other questions of the Developer? Wayne, can we act on this or should this item be tabled until we handle No. g? Crookston: It should be tabled until you have acted on #9. Johnson: We needed to take the testimony and at this point we really need to table the item don't we. Hepper: I have a question for the developer, the park issue was brought up. I was just wondering originally there was a lot of park area designated in this and I guess we are little bit sensitive. There was so much there the first time and now there isn't any. What is the feasibility of having a small neighborhood park in the area, is there any particular reason why there couldn't be or shouldn't be? Hutchinson: Mr. Hepper, as I indicated earlier in fact we have no net gain in the number of lots, in fact we lost a couple of lots in the design. Part of the reason that the land was taken up is the new configuration of the streets it doesn't lend itself really to that large of a park area and still be able to yield a development that is going to be economical for total development. We have looked a couple of designs, we have toyed with working this out whether or not we can get a couple of smaller pocket parks within the development. We will have to sit down with the developer and see if there is a proposal in there that might work. We recognize the need for open area for the people in the development. We were a little dismayed at the response to our previous development proposal when we did get Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 31 further down the public hearing process. We thought that 5 acre park was an extremely nice amenity given the location. But whether or not we can come up with something that will be feasible again we will have to push the numbers and the configuration past the developer and see if they think it is possible. Hepper: Since this will probably be table I just wanted to point out right in the middle of the project there appears to be 2 very odd shaped lots, one is almost 18,000 - 19,000 square feet and the other is 17,000, it would be Lot 10 and Lot 29. Between the 2 of them that would be 35,000 square feet which would be almost 3/4 of an acre. Hutchinson: We also recognize that those lots the way they are configured in this drawing they need (inaudible) changing the flag so it didn't go onto the culdesac it would go onto Justin Way which is the street in the middle. So there would be some reconfiguration there. We may be able to configure to provide a pathway from the culdesacs to Justin way but again we have to look at this in a little more detail. I think your information and input here tonight is going have a great deal of impact on pushing that through to see what we can come up with. Hepper: I don't think a small neighborhood park would be out of the question. I guess the economics and feasibility of it dictate whether you are willing to do it or not. We would have to look at it. Hutchinson: We will sit down with the developer on this thing and make sure that is one issue that we go over quite heavily. Johnson: Anyone else? I will now close the public hearing. Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this item until our next regularly scheduled meeting on May 9th. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we table this item until the May 9th regular meeting of Planning and Zoning, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: For those of you that might be confused as to what is going on in this (inaudible) this item, the findings of fact and conclusions of law on item #9 will be at our May 9th meeting at that time those findings of fact will incorporate the testimony we took tonight plus how the application legally stands with our ordinances, then we will act on that on Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 32 May 9th and then it will go for another public hearing to the City Council when it can be on their agenda which will probably either the last regular meeting in May or the first one in June. So you will have another opportunity to a public hearing and that is the purpose of me explaining that. FIVE MINUTE BREAK ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS ADDITION NO. 3,6 LOTS BY MAWS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to address the Commission. Ted Hutchinson, 109 South Fourth Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Members of the Commission, this is an application for a 7 lot subdivision, I believe your staff report or something on the original application said 6 but there are 7 residential lots and one drainage lot. This is the final addition to Maws Addition subdivisions at Pine Avenue and Locust Grove Roads. This is going to be north of Pine with frontage on Adkins Lane. Each of these lots have been designed to comply with the zoning requirements of the R-8 zone. The lots are, when they were originally proposed as part of the master plan for the Maws Additions they were proposed at 60 foot wide lots, however the approval expired before the last phase could be submitted and we have redesigned these to comply with the current zoning standards. They are at least 65 feet in width and I believe they are about 6500 square feet, they are about 100 feet deep. This will be the final phase for Maws Addition, I think it is compatible with what has been approved and constructed in the area. We would ask that you recommend approval of this application to the City Council. With that are there any questions that I might answer for the Commission? Johnson: Thanks Ted, any questions for Mr. Hutchinson? Hepper: Does that street go on to the north, where does that street terminate at? Hutchinson: Mr. Hepper, Adkins Lane terminates up there, it simply dead ends I believe Danbury Fair, Shari said Danbury Fair is the subdivision to the north. They haven't quite worked out what they are going to do as far as access to Adkins Lane whether or not they are going to access it or not. The last conversation we had with the Highway District about Adkins Lane we'd be required to do improvements and possibly a temporary turn around but again the temporary turn around would be at the end of the current street. Whether or not that becomes a through street will depend on Danbury Fair's ultimate decision whether OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P & Z Adm. KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W. L "BILL" GORDON, Polite 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 a FAX (208) 8874813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: (Supplemental) To: Mayor, City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION (Annexation and Zoning) Engineer • COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P & Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER June 15, 1995 I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following supplemental comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their fine in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. CAWPWIN60\GENEt2AL.\nAC VARD1. C -C OFFICIALS 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. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: To: From: Re: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-1433 • FAX (208) 887.4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning April 6, 1995 Annexation and Zoning of R-4 with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision by PNE/Edmonds Construction We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-104A. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and profile the subsurface soil conditions. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 5. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. 6. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 7. Coordinate the fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 8. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 2 9. Please submit information detailing the traffic impact on existing or adjacent roadways and intersections. 10. Indicate any floodplain boundaries as determined by FEMA and measures to amend this boundary. 11. Horizontal location and spacing of sanitary sewer manholes to be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. 12. Show all proposed or existing utilities, including, but not limited to, storm and sanitary sewers, irrigation laterals, ditches, drainage, bridges, culverts, water mains, fire hydrants, streetlights, and pressurized irrigation. 13. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimension and purpose of such. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. The Preliminary Plat map contour lines need to be tied to an established Benchmark. 2. Please submit, to the Public Works Department, a master street drainage plan including method of disposal and approval from the affected drainage district. 3. Streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. These will be installed at the subdivider's expense. 4. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. 5. The legal description submitted with this application and the Preliminary Plat map doesn't follow the boundaries of the adjacent Plats of Record. Bearing and distance calls that don't match should be referenced as "Information of Record". Please clear up these discrepancies and resubmit a new legal description per Resolution 158 (Aug. 16, 1994). 6. 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. 7. Government Corners referenced in the legal description need to be shown on the Preliminary Plat map. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 3 8. A temporary sanitary sewage lift station will need to be installed to service this property. Details for the placement and configuration of this temporary lift station need to be worked out with the Public Works Department. 9. The lots adjacent to Carol's Subdivision range in size from 0.3 acre to 0.42 acre. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Applicant has submitted a proposed plan of future phases of Packard Subdivision for review. 2. This subdivision was previously submitted as a 128 -lot subdivision with a 5 -acre park. As a result of redesign, two building lots and the park have been absorbed. Some small "pocket" parks remain. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. 3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. 4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 6. Block lengths exceed 1,000'. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided to minimize walking distances. For example, walkways will be required from Chandra Way through to Meadow Wood Court. Applicant should also install lighting system for the walkway for safety purposes. 7. Frontage on several of the lots do not meet the 80' minimum. Some corner lots will need arrows indicating front of lot. 8. Existing natural features along the northerly boundary could possibly be lost if this sub - lateral is tiled. 9. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ANNEXATION AND ZONING NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION -5-,- T. ECTION5,T 3N., R 1E., B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO MERIDIAN. IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on April 11, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing through Ted Hutchinson, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for April 11, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the April 11, 1995, 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. 2. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is 39.87 acres in size; it is located between Locust Grove Road and Meridian Road and between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road; surrounding subdivisions are Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, Kearney Place Subdivision, Chateau Meadows Subdivision, which are in the City of Meridian, and Carol Subdivision, which is not in the City; the South Slough, also known as the Finch Lateral, runs along the North boundary of the proposed subdivision. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County RT (Rural Transition) and the proposed use is requested to be for R-4 Residential development. 4. Most of the general area surrounding the property is either developed or is proposed to be developed. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant is shown on the subdivision application to be the owner of record of the property. 7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property is for one house and for agricultural uses; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property is for an COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 2 R-4 type subdivision use with lots ranging from 8,000 to over 18,000 square feet; that the Applicant did submit a request for approval of a subdivision plat at the time of submitting the application for annexation. That after the public testified the Applicant, through Ted Hutchinson, stated that Wingate Lane would not be affected by this development and it was not their proposal to utilize Wingate Lane, he explained the situation with larger lots being next to Carol Subdivision but not next to the lots where the Sharps and others live, that the developer would like to extend the South Slough sewer to serve the development but they will have to use temporary lift stations. He also stated that the irrigation water would be protected. 10. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: a. Helen Sharp testified that there were already difficulties with lgr, that the density was already too high in Meridian and that there was no need for additional houses, that there were water drainage problems that need to be addressed, and that she was apposed to the high density. b. Jon Barnes testified that the redesign of the subdivision was much improved, that he understood that there was going to be a 30 foot setback on the lots next to his in Carol Subdivision when the lots are already 140 deep, that he would like a fence between the new homes and Carol Subdivision and that a neighborhood park would be nice. c. Vern Alleman testified that his concern was over parks and that not enough of them are provided in developments, that impact fees are possibly the best and fairest solution to need created by additional development, and his additional concern was the use of lift stations for. sewers. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 3 d. Douglas Miller testified that he was concerned about privacy, that the idea of berms, fences and setbacks was very good, that the density was fairly high in regard to the other areas where people had already built, and that the design was much improved. e. Dale Sharp stated that she was opposed to the subdivision because of the school and traffic problems; that he did not want Wingate Lane cut off; he questioned where the sewer was going to come from; that he had the same problems as Mr. Barnes, but nothing was being done for him and his land. f. Bob Golse testified that he questioned by such high density would be allowed with only two accesses and that there would be too many cars coming in and out of the subdivision for the limited access. g. Don Bryan testified that he was concerned with the irrigation water, that he wanted know what was going to be done with the head gate on southwest corner, which is his headgate and it needed to be addressed in this development. h. John Schey testified that he was in agreement with the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Sharp and that he was concerned about the traffic and stated that the subdivision did not have sufficient access. 11. That the property is in an area marked on the Generalized Land Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family residential area; that in the Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per acre. 12. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. 13. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. 14. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines and constructs and installs necessary equipment and facilities. 15. The Assistant to the Meridian City Engineer and Meridian City Planner did submit comments and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. That some of the comments of the Meridian Planning Director were that perimeter fencing is required prior to construction; that a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation; that the previous plat showed a 5 -acre park but the subdivision was redesigned with some small "pocket" parks; that there is no school capacity to serve the subdivision; that some block lengths exceed 1,000 feet; that pedestrian walkways will be required from Chandra through to Meadow Wood Court with a lighting system; and that frontage on several lots does not meet the 80 foot minimum requirement for R-4. 16. That the Assistant to the City Engineer commented and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that some of the general comments were that any existing irrigation ditches crossing the property shall be tiled; that the high seasonal ground water needed to be established; that water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis; that sidewalks to meet City ordinance must be constructed; that perimeter fencing is required prior to obtaining building permits; existing wells and/or septic systems will have to be removed and that the wells may be COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT &_CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 used ,for non-domestic and irrigation purposes; determine high seasonal ground water; provide sidewalks in accordance with Meridian ordinance; the preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by a land surveyor. That the site specific comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, some of which were that the legal description does not follow the boundaries of adjacent plats and correction needs to be made; that a temporary sewer lift station will need to be installed; and that a master street drainage plan needed to be submitted. 17. That the Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire and Police Departments, Meridian School District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Central District Health Department, and other agencies submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows: R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only Single Family Dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential Development and public schools. The purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four ( 4 ) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square feet to be included in houses in that zone. 19. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows: "Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-family, multi -family, town houses, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities. 20. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows: "Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided . 21. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows: "Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan." 22. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Housing, Housing Policies, at page 66, it states as follows: "1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes, multi -family, town houses arrangements), . "1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background." "1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged." 23. That there is a population influx into the City of Meridian at the present time which has been going on for some time and is likely to continue; that the land is relatively close to Meridian and economic conditions are making it difficult to COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 continue farming in the area. 24. That the City Engineer has previously submitted comment in different applications that a determination of ground water level and subsurface soil conditions should be made; that such a comment is equally applicable to this Application. 25. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning in this area the Zoning Administrator has commented that annexation should be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park site to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an approved development agreement. 26. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 residents of the City; that the City, knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 27. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 28. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10') wide." 29. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 30. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 31. That Section 11-9-605 R states as follows: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 9 "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi - improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 32. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 33. That Section 11-9-605 M, PIPING OF DITCHES states, in part, as follows: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 10 34. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That 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 Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That 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. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 11 the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, PNE/Edmonds Construction, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land, if annexed, 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, Piping of Ditches, and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation; that the Applicant would be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the development of the property would be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance; that, as a condition of annexation the Applicant is 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 the inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, M, and prior comments of the previous Planning Director, Wayne Forrey, relating to the lack of adequate recreation facilities and that land set aside for a future park would be desirable, that the City is in need of land set -asides for future public service use; that the development agreement shall, as a condition of annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 12 executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City; that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be subject to de - annexation and loss of City services, if the requirements of this paragraph are not met. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property has not been shown and the Applicant must work to obtain better access. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in an area marked as a single family residential area, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies; however, there are very large lots in the Wingate Lane area and in Carol Subdivision and they shall be buffered by the Applicant and the subdivision covenants shall let the home owners in the proposed subdivision know that those lots are there and that the buffering must remain; that this matter shall be addressed in the development agreement. 12. That the development of R-4 as suggested by the Applicant would be compatible to the homes across Wingate Lane and in Carol Subdivision if they are buffered as required above; that R-4 development would be compatible with the lots and homes in Chateau Meadows, Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, and Kearney Place Subdivision. 13. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and evidence, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 13 Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned and the zoning of the property should be R-4 Residential; that the conditions would be those stated above if the property is eventually annexed and zoned; that the annexation would be orderly development and reasonable if the necessary buffering is completed between this subdivision and the lots in the Wingate area and in Carol Subdivision; that the property shall be subject to de -annexation if the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not met. 14. That it is concluded that a fence should be placed along Wingate Lane to prevent home owners on this land from gaining access to Wingate Lane, particularly because it is a private lane. 15. That the South Slough runs along the north boundary of the property, and as a condition of annexation the South Slough must be landscaped to fit into other improvements that have been made along the slough with a pedestrian and bike path or it must be tiled; that the South Slough shall be addressed in the development agreement. 16. That all ditches, canals, and waterways required to be tiled by City Ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 17. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 18. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property should not annexed. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 14 19. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) RECOMMENDATION VOTEDfAj ~ VOTED VOTED l_ VOTED VOTED The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the Application for annexation and zoning be granted under the terms and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law and any other requirements set by the City Council; if the Applicant shall not meet these conditions, the Application shall be denied or the land shall be de -annexed. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 15 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of rx — Fact and Conclusions this 11 day of 1995. ROLL CALL CAI COUNCILMAN MORROW COUNCILMAN YERRINGTON COUNCILMAN CORRIE COUNCILMAN TOLSMA MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) (INITIAL) APPROVED 4�/ DISAPPROVED VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED VOTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - (f- olyj-TR�,k c T clw . HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live COUNCIL MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH ONGTON BE RT D. WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Planner & Zoning Atlmmistraior W.L. 'BILL" GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning S Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE.- 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RE TION(PRELIM & F,NAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: - 7 _: 1 � YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: 4^� CITY ATTORNEY 14 CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER RzGEPVFED MAR 2 3 IS95 CITY OF MERIDIAN i.LII:;<iZ�► +Z�r_.1CYi17�l�INfai� OFFICIALS COUNCIL MEMBERS A Good Place to Live WILLIRONALD JANIC L. GASB, City T easur Clerk JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRiE GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Planner 8 Zoning Administrator W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning & Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: ` 9S YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: A) v 7` !.i !!.a- 7-F .1L OFF or- M .0 4 d9V,,; k) 00 Aiv i 40-11- 4P la OFF OF CiiAtjfYkA k J M ; r JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary TO: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION 3131 LANARK STREET MERIDIAN, ID 83642 FROM: Karen Gallagher, C i at Development Servic ' si n SUBJECT: PACKARD- PRELIMINAR RE EI V L -i.; APR 1 U ?c?r /�rr -, 1 1 00 April 6, 1995 On APRIL 5, 1995, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called "District") took action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report. In order that the Final Plat may be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall cause the following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification and endorsement: 1. Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District. 2. If public street improvements are required: Prior to any construction within the existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District: a. Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by an Idaho Registered Professional Engineer, together with payment of plan review fee. b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services. C. Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or execute Surety Agreement between the Developer and the District to guarantee the completion of construction of all street improvements. ada county highway district 318 East 37th • Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 April 6, 1995 Page 2 3. Furnish copy of Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local Government Agency having such authority together with payment of fee charged for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs, as required. 4. If Public Rights -of -Way Trust Find deposit is required, make deposit to the District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the District. 5. Furnish easements, agreements, and all other datum or documents as required by the District. 6. Furnish Final Plat drawings for District acceptance, certifications, and endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner's and Land Surveyor's certification. 7. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. An extension of one year will be considered by the Commission if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration date. Please contact me at 345-7680, should you have any questions. KG cc: Development Services Chron John Edney TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY CITY OF MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat and Annexation - Packard Meridian Packard is a 126 -lot residential subdivision on 39.9 -acres. The site is located 1/4 -mile north of Fairview Avenue and 1/4 -mile west of Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 1204 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development are: FAIRVIEW AVENUE - Arterial street with a bike lane designation - Traffic count 16,470 in 1990 EAGLE ROAD - ITD jurisdiction - Arterial street - Traffic count 12,000 from traffic study (350 trips will be added) HICKORY AVENUE - Collector street with no pathway designation (1,200 trips added) packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 USTICK RD. SITE � � o Cy - Id TAZ 265 (Y TAZ 144 Z / tV � VI DgOwS Lu E041 FAIRVIEW AVE I � TREASURE aw VALLEY V BUSINESS - PARK I u TAZ 145 I � - I— — — — — — I TAZ 266 I — — — — — — — — PINE ST. I I FRANKLIN RD. packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 4 y A. • y tl �• ! xS `•a/_ ..I — 1 = ' !� r s �d ✓ �+� +ter 6✓� r r ' I �� Cl Al -N '; LL 1 •x � 3.vy =� � � s !� b •� � •� 4 .s � z ! :_ .� s � O; " s R� y cr aF .e.ti i} ggs .1\^ "• A+S'. = 1 y ~� s ^� �^.� � •`,� '!} �yy ,.,y ^� � r � y R� CJ` �w,/ � _ i _ zs Z aR •R i �^ h °.ri i k ! •�, y •= 9 c 1 �, i _ _A ^—`��— .L�i Llfl • m.GLtL.0Q6 _ _ 9 I 1 xl Iii A '^4 ^ora=}q l.'1 •Tf1 , h �r;3p •w ya .fYe• ��'•'•� ': 40rLi15 W, It i'LL A •/1 •• 7rLL ON "AMns oNrl s.Ainvil Noismacisas amy.mavd AO .Ltl•Id .ltltl(�III1IZ32id s° LL Z 1 y . + l � Q e • 6 r wk.) (P h �N �`rir-_� �uCa :'5 lK � -moi nays � J� LLI U a p Z _ i i I � p► � u �1 � � � ° Ul m u W o0 (Y -Q °a �,�u, :. `Q n; �e a�} Z W "go b zaW a gai m - Won a • °1Cy u t' -ON "_ " LJ W � N•ZN J y a'n � di 3 7 } OZaWw 1 z uuI a 3 � w J Z Ol�Ow rmn0a _ W 7J �,4n 4 y A. • y tl �• ! xS `•a/_ ..I — 1 = ' !� r s �d ✓ �+� +ter 6✓� r r ' I �� Cl Al -N '; LL 1 •x � 3.vy =� � � s !� b •� � •� 4 .s � z ! :_ .� s � O; " s R� y cr aF .e.ti i} ggs .1\^ "• A+S'. = 1 y ~� s ^� �^.� � •`,� '!} �yy ,.,y ^� � r � y R� CJ` �w,/ � _ i _ zs Z aR •R i �^ h °.ri i k ! •�, y •= 9 c 1 �, i _ _A ^—`��— .L�i Llfl • m.GLtL.0Q6 _ _ 9 I 1 xl Iii A Facts and Findings: A. General Information R-4 - Zoning 126 - Lots 39.9 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Hickory Avenue Collector with no pathway designation 60 -feet of frontage on the future right-of-way that has been approved as a preliminary plat 60 -feet of right-of-way to be platted (30 -feet from centerline) 60 -feet required right-of-way for the extension of Hickory Avenue (30 -feet from centerline) Hickory Avenue is improved with a 41 -feet street section south of the site; the improvements do not reach the site, but will with the completion of a later phase of Dove Meadows. B. This is a modification to the original preliminary plat submittal. No action was taken on the original submittal. Staff has had several meetings with the representatives of this subdivision to discuss stub streets and traffic flow. Staff supports the stub streets as proposed. C. A traffic study was submitted and review for this subdivision. The traffic study was completed for 135 residential lots; the number of lots has been reduced to 126 buildable lots. D. Staff recommends that Hickory Avenue continue as a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with a 60 -foot right-of-way from the south boundary to the first internal intersection. Direct lot access to Hickory Avenue will be restricted. The preliminary plat shows Hickory Avenue with 60 -feet of right-of-way with a landscaped median. Both travel lanes of Hickory Avenue should maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet between backs of curbs. E. Staff can accept culdesacs having a 29 -foot street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and a 42 -foot right-of-way for those culdesacs generating less than 200 -trips per day. The 29 -foot street section restricts parking on one side. Staff discussed the 29 -foot street section with the applicant and supports the reduced street section on two of the culdesacs, Chandra Way and Mindy Place, since the loss of parking on one side of the street would directly effect only one lot in each of those cases. F. Unless otherwise specified, staff recommends that all internal local streets be constructed as Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 2 37 -foot street sections and 4 -foot minimum (5 -foot required by Meridian) with a 40 -foot right-of-way. G. Several curves are shown the preliminary plat with radii less than 100 -feet. If the turn or curve is a right-angle a lesser radii can be accepted. Staff recommends that the streets be modified to maintain a minimum radii of 100 -feet unless the curve delta is at or near a right- angle. H. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shown are deep enough that a median island should be required to focus traffic. A minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb is necessary. There are four stub streets proposed in this subdivision, one in each direction. The northern and eastern stub streets extend into undeveloped land. No additional stub streets are being proposed or recommended by staff to the south since the property to the south is 25 acres of property held in contiguous ownership by the Capitol Christian Center Inc. and can be accessed from Hickory Avenue to the south. J. A residential collector road (41 -foot street section with no direct lots access) is anticipated to be extended from Eagle Road to Chandra Way when the intervening property is developed. K. Staff recommends that only the 126 -lots of Packard Subdivision be approved in this area until additional streets are constructed that connect to the other three stub streets and eventually to arterials. Development of more lots than this will cause the generation of traffic in excess of that allowed on a residential collectors (Hickory Avenue) by District Policy. L. A portion of the funds allocated to Ada County Highway District from the Highway Distribution Account are predicated on the number of improved road miles (under the District's jurisdiction) that are located outside the limits of any incorporated city. Consequently, annexation of subject lands will adversely affect a major revenue base of the District without any compatible decrease in the District's responsibility to continue to maintain those public roadways located within the annexation area. M. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 11, 1995. The following requirements are provided to Meridian City as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Construct Hickory Avenue to a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 3 a 60 -foot right-of-way. If a landscaped median is constructed, maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet from back of curb on both sides of the median. 2. Direct lot or parcel access to Hickory Avenue is prohibited, in compliance with District policy. Lot access restrictions shall be stated on the final plat. 3. The District will not sign the final plat for any part of this subdivision until the adjacent street system that it connects to, Hickory Avenue, becomes part of the public street system. 4. Construct all other internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot (Meridian width requirement) and a 50 -foot right-of-way. 11 5. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services Division. 6. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners association. 7. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves having other than 90 -degree angles of deflection. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 3. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 4. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 4 5. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public. 6. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. Purchase street nave signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff. 7. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no obstruction higher than 36 -inches will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street construction plans of these restrictions. 8. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACRD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 9. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel. 10. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required). 11. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system. 12. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with District standards and policies. 13. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 14. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 5 ACRD. 15. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff Submitting Date of Commissiqkl AR12roval: APR p 5 199b Karen Gallagher Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 6 SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET AP? 1 J 15953 CITY OF MERIDIA Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 3/30/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final Engineer/Developer Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance. The following existing street names shall appear on the plat as: °' N. HICKORY WAY" "E. MEADOW WOOD COURT" "E. CHATEAU DRIVE" "N. JUSTIN WAY" "BISON" is a duplication and therefore cannot be used. "SWEETGRASS" is reserved for another subdivision and cannot be used unless it is in alignment. "MINDY" sound too much like MENDI and therefore cannot be used. "CHANDRA" sounds too much like SANDRA and therefore cannot be used. "NIKKI" sound too much like DICKY and therefore cannot be used. Please choose 5 new street names and have them aooroved by the street name committee T',,.-- ../VvG JLIVNI il:illle VGIIImenls IIOYa NC'ie11 IQaaJ and aNprG'Jed by the follyv.in^y agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee i order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITJ,GEINNC PRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Ada County Engineer John Prieste1 Date Ada Planning Assoc. Terri Raynor Date 3 3GIn- Meridian Fire District Representative Ivlx i cam" z W j ,Q/J/- Date NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Alda County Engineer at the time of signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!! Subindex Street Index NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS ' ,�Avm _r-�� 2 222/ / . \ ( � ! ■ - k f ( 4 »{/ k 6 ��E•,|!| x §�) ± e a , ` � 2 !',:i D; ��'■�; ,■!||"|E � � ! k��| q @�, $ .c - . ! ®•' | 6 | 2 � § (L (L � }(P § \k\[ ||;■ _WNW 2 |■22 § C1610 CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Rezone # REVIEW SHEET Environmental Health Division Return to: ❑ Boise `s: ❑ Eagle ❑ Garden city ,'$�Meridian Co tional Use ## ❑ Kuna Preliminary Final /Short Plat �1t�./G'ti'-I� �c��cl/y%J���''�� ❑ ACZ ❑ I. We have 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. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: 0 central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well interim sewage ,central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: �E4entral sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines ,central water �. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ I I. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. 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 ❑ 13. ^4) /4! )77tf1A-"Jnh Date: Reviewed By: CDHD 10/91 rcb, rev. 11/93 ill CENTRAL LI DISTRICT H EALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL. • BOISE, ID. 83704-0825 • (208) 375-5211 s FAX: 321-8c.00 To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECONMIENDATIONS 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) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, .Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada / Boise County Office WIC Boise - Meridian Ehm County Office Elmore County Office Valley County Office 707 N. Arnstrong Fl. 1606 Robert St. 520 E. 8th Street N. of Environmental Health P.O. Box 1448 Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Boise, ID. 83705 Mountain Home, ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. McCall, ID. 83638 Enviro. Health: 327-7499 Ph. 334.3355 83647 Ph. 581-4407 Mountain Home, ID. Ph. 634.7194 Famiry Planning: 327-7400 324 Meridian Rd. 83641 Ph. 587.9225 Immun¢ations: 327-7450 Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrition: 327-7460 Ph. 888-6525 W!C: 327.7488 OFFICIALS 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. KENNY 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT 0.COPPiE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Adm mstracc- JIM JOHNSON Chairman Planning & Zz -^_ UUU uL J'v ,__iD �i:pSi os NAMPA C TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVE4MPMRNTT&0JECTS 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR =NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation POLICE DEPARTMENT District's Stokesberry Lateral courses along the north CITY ATTORNEY boundary of the project. The right-of-way of the Stokes - CITY ENGINEER berry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each CITY PLANNER way. See Idaho Code 42 -1208 --RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John Anderson or Bill Henson at 466-0663 or 345-2431 for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. This District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. �fi(O Bill Henson, Assistant Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 30 March 1995 Tealey's Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, ID 83702 Maw 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision Dear Tealey's: - - - Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to f ile with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. You were previously sent a complete packet of information concerning Land Use Change, urban irrigation, and exclusion. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent PNE/Edmonds Construction ✓City of Meridian enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 APR -04-95 TUE W4:140 I—I'l LLNI'tU r --m o- ._.r--.— ---- — HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALES A Good Place to Live WILLIAJANICE L. GASSO ityT(cOily Clark JANICE L. GASB, City Tttawrer CITE OF MERIDIAN GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer BRUCE 0. STUART. Water WOrka Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Watersuct. KENNY W. BOWERS. Fife Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L."BILL­ GORDON, Police Cnief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney Phone (208) 8884433 a FAX (208) 887.1813 Public WorkS/Buildini; Dcpartment (208) 887.2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YEHRINGTON ROBERT 0 CORAIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Adminintrnl nr JIM JOHNSON CnalfMan • planning d zoning 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: April 4 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3120195 HEARING DATE: 4111/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY:-'NE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P2 CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, PfZ _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, CIC _BOB CORRIE, CIC —WALT MORROW, C/O —MAX YERRINGTON, C/C —WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT `POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. Tim Adams Idaho Power 322-2047 AvA-^''s � _ 145 APR 04 '95 17:00 2083222032 PAGE.03 June 9, 1995 TEALETS LAND SURVEYING Gary Smith, City Engineer City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian Id 83642 109 South 41" Street Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 RE: Comments and Conditions for Packard Subdivision #1 Dear Mr. Smith, RECEIVED JUN U 9 1995 MERIDIAN CITY ENGWEER Thank you for taking time on June 6, 1995, to meet with us regarding the Packard Subdivision #1 proposal. I apologize for the delay of these responses as I was unaware of your new policy requiring written response to your subdivision comments. On April 6, 1995, Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles sent a memorandum to the Mayor, City Council, and Planning and Zoning, concerning Packard Subdivision #1. Regarding those "General Comments," we offer the following: As required by City Ordinance 11-9-605.M, irrigation/drainage ditches included in this project will be tiled. The tiling will be done under the supervision and approval of the appropriate irrigation district. 2 There are no existing domestic water wells or septic systems within this project boundary. 3 Test holes were dug on the site (6/5/95) to find the seasonal high ground water elevation. 4 The developer is preparing restrictive covenants. Attached is a copy of the Ada County Street Name Evaluation form and a copy of the County Engineer's letter approving the subdivision name. 6 As shown on the preliminary plat in the typical street cross-section, a five foot (5) sidewalk will be installed. Packard Subdivision #I Projed 1290 - 1 - 7 I contacted Bruce Stewart of the Meridian Water Department concerning placement of fire hydrants. The locations recommended by Mr. Stewart have been incorporated into the preliminary plat drawings and will be used in the construction drawings. 8 The preliminary plat has been stamped by a licensed surveyor. 9 A traffic study for this site was prepared and submitted to the Ada County Highway District. A copy of that report is attached. 10 '£'here are no flood hazard areas shown on F.I.R.M. panels #0165 or #0251 that would affect this project. 11 Location of sanitary sewer manholes will be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. Those locations will be shown on the shown on the preliminary plat. 12 All proposed or existing utilities are now shown on the preliminary plat. 13 Statements of dedications to the public are provided on the final plat. Locations of proposed easements and public streets are shown on the preliminary plat. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Public Works Department, we are providing the following responses: The contour lines on the preliminary plat are tied to an established Benchmark referenced to the southwest corner of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian. This is an elevation of 2607.14. This datum is the same datum used for the aerial photography done for the city of Meridian by J.U.B. Engineers. 2 The master street drainage plan will be prepared before the construction phase following the approval of the preliminary plat and before submitting the final plat for approval. Estimated runoff directions and locations of retention areas have been identified on the preliminary plat. 3 Location of street lights is shown on the preliminary plat. Specific locations for street lighting will be approved by the Meridian Public Works Department before installation by the developer. 4 Has your computer model for hydraulic analysis been performed to evaluate this proposal? 5 A revised legal description is attached. 6 Any plans for supplemental water supply for irrigation purposes will be submitted to your office for review and approval. Packard Subdivision #I Project 1290 - 2 - 7 The Government Corners referenced in the legal description are shown on the preliminary plat. 8 Location for the temporary lift station has been identified on the preliminary plat. We will work closely with your department to ensure that the rift station meets your criteria. 9 No response. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" fi-om the Planning Department, we are providing the following responses: 1 No response. 2 A minor redesign of this project has yielded two (2) smaller park/open space areas for this development. These will be private open space lots maintained by the homeowners association for use by the residents of this development. 3 Perimeter fencing will be installed for each phase before requesting building permits. 4 A development agreement will be submitted by the developers. 5 The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will not necessarily attend the nearest neighborhood school. 6 Few intervening streets or natural breaks occur around the boundaries of this plat. This makes long blocks necessary. The internal block lengths have been interrupted by access to the pocket parks. These accesses also provide internal pathways through the subdivision for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7 The eighty foot (80') frontage requirement has been met for all lots that are not fronting on a cul-de-sac or are not flag lots. Those lots meet the minimum standards for cul-de-sac or flag lot frontages. 8 The developer will work with the city of Meridian to protect the existing natural features along the northern boundary of this development. Most of those features are, however, not on the developer's property. But, anywhere.the nature features exist on-site, protection of those features will be attempted. Otherwise, the waterway will be tiled according to City Ordinance. 9 Phase lines have been included on the preliminary plat. Packard Subdivision #I Project 1290 - 3 - Many comments and concerns expressed by your department will be addressed as part of receiving approval for a final plat. Construction drawings, engineering, and other costly preparations are not made until after the preliminary plat is approved. Developers are hesitant to expend money for those costs if there is a possibility that their project will not be approved. However, the developer is willing to work with you and'your staff to address those items to your satisfaction. We look forward to working with you and your department in the completion of this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, please let me know. Thank you again for taking time to meet u nth us. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying B. 71-eoe--70- � /� Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision #1 Projed 12% - 4 - SETTLERS' IRRIGATION DISTRICT P.O. BOX 7571 • BOISE, IDAHO B3707 PHONE 344-2471 I SAE? 2 3 n-' March 22, 1995 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 33 E Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: The above referenced subdivision lies within the Settlers Irrigation District; however, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District delivers the water for us. We are pleased to see that this development will comply with Settlers' policy by providing a pressurized irrigation system for the homeowners. If you have any questions, please phone me at 343-5271. Sincerely, Troy L. shaw, Manager Settlers Irrigation District TLU/vrk ��AGKArd Sv6�rtJ�S,OJ No. 2101 A. Ustick Ad, t-teriaian, ldano 85642 -June 2U, 1995 Honorable 1'Layor and Gity Council tvterabars i-*riaian, Idaho b)642 There is a need for parks and scauols as indicatgd in the findings of Fact and Uonciusions GI Law of klanniug and zoning for this subdivision* originally there was a five -acre Dark planned W11-10,4 has now been redesi6med with some small "pocket" parks, 1 don't think. these small "pocket parks are the answer* `lnere neeas to be larger areas to accommodate sports activities in particular* This location is centrally located for this section, which is desirable* `The time to address anis need for parks and scnools in this area is now rather than latero Alt least the set aside of land for these snoula be done now * 1 am concerned and worried that if tnis is not done now, after the fact, you will. cove to me and say we have to have your land for tilis o .Please don't do this* Please act prudently nowo `thank you* Sincerely, Vern alleman 'Id ORDINANCE NO. 709 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NW 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 5, T.3N., R.lE., B.M. 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: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described as: A parcel of land being the NW 1/4 SE 1/4 of Section 5, T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the South 1/4 corner of said Section 5, a point marked by a brass cap; thence along the North-South center of section line of said Section 5 North 0°27'15" East 1312.52 feet to the Southwest corner of the said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 00_27115" East 1312.52 feet to the Northwest corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the North line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 South 89°40'20" East 1324.78 feet to the Northeast corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the East line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 South 0030147" West 1310.88 feet to the Southeast corner of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, marked by a 5/8" iron pin; thence along the South line of said NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 North 89044136" West 1323.43 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4 Residential; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 1 Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for annexation and zoning. Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de - annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant is required to connect to the 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, 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 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 and other matters. 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, and 11-9-6,05 M. which pertains -to the tiling of ditches and waterways, e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns.. f. 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 if Applicant shall fail to meet the above conditions the property shall be subject to de -annexation, which conditions subsequent shall run with land and also be personal to the owner and Applicant. Section 4. 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 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 2 within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Amended Ordinance. Section 5. 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. PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of August, 1995. APPROVED: MAYOR -- GRANT P. KINGSFORD ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. -- CITY -CLERK STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, I, WILLIAM BERG, 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 PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE NW 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 5, T.3N., R.lE., B.M. ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.", passed as Ordinance No. 709 , by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the day of August, 1995, as the same appears in my office. DATED this day of August, 1995. City Clerk, City of Meridian Ada -County, Idaho ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 3 STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) On this th day of August, 1995, 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. SEAL Notary Public for Idaho Residing at Meridian, Idaho ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - PACKARD Page 4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JUNE 20 1995 APPLICANT PNEIEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ITEM NUMBER; 12 REQUEST; PUBLIC HEARING• REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 39.87 ACRES TO R-4 FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: MINUTES FROM 4-11-95 P8Z MEETING CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONLUSIONS 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: OTHER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 23 conclusions of law (inaudible) Rountree: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this application, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION, 126 LOTS BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: This is Packard No. 1, 1 will now open the public hearing. Would the applicant like to address the Commission, you need to be sworn again, it is a new public hearing. Ted Hutchinson, 109 South 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, now we are to the meat of the annexation parcel. We are proposing to subdivide the parcel which we were just discussing the annexation on. This is a residential development we are proposing R-4 the lot sizes in this development are 8,000 square feet and larger. As indicated in the prior public hearing a number of the lots we have it broken out on this particular diagram, again from 8,000 to 10,000 square feet, from 10,000 to 15,000 square feet and then from 15,000 to on up. This includes the open space areas, in this particular proposal there is landscaped entry ways, and as you come in it would be on both sides of Hickory Way with an open area as soon as you got into the development. Then there are drainage lots and a couple of small open space lots within the development. Then we are proposing as well a landscaped easement that will affect all of the lots within the development so that there will be a 15 foot wide landscape easement which will contain street trees, and additional landscape treatment as well as entryway treatment for each of the individual lots. Mr. Richard Pavelic is here tonight as a consultant on this, he has done the landscape layout proposal to give you an example of what we are proposing for this particular development to move this development into an upper scale better than moderate price development for the City of Meridian. Again, the issues that have risen concerning the sewer. This particular development standing by itself would use a temporary lift station, however we have picked up additional properties and that property will be coming to you as Packard subdivision No. 2 and we have provided a copy of that plat to you, I believe that is in your packets. We picked up the Borup property which is immediately adjacent to north or our property which lies between the Sharp property and is adjacent to Carol Subdivision on the west side. We then picked up the Brown property which the annexation request has already been submitted on the Brown property it was tabled pending the development Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 26 circumstances where you probably would need some privacy and those areas we would be looking at conifers of mixed types. Rountree: Going back to the drawing, (inaudible) you have considerable effort in layout of the landscaping, but the upper most lot there we run into situations where somebody is going to want to build a fence on that lot at some point in time in the future. If you would incorporate that into your concept it would be helpful for the City so we don't have to look at variances and safety situations and that sort of thing. Pavelic: I thought I had mentioned it, and maybe I didn't, in the package that would go as part of the provision of the covenants and restrictive covenants would be a community or neighborhood wide fence (inaudible) cover those issues. Hepper: Did you say that the developer would provide the trees for the Pavelic: We are looking at the developer taking the responsibility for the street trees and they would be a random planting more or less and try to group them along the street. Hepper: That type of configuration, would that be throughout the subdivision not just in the entry way? Pavelic: Yes (End of Tape) Sharp: I would like them to show those drawings so that those in the audience know just exactly where they are talking about this development. Johnson: This is a separate public hearing Wayne, doesn't she have to be sworn again? Crookston: I'm sorry she does. Helen Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I would like to see that these, I think some of us are a little confused as to just exactly where this is. I couldn't help but think of the little anecdote if you show a child a shiny penny he will overlook that dull quarter and that is what I think we are looking at now. You can put all the beautiful trees and all that you like we still have a subdivision and we don't really need it. What it amounts to he is saying we don't jeopardize Wingate Lane or the access for the Sharp's, that is me at the end of the lane. They have easements along the lane (inaudible) when they approached us about buying some of the property, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 27 it did cross and it zig-zagged. They wanted to put trees at the end of the lane so they could down the lane, if we have access from our end of the lane down to the end of the land would that not give everybody on the lane access to Wingate Lane too. We have been told by several people that who did or did not sell on the lane and we find out they did not. We were getting conflicting stories from developers and (inaudible). If you open the door and give them what they want then they could do what they want with the next piece which is the Borup's (inaudible) sewer again. They don't have that yet, they don't have it and they are still talking about a temporary lift station, are they talking 6 months or 6 years or 60 years. I think we need to get something in concrete and I think like I say we are showing a shiny penny to overlook that dull quarter. Johnson: Well I know now why I came home from Grandma's house with shiny pennys in my pocket, I never figured it out before, now I know why. My whole life is a dull quarter. Let's display those drawings over there as best we can so the public can see them. Doug Miller, 1035 Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: One of the concerns I have that I think has already been brought up but I would like to reinforce it is it appears to me that we have very much a piece meal planning process. Case in point is my property apparently bounds on both of these developments, both of these proposals being discussed under 9 and 10. 1 have seen no information about the one which is directly west of my property and that is part of the reason we have had some confusing testimony here because we are not clear on how these things connect. Johnson: Let me clarify something for you that might help you a little bit. We don't actually have anything on that piece of property directly to your west, but what we do have in our application is a requirement that if they are aware of any development or any pending development that is adjacent or contiguous to an application then they are to disclose that to us. Because we want to know what the ramifications are and the proximity of a specific application. So you are right in what you say, but on the other hand they are following our guideline mentioning what is down the road perhaps. Does that kind of help you a little bit? Miller: It helps a little bit but I think the issue is still there. Johnson: It is 2 separate applications, that is the distinction you need to make. Right now we are looking at the one that is south of your property. Miller: And what is planned for the one west of the property. I keep hearing references to that sewer connection, road connection, irrigation connection. I think it reinforces the point that we need to see a big picture both in terms of planning for the sewer, planning for the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 28 egress and ingress out of these properties, planning for the irrigation right of ways that go through there. It is very confusing to us to even respond to these kind of applications when we don't see how they connect. I think we have a lot of references that are potentially going to happen and connections here. It seems to me it would make a lot more sense if we try to plan them all in sort of a group. Because there are a lot of contingencies that I am hearing, both in the connection of the roads, connections of the sewers, how it affects people's right of ways on private lanes. I would suggest that the approval of one piece which is contingent on too many future pieces is not a wise thing to do. I think I agree with a lot of the comments that have been said is that we are making decisions in a piece meal way and we are going to pay for it in the long term. Johnson: That is kind of a definition of Planning and Zoning, is piece meal. Miller: But does it need to be? Johnson: Yes it does because we are not Brigham Young, we don't have that luxury of planning a whole city at once. Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Brian: Since this is concerning a preliminary plat I would like to bring up the ditches again and make sure they are tiled with the project or before the project and it doesn't get caught up in different phasing like has happened at Dove Meadows which we have lost the final phase of Dove Meadows and the ditches are still open and a mess. This property, the ditch, my water feed, if I can step over to the map. My live water comes from this border all the way (inaudible) perimeter. I would like to see that all get taken care of before they do the whole project or with phase 1. So they don't do phase 1 and have a nice entry here, is this the entry at the comer? Where is my head gate? (Inaudible) Like I stated I would like to see that all get tiled at the initiation of the project so that is taken care of and we don't have to deal with it later, 2 years down the road when they do phase 3 or 4 or whatever. Johnson: You made reference to losing the last phase of Dove Meadows, could you elaborate on that? Brian: Dove Meadows development went in 2 years ago, it started through Planning and Zoning 2 years ago and is going in 3 phases or 2 phases. They have done phase 1, the final phase is where my ditch comes in which they are required to bury all the ditches that cross their property. They have not buried that ditch because it is in the final phase, well that final phase of that project ran out of time. They have lost the final plat, so it has to go through again. So nothing is being done with my ditch out there and it is an ongoing Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 29 problem. We have had meetings down here at City Hall concerning that very thing what we need to do. As they develop these properties they wait until the certain phase to bury these ditches so you have problems with those ditches and no man's land that no one takes care of them unless you pursue the developer to make sure they are cleaned and taken care of which is a hassle in itself and then when you get that many developers down the line I have to find 4 or 5 different people to get the ditches cleaned. If they go in before the development starts and do that ground work first and get it out of the way then they don't have to wont' about me coming here and (inaudible). That is all I need to bring up, any questions? Johnson: Any questions for Mr. Brian? Thanks Don, anyone else? Jon Barnes, 1034 Justin Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Barnes: I am just a developer and I can't read 9 and 10 and I don't want to be redundant. I would just recommend approval, I would suggest, I like all the landscape treatment that they are doing but I would strongly encourage the developer to put a larger kind of a park like an acre park in there. I would like to have them held to a 30 foot rear yard setback on those lots that boundary us on the north there, those deep 140 lots and a fence on the north side. I encourage you to do this, thank you. Johnson: Thanks Jon Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Sharp: I would recommend that they disapprove this (inaudible) we don't have the sewer accessibility, we don't have the access down Wingate Lane. And what they proposed to us and they came and talked to us and they came and talked to me and i have the chart right at home what they said. They said they wanted to come from Hickory Lane across and over Wingate Lane and block me off there. As far as, how are you going to stop those people from in these subdivisions from going down Wingate Lane are you going to fence them off or are you going to put berms and fences up there and stop that, well they should. Shearer: Is Wingate paved? Johnson: No it is a gravel road. Shearer: I doubt anybody is going to drive up a gravel road when they have a paved one. Sharp: I disagree with you there, I live there and they do drive up that gravel road. We would like to have 30 foot setbacks on these lots down closer to us too. Just because they Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission April 11, 1995 Page 30 live in (inaudible) doesn't mean they should have any more rights than what we do. I know that Jon is a developer and of course (inaudible) as far as that goes I just think (inaudible) schools to support the subdivisions like this and so I recommend (inaudible). Johnson: Thank you, I saw a hand over here. Craig Thompson, 2950 Wingate Lane, was sworn by the City Attorney. Thompson: First of all I have been here for awhile, I have been trying to understand what is happening and I am completely confused. We are involved with this we live on Wingate Lane and when they say it is going to make Wingate Lane accessible to the Sharp's how are they going to do that, are they going to build an overpass over Wingate Lane. If they intersect it we are vulnerable because the traffic is going to pass there. We pay for the road, we pay for the gravel that goes on it and I really don't want anybody else to drive on it except the ones that live there. They mentioned about bringing trees in and rock this and that and I like it just the way it is. I just hope that they leave it that way. Thank you. Johnson: Thanks Craig, anyone else? Anybody have any other questions of the Developer? Wayne, can we act on this or should this item be tabled until we handle No. 9? Crookston: It should be tabled until you have acted on #9. Johnson: We needed to take the testimony and at this point we really need to table the item don't we. Hepper: I have a question for the developer, the park issue was brought up. I was just wondering originally there was a lot of park area designated in this and I guess we are little bit sensitive. There was so much there the first time and now there isn't any. What is the feasibility of having a small neighborhood park in the area, is there any particular reason why there couldn't be or shouldn't be? Hutchinson: Mr. Hepper, as I indicated earlier in fact we have no net gain in the number of lots, in fact we lost a couple of lots in the design. Part of the reason that the land was taken up is the new configuration of the streets it doesn't lend itself really to that large of a park area and still be able to yield a development that is going to be economical for total development. We have looked a couple of designs, we have toyed with working this out whether or not we can get a couple of smaller pocket parks within the development. We will have to sit down with the developer and see if there is a proposal in there that might work. We recognize the need for open area for the people in the development. We were a little dismayed at the response to our previous development proposal when we did get OFFICIALS 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 S. STILES, P It Z Adm. 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 a FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: (Supplemental) To: Mayor, City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Re: PACKARD SUBDIVISION (Annexation and Zoning) COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAXYERRINGTON ROBERT 0. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW P 3 Z COMMISSION JIM JOHNSON, Chairman MOE ALIDJANI JIM SHEARER CHARLIE ROUNTREE TIM HEPPER June 15, 1995 I have reviewed this submittal and offer the following supplemental comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: We have been receiving quite a few complaints of low water pressure from residents in various parts of the City. Also, our water system has not been able to supply required flows to fire sprinkler systems in some recent commercial developments. These developments have had to install a pressure booster pump in their line in order to meet required fire sprinkler flows. In light of these problems we don't feel comfortable adding more demand to our already taxed water system, and we respectfully request that this application be tabled until such time as we have the problems better defined and a clear plan of action in place. C: \WPW IN60\GF.NERAL\PACKARDI . C -C OFFICIALS 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. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney MEMORANDUM: To: From: Re: 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning April 6, 1995 Annexation and Zoning of R-4 with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision by PNE/Edmonds Construction We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-104A. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and profile the subsurface soil conditions. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 5. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. 6. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 7. Coordinate the fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 8. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ANNEXATION AND ZONING NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 5, T. 3N. R. 1E. B. 4. ADA COUNTY IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on April 11, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing through Ted Hutchinson, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for April 11, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the April 11, 1995, 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. 2. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is 39.87 acres in size; it is located between Locust Grove Road and Meridian Road and between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road; surrounding subdivisions are Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, Kearney Place Subdivision, Chateau Meadows Subdivision, which are in the City of Meridian, and Carol Subdivision, which is not in the City; the South Slough, also known as the Finch Lateral, runs along the North boundary of the proposed subdivision. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County RT (Rural Transition) and the proposed use is requested to be for R-4 Residential development. 4. Most of the general area surrounding the property is either developed or is proposed to be developed. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant is shown on the subdivision application to be the owner of record of the property. 7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property is for one house and for agricultural uses; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property is for an COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW page - 2 use with lots ranging from 8,000 to over R-4 type subdivision 18,000 square feet; that the Applicant did submit a request for approval of a subdivision plat at the time of submitting the application for annexation. That after the public testified the Applicant, through Ted Hutchinson, stated that Wingate Lane would not be affected by this development and it was not their proposal to utilize Wingate Lane, he explained the situation with larger lots being next to Carol Subdivision but not next to the lots where the Sharps and others live, that the developer would like to extend the South Slough sewer to serve the development but they will have to use temporary lift stations. He also stated that the irrigation water would be protected. 10. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: a. Helen Sharp testified that there were already difficulties with lgr, that the density was already too high in Meridian and that there was no need for additional houses, that there were water drainage problems that need to be addressed, and that she was apposed to the high density. b. Jon Barnes testified that the redesign of the subdivision was much improved, that he understood that there was going to be a 30 foot setback on the lots next to his in Carol Subdivision when the lots are already 140 deep, that he would like a fence between the new homes and Carol Subdivision and that a neighborhood park would be nice. c. Vern Alleman testified that his concern was over parks and that not enough of them are provided in developments, that impact fees are possibly the best and fairest solution to need created by additional development, and his additional concern was the use of lift stations for sewers. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 33 d. Douglas Miller testified that he was concerned about privacy, that the idea of berms, fences and setbacks was very good, that the density was fairly high in regard to the other areas where people had already built, and that the design was much improved. e . Dale Sharp stated that she was opposed to the subdivision because of the school and traffic problems; that he did not want Wingate Lane cut off; he questioned where the sewer was going to come from; that he had the same problems as Mr. Barnes, but nothing was being done for him and his land. f. Bob Golse testified that he questioned by such high density would be allowed with only two accesses and that there would be too many cars coming in and out of the subdivision for the limited access. g. Don Bryan testified that he was concerned with the irrigation water, that he wanted know what was going to be done with the head gate on southwest corner, which is his headgate and it needed to be addressed in this development. h. John Schey testified that he was in agreement with the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Sharp and that he was concerned about the traffic and stated that the subdivision did not have sufficient access. 11. That the property is in an area marked on the Generalized Land Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family residential area; that in the Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per acre. 12. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. 13. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. 14. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines and constructs and installs necessary equipment and facilities. 15. The Assistant to the Meridian City Engineer and Meridian City Planner did submit comments and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. That some of the comments of the Meridian Planning Director were that perimeter fencing is required prior to construction; that a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation; that the previous plat showed a 5 -acre park but the subdivision was redesigned with some small "pocket" parks; that there is no school capacity to serve the subdivision; that some block lengths exceed 1,000 feet; that pedestrian walkways will be required from Chandra through to Meadow Wood Court with a lighting system; and that frontage on several lots does not meet the 80 foot minimum requirement for R-4. 16. That the Assistant to the City Engineer commented and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that some of the general comments were that any existing irrigation ditches crossing the property shall be tiled; that the high seasonal ground water needed to be established; that water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis; that sidewalks to meet City ordinance must be constructed; that perimeter fencing is required prior to obtaining building permits; existing wells and/or septic systems will have to be removed and that the wells may be COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 used .for non-domestic and irrigation purposes; determine high seasonal ground water; provide sidewalks in accordance with Meridian ordinance; the preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by a land surveyor. That the site specific comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, some of which were that the legal description does not follow the boundaries of adjacent plats and correction needs to be made; that a temporary sewer lift station will need to be installed; and that a master street drainage plan needed to be submitted. 17. That the Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire and Police Departments, Meridian School District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Central District Health Department, and other agencies submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows: R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only Single Family Dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential Development and public schools. The purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of -residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four ( 4 ) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square feet to be included in houses in that zone. 19. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows: "Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-family, multi -family, town houses, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities." 20. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows: "Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided . 21. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows: "Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan." 22. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Housing, Housing Policies, at page 66, it states as follows: "1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes, multi -family, town houses arrangements), ." "1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background." 1'1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged." 23. That there is a population influx into the City of Meridian at the present time which has been going on for some time and is likely to continue; that the land is relatively close to Meridian and economic conditions are making it difficult to COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 continue farming in the area. 24. That the City Engineer has previously submitted comment in different applications that a determination of ground water level and subsurface soil conditions should be made; that such a comment is equally applicable to this Application. 25. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning in this area the Zoning Administrator has commented that annexation should be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park site to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an approved development agreement. 26. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 27. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 28. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide." 29. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 30. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 31. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 9 "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi - improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 32. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 33. That Section 11-9-605 M, PIPING OF DITCHES states, in part, as follows: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 10 34. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That 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 Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That 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. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 11 the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, PNE/Edmonds Construction, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land, if annexed, 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, Piping of Ditches, and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation; that the Applicant would be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the development of the property would be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance; that, as a condition of annexation the Applicant is 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 the inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, M, and prior comments of the previous Planning Director, Wayne Forrey, relating to the lack of adequate recreation facilities and that land set aside for a future park would be desirable, that the City is in need of land set -asides for future public service use; that the development agreement shall, as a condition of annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 12 executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City; that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be subject to de - annexation and loss of City services, if the requirements of this paragraph are not met. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property has not been shown and the Applicant must work to obtain better access. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in an area marked as a single family residential area, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with --.ie Rural Areas policies; however, there are very large lots in the Wingate Lane area and in Carol Subdivision and they shall be buffered by the Applicant and the subdivision covenants shall let the home owners in the proposed subdivision know that those lots are there and that the buffering must remain; that this matter shall be addressed in the development agreement. 12. That the development of R-4 as suggested by the Applicant would be compatible to the homes across Wingate Lane and in Carol Subdivision if they are buffered as required above; that R-4 development would be compatible with the lots and homes in Chateau Meadows, Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, and Kearney Place Subdivision. 13. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and evidence, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Paste - 13 Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned and the zoning of the property should be R-4 Residential; that the conditions would be those stated above if the property is eventually annexed and zoned; that the annexation would be orderly development and reasonable if the necessary buffering is completed between this subdivision and the lots in the Wingate area and in Carol Subdivision; that the property shall be subject to de -annexation if the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not met. 14. That it is concluded that a fence should be placed along Wingate Lane to prevent home owners on this land from gaining access to Wingate Lane, particularly because it is a private lane, until . 15. That the South Slough runs along the north boundary of the property, and as a condition of annexation the South Slough must be landscaped to fit into other improvements that have been made along the slough with a pedestrian and bike path or it must be tiled; that the South Slough shall be addressed in the development agreement. 16. That all ditches, canals, and waterways required to be tiled by City Ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 17. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 18. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property should not annexed. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 14 19. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) RECOMMENDATION VOTED VOTEDfA �� VOTED VOTED VOTED / The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the Application for annexation and zoning be granted under the terms and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law and any other requirements set by the City Council; if the Applicant shall not meet these conditions, the Application shall be denied or the land shall be de -annexed. MOTION: APPROVED DISAPPROVED: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 15 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, CIC WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT *"'POLICE 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RE TION(PRELIM &�INAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: - YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CCPRIE GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer WALT" MORROW BRUCE D. STUART. Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. Planner & Zoning Admmistrato, KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM JOHNSON W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 •FAX (208) 887813 Chairman Planning & Zen,ng WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, CIC WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT *POLICE DEPARTMENT *"'POLICE 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RE TION(PRELIM &�INAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: - YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preli mi nark Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: N L) T' A. i /l.P- to -9- w %t- OFF -Or- C h A,v (y l; ,4 4-) M i s COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA LLIAM G. BERG, City Clerk JAIN MASS C CityTreasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN RINGTON MAX R D. CORRIE Engineer GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer Y D. W., WALT MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. Planner & Zoning Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL'' GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON Chairman � Planning & Zomnc WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preli mi nark Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: N L) T' A. i /l.P- to -9- w %t- OFF -Or- C h A,v (y l; ,4 4-) M i s �Li APR I U TF5 C11 1 04 JAMES E. BRUCE, President SHERRY R. HUBER, Vice President SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, Secretary TO: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION 3131 LANARK STREET MERIDIAN, ID 83642 FROM: Karen Gallagher, C i at Development Servic ' si n SUBJECT: PACKARD- PRELIMINAR April 6, 1995 On APRIL 5, 1995, the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District (hereafter called "District") took action on the Preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report. In order that the Final Plat may be considered by the District for acceptance, the Developer shall cause the following applicable standard conditions to be satisfied prior to District certification and endorsement: 1. Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District. 2. If public street improvements are required: Prior to any construction within the existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the District: a. Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by an Idaho Registered Professional Engineer, together with payment of plan review fee. b. Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services. C. Complete all street improvements to the satisfaction of the District, or execute Surety Agreement between the Developer and the District to guarantee the completion of construction of all street improvements. ada county highway district 318 East 37th 9 Boise, Idaho 83714 • Phone (208) 345-7680 April 6, 1995 Page 2 3. Furnish copy of Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local Government Agency having such authority together with payment of fee charged for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs, as required. 4. If Public Rights -of -Way Trust Find deposit is required, make deposit to the District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the District. 5. Furnish easements, agreements, and all other datum or documents as required by the District. 6. Furnish Final Plat drawings for District acceptance, certifications, and endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement of the Owner's and Land Surveyor's certification. 7. Approval of the plat is valid for one year. An extension of one year will be considered by the Commission if requested within 15 -days prior to the expiration date. Please contact me at 345-7680, should you have any questions. KG cc: Development Services Chron John Edney TEALEY'S LAND SURVEY CITY OF MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat and Annexation - Packard Meridian Packard is a 126 -lot residential subdivision on 39.9 -acres. The site is located 1/4 -mile north of Fairview Avenue and 1/4 -mile west of Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 1204 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development are: FAIRVIEW AVENUE - Arterial street with a bike lane designation - Traffic count 16,470 in 1990 EAGLE ROAD - ITD jurisdiction - Arterial street - Traffic count 12,000 from traffic study (350 trips will be added) HICKORY AVENUE - Collector street with no pathway designation (1,200 trips added) ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 USTICK RD. I SI TE o I pE Cy- I q W TAZ 265 TAZ 144 Z Q / j� W � I � J FEE LLJ DOVE DDWS IVI SUBD FAIRVIEW AVE I z TREASURE VALLEY BUSINESS >.- PARK 0 0 TAZ 145 I I- I I - - - - - TAZ 266 - - - - - - - PINE ST. I I FRANKLIN RD. ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 °/` k!2 2 !§» -_u_ ans 3lV3.L No: AMEL allYMDyd w § do:V-ld3 § UJ \ Z It (}!�§ � f j � � a �l;;■!■; ! �j§§ E / :§a§ ® * - � £ :2 ■,� _ ■ ! i ��� � ®� ƒ7` - §§ °/` k!2 2 !§» Zi § UJ \ § $ ( It (}!�§ � � 7 g�■ ��� � ��� � Facts and Findings: A. General Information R-4 - Zoning 126 - Lots 39.9 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Hickory Avenue Collector with no pathway designation 60 -feet of frontage on the future right-of-way that has been approved as a preliminary plat 60 -feet of right-of-way to be platted (30 -feet from centerline) 60 -feet required right-of-way for the extension of Hickory Avenue (30 -feet from centerline) Hickory Avenue is improved with a 41 -feet street section south of the site; the improvements do not reach the site, but will with the completion of a later phase of Dove Meadows. B. This is a modification to the original preliminary plat submittal. No action was taken on the original submittal. Staff has had several meetings with the representatives of this subdivision to discuss stub streets and traffic flow. Staff supports the stub streets as proposed. C. A traffic study was submitted and review for this subdivision. The traffic study was completed for 135 residential lots; the number of lots has been reduced to 126 buildable lots. D. Staff recommends that Hickory Avenue continue as a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with a 60 -foot right-of-way from the south boundary to the first internal intersection. Direct lot access to Hickory Avenue will be restricted. The preliminary plat shows Hickory Avenue with 60 -feet of right-of-way with a landscaped median. Both travel lanes of Hickory Avenue should maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet between backs of curbs. E. Staff can accept culdesacs having a 29 -foot street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and a 42 -foot right-of-way for those culdesacs generating less than 200 -trips per day. The 29 -foot street section restricts parking on one side. Staff discussed the 29 -foot street section with the applicant and supports the reduced street section on two of the culdesacs, Chandra Way and Mindy Place, since the loss of parking on one side of the street would directly effect only one lot in each of those cases. F. Unless otherwise specified, staff recommends that all internal local streets be constructed as Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 2 37 -foot street sections and 4 -foot minimum (5 -foot required by Meridian) with a 40 -foot right-of-way. G. Several curves are shown the preliminary plat with radii less than 100 -feet. If the turn or curve is a right-angle a lesser radii can be accepted. Staff recommends that the streets be modified to maintain a minimum radii of 100 -feet unless the curve delta is at or near a right- angle. H. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shown are deep enough that a median island should be required to focus traffic. A minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb is necessary. There are four stub streets proposed in this subdivision, one in each direction. The northern and eastern stub streets extend into undeveloped land. No additional stub streets are being proposed or recommended by staff to the south since the property to the south is 25 acres of property held in contiguous ownership by the Capitol Christian Center Inc. and can be accessed from Hickory Avenue to the south. A residential collector road (41 -foot street section with no direct lots access) is anticipated to be extended from Eagle Road to Chandra Way when the intervening property is developed. K. Staff recommends that only the 126 -lots of Packard Subdivision be approved in this area until additional streets are constructed that connect to the other three stub streets and eventually to arterials. Development of more lots than this will cause the generation of traffic in excess of that allowed on a residential collectors (Hickory Avenue) by District Policy. L. A portion of the funds allocated to Ada County Highway District from the Highway Distribution Account are predicated on the number of improved road miles (under the District's jurisdiction) that are located outside the limits of any incorporated city. Consequently, annexation of subject lands will adversely affect a major revenue base of the District without any compatible decrease in the District's responsibility to continue to maintain those public roadways located within the annexation area. M. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 11, 1995. The following requirements are provided to Meridian City as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Construct Hickory Avenue to a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 3 a 60 -foot right-of-way. If a landscaped median is constructed, maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet from back of curb on both sides of the median. 2. Direct lot or parcel access to Hickory Avenue is prohibited, in compliance with District policy. Lot access restrictions shall be stated on the final plat. 3. The District will not sign the final plat for any part of this subdivision until the adjacent street system that it connects to, Hickory Avenue, becomes part of the public street system. 4. Construct all other internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot (Meridian width requirement) and a 50 -foot right-of-way. , 5. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services Division. 6. All landscaped medians shall be separate platted lots owned and maintained by a homeowners association. 7. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves having other than 90 -degree angles of deflection. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 3. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 4. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 4 Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public. 6. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. Purchase street nave signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff. 7. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no obstruction higher than 36 -inches will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street construction plans of these restrictions. 8. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 9. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel. 10. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required). 11. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system. 12. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with District standards and policies. 13. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 14. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 5 ACHD . 15. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff Submitting Date Co i sion A ---oval: APR p 5 199b Karen Gallagher Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 6 SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SHEET ii - Y! TT":': 3", w s - APR 10 15955 CITY O IA"ERIDIA?.4 Proposed Development Name PACKARD SUB City MERIDIAN Date Reviewed 3/30/95 Preliminary Stage XXXXX Final Engineer/Developer Tealey's Land Surveying / PNE & Edmonds Contruction The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance. The following existing street names shall appear on the plat as: "N. HICKORY WAY" "E. MEADOW WOOD COURT" "E. CHATEAU DRIVE" "N. JUSTIN WAY" "BISON" is a duplication and therefore cannot be used. "SWEETGRASS" is reserved for another subdivision and cannot be used unless it is in alignment. "MINDY" sound too much like MENDI and therefore cannot be used. "CHANDRA" sounds too much like SANDRA and therefore cannot be used. "NIKKI" sound too much like DICKY and therefore cannot be used. Please choose 5 new street names and have them approved by the street name committee. Thle 8b^v8 s,rcet no.me vvmeimits have ~GG.^I read and approved 1v0 the f0!n!oti.,',ny agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee i2 order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTE�IGENCI'FjtPR�SENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Ada County Engineer John Priester Date ,['�Y Ada Planning Assoc. Terri Raynor Date 3 3G Meridian Fire District Representative Date 3 ?� NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the time or" signing the "final plat", otherwise the plat will not be signed !!!! Subindex Street Index NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOC e_Am_ owns_ LL , | 2 .■|§�� .wsL o. _ a."NOy , / _ In,. YNI_I-la ud o (Y e|\ $ ® !�l »||||,|< ■ , { g k 7 0_ Oda E ; & . • i B§\. ■� QQ of:® Jf IWW ■--e 2||�■ @| . OFFICIALS 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. KENNY 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CCPRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zonmg fr-a sir NMOPA & M"I7 11 i;niY , TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVEMPI MUMI jOJECTS 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR =NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation POLICE DEPARTMENT District's Stokesberry Lateral courses along the north CITY ATTORNEY boundary of the project. The right—of—way of the Stokes— CITY ENGINEER berry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each CITY PLANNER way. See Idaho Code 42-1208--RIGHTS—OF—WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John Anderson or Bill Henson at 466-0663 or 345-2431 for approval before any encroachment or change of right—of—way occurs. This District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must reviewdrainage plans. It is recommended 2th-atirrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. r "-,/ 4-.5,0� Bill Henson, Assistant Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 30 March 1995 Tealey's Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, ID 83702 i 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision Dear Tealey's: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. You were previously sent a complete packet of information concerning Land Use Change, urban irrigation, and exclusion. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent PNE/Edmonds Construction ✓City of Meridian enc. APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 SETTLERS' IRRIGATION DISTRICT P.O. BOX 7571 • BOISE, IDAHO 63707 PHONE 344-2471 MAS? 2 7 112,`15 C1 t I V1t- March 22, 1995 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 33 E Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: The above referenced subdivision lies within the Settlers Irrigation District; however, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District delivers the water for us. We are pleased to see that this development will comply with Settlers' policy by providing a pressurized irrigation system for the homeowners. If you have any questions, please phone me at 343-5271. Sincerely, � v Troy L. ' shaw, Manager Settlers Irrigation District TLU/vrk RPR -04-95 TUE 04:10 PM i DRHU PwK SrcvL ---------- o-«<---HUB HUBOF TREASC/RE VALLEY OFFICIAL15 A Good Place to Live WILLIAM G. BERG. JR.. City Clark CITY OF MERIDIAN GARY 0 SMITH, P.EYCity Engineer BRUCE 0. STUART, Waler Worke 3UDt. 33 BAST IDAHO JOHN T, SHAWCROFT. Waata WalersuDt. KENNY W.BOWEFIS, File Cnlel MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Polite Cn181 WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JA.. Attorney Phone (208) 8884433 • FAX (208) 887.4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887.2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSM^ MAX YEAAINGTOH ROBERT 0 COAAIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner8 Zoning Asmmiyua or JIM JOHNSON Cnsirman • Planning A Zoning 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3120195 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary/ Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, CIC _BOB CORRIE, C/C ,WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C _WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT `POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. Tim Adams Idaho Power 322-2047 APR 04 '95 17:00 2083222032 PAGE.03 ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat and Annexation - Packard Meridian Packard is a 126 -lot residential subdivision on 39.9 -acres. The site is located 1/4 -mile north of Fairview Avenue and 1/4 -mile west of Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 1204 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development are: FAIRVIEW AVENUE - Arterial street with a bike lane designation - Traffic count 16,470 in 1990 EAGLE ROAD - ITD jurisdiction - Arterial street - Traffic count 12,000 from traffic study (350 trips will be added) HICKORY AVENUE - Collector street with no pathway designation (1,200 trips added) Issues to be addressed are: 1. Right-of-way requirements 2. Road improvements 3. Medians needed in knuckles or bulbs packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 USTICK RD. — ' SI TE o i a c I 4 Z 1 tr,J TAZ 265 pC TAZ 144 11J DOVE DOws (T SUBDIVI Lu FAIRVIEW AVE I � TREASURE VALLEY V BUSINESS > PARK 0 O TAZ 145 x — — PINE ST— — I TAZ 266 I FRANKLIN RD. packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 1 ! }§\ _ISI mGEI" a (IH YIIDy a . .40LV-ld,lH Vt,11Vqn3Hd �- Z ' � ® }$ \ LL �\ \ \ T��; § $ § 2 (\§ 7 / `§�§ 'It ® § i= uj §»f, ! ! \ � � _ABAu_ ens _Y1 ~\/ 1 mo J _ISI mGEI" a (IH YIIDy a . .40LV-ld,lH Vt,11Vqn3Hd / I� Z ' � / }$ \ 1 J °`§, § T��; § § 2 (\§ / `§�§ 'It ® § i= uj §»f, §/tu icl .E/!|k~-2|I �\\§} & 7 Facts and Findings: A. General Information R-4 - Zoning 126 - Lots 39.9 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Hickory Avenue Collector with no pathway designation 60 -feet of frontage 60 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 60 -feet required right-of-way (45 -feet from centerline) Hickory Avenue is improved with a 41 -feet street section. The improvements do not reach the site, but will with the completion of a later phase of Dove Meadows. B. This is a modification to the original preliminary plat submittal. No action was taken on the original submittal. Staff has had several meetings with the representatives of this subdivision to discuss stub streets and traffic flow. Staff supports the stub streets as proposed. C. A traffic study was submitted and review for this subdivision. The traffic study was completed for 135 residential lots; the number of lots has been reduced to 126 buildable lots. D. Staff recommends that Hickory Avenue continue as a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with a 60 -foot right-of-way from the south boundary to the first internal intersection. Direct lot access will be restricted to Hickory Avenue. The preliminary plat shows Hickory Avenue with 60 -feet of right-of-way with a landscaped median in the center of it. Both travel lanes of Hickory Avenue will needed to maintain an minimum back of curb width of 21 -feet. E. Unless otherwise specified, staff recommends that all internal local streets be constructed as 37 -foot street sections and 4 -foot minimum (5 -foot required by Meridian) with a 40 -foot right-of-way. F. Several curves are shown the preliminary plat with radii less than 100 -feet. If the turn or curve is a right-angle a lesser radii can be accepted. Staff recommends that the streets be modified to maintain a minimum radii of 100 -feet unless it is a right-angle. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 2 G. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shown are deep enough that a median island is required to focus traffic. A minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb is necessary. H. There are four stub streets proposed in this subdivision, one in each direction. The northern and western stub street extend into undeveloped land. No additional stub streets are being proposed or recommended by staff to the south since the property to the south is 25 acres of property held in contiguous ownership by the Capitol Christian Center Inc. and can be accessed from Hickory Avenue to the south. A residential collector road (41 -foot street section with no direct lots access) is anticipated to be extended from Eagle Road to Chandra Way when the intervening property is developed. J. Staff recommends that only the 126 -lots of Packard Subdivision be approved in this area until additional streets are constructed that connect to the other three stub streets and eventually to arterials. Development of more lots than this will cause the generation of traffic in excess of that allowed on a residential collectors (Hickory Avenue) by District Policy. K. A portion of the funds allocated to Ada County Highway District from the Highway Distribution Account are predicated on the number of improved road miles (under the District's jurisdiction) that are located outside the limits of any incorporated city. Consequently, annexation of subject lands will adversely affect a major revenue base of the District without any compatible decrease in the District's responsibility to continue to maintain those public roadways located within the annexation area. L. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 11, 1995. The following requirements are provided to Meridian City as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: 1. Construct Hickory Avenue to a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and a 60 -foot right-of-way. If a landscaped median is constructed, maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet from back of curb to back of curb in each direction. 2. Direct lot or parcel access to Hickory Avenue is prohibited, in compliance with District policy. Lot access restrictions shall be stated on the final plat. 3. The District will not sign the final plat for any part of this subdivision until the adjacent street system that it connects to, Hickory Avenue, becomes part of the public street system. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 3 4. Construct all other internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot (Meridian width requirement) and a 50 -foot right-of-way. 5. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services Division. 6. All landscaped medians shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. 7. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves other than 90 -degree corners. Standard Requirements: A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 3. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 4. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public. 6. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. Purchase street nave signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 4 7. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no obstruction higher than 36 -inches will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street construction plans of these restrictions. 8. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 9. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel. 10. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required). 11. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system. 12. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with District standards and policies. 13. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 14. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by ACHD. 15. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff Submitting Date of Commission Approval: Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 5 Karen Gallagher Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 6 June 9, 1995 TEALEY'S LAND 109 South 41" Street Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Gary Smith, City Engineer City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian Id 83642 RE: Comments and Conditions for Packard Subdivision #1 Dear Mr. Smith, RECEIVED JUN 0 9 1995 MERIDIAN CITY ENGBJEER Thank you for taking time on June 6, 1995, to meet with us regarding the Packard Subdivision #1 proposal. I apologize for the delay of these responses as I was unaware of your new policy requiring written response to your subdivision comments. On April 6, 1995, Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles sent a memorandum to the Mayor, City Council, and Planning and Zoning, concerning Packard Subdivision #1. Regarding those "General Comments," we offer the following: 1 As required by City Ordinance 11-9-605.M, irrigation/drainage ditches included in this project will be tiled. The tiling will be done under the supervision and approval of the appropriate irrigation district. 2 There are no existing domestic water wells or septic systems within this project boundary. 3 Test holes were dug on the site (6/5195) to find the seasonal high ground water elevation. 4 The developer is preparing restrictive covenants. 5 Attached is a copy of the Ada County Street Name Evaluation form and a copy of the County Engineer's letter approving the subdivision name. 6 As shown on the preliminary plat in the typical street cross-section, a five foot (5) sidewalk will be installed. Packard Subdivision #1 Project 1290 - 1 - 7 I contacted Bruce Stewart of the Meridian Water Department concerning placement of fire hydrants. The locations recommended by Mr. Stewart have been incorporated into the preliminary plat drawings and will be used in the construction drawings. 8 The preliminary plat has been stamped by a licensed surveyor. 9 A traffic study for this site was prepared and submitted to the Ada County Highway District. A copy of that report is attached. 10 There are no flood hazard areas shown on F.I.R.M. panels ##0165 or #0251 that would affect this project. 11 Location of sanitary sewer manholes will be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. Those locations will be shown on the shown on the preliminary plat. 12 All proposed or existing utilities are now shown on the preliminary plat. 13 Statements of dedications to the public are provided on the final plat. Locations of proposed easements and public streets are shown on the preliminary plat. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Public Works Department, we are providing the following responses: The contour lines on the preliminary plat are tied to an established Benchmark referenced to the southwest corner of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian. This is an elevation of 2607.14. This datum is the same datum used for the aerial photography done for the city of Meridian by J.U.B. Engineers. 2 The master street drainage plan will be prepared before the construction phase following the approval of the preliminary plat and before submitting the final plat for approval. Estimated runoff directions and locations of retention areas have been identified on the preliminary plat. 3 Location of street lights is shown on the preliminary plat. Specific locations for street lighting will be approved by the Meridian Public Works Department before installation by the developer. 4 Has your computer model for hydraulic analysis been performed to evaluate this proposal? 5 A revised legal description is attached. 6 Any plans for supplemental water supply for irrigation purposes will be submitted to your office for review and approval. Padcard Subdivision #I Project 1290 -2- 7 The Government Corners referenced in the legal description are shown on the preliminary plat. 8 Location for the temporary lift station has been identified on the preliminary plat. We will work closely with your department to ensure that the Iift station meets your criteria. 9 No response. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Planning Department, we are providing the following responses: 1 No response. 2 A minor redesign of this project has yielded two (2) smaller park/open space areas for this development. These will be private open space lots maintained by the homeowners association for use by the residents of this development. Perimeter fencing will be installed for each phase before requesting building permits. 4 A development agreement will be submitted by the developers. The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will not necessarily attend the nearest neighborhood school. 6 Few intervening streets or natural breaks occur around the boundaries of this plat. This makes long blocks necessary. The internal block lengths have been interrupted by access to the pocket parks. These accesses also provide internal pathways through the subdivision for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7 The eighty foot (80') frontage requirement has been met for all lots that are not fronting on a cul-de-sac or are not flag lots. Those lots meet the minimum standards for cul-de-sac or flag lot frontages. 8 The developer will work with the city of Meridian to protect the existing natural features along the northern boundary of this development. Most of those features are, however, not on the developer's property. But, anywhere the nature features exist on-site, protection of those features will be attempted. Otherwise, the waterway will be tiled according to City Ordinance. 9 Phase lines have been included on the preliminary plat. Packard Subdivision #1 Projed 1290 -3 - Many comments and concerns expressed by your department will be addressed as part of receiving approval for a final plat. Construction drawings, engineering, and other costly preparations are not made until after the preliminary plat is approved. Developers are hesitant to expend money for those costs if there is a possibility that their project will not be approved. However, the developer is willing to work with you and'your staff to address those items to your satisfaction. We look forward to working with you and your department in the completion of this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, please let me know. Thank you again for taking time to meet A:th us. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying B. �1-e'-10-�//� Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision #I Projed 12W -4- City of Meridian INTER -OFFICE MEMO DATE M _f 5 FROM: TO: SUBJECT: MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 13 1995 APPLICANT: PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA I TEM NUMBER: 2 REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION AGENCY 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 All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. June 9, 1995 TEALETS LAND 109 South 41' Street Boise, Idaho 83702 SURVEYING (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 Gary Smith, City Engineer City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian Id 83642 RE: Comments and Conditions for Packard Subdivision #1 Dear Mr. Smith, RECEIVED J U N 0 9 1995 MERVA N CITY ENR Thank you for taking time on June 6, 1995, to meet with us regarding the Packard Subdivision 91 proposal. I apologize for the delay of these responses as I was unaware of your new policy requiring written response to your subdivision comments. On April 6, 1995, Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles sent a memorandum to the Mayor, City Council, and Planning and Zoning, concerning Packard Subdivision #1. Regarding those "General Comments," we offer the following: 1 As required by City Ordinance 11-9-605.M, irrigation/drainage ditches included in this project will be tiled. The tiling will be done under the supervision and approval of the appropriate irrigation district. 2 There are no existing domestic water wells or septic systems within this project boundary. 3 Test holes were dug on the site (6/5/95) to find the seasonal high ground water elevation. 4 The developer is preparing restrictive covenants. 5 Attached is a copy of the Ada County Street Name Evaluation form and a copy of the County Engineer's letter approving the subdivision name. 6 As shown on the preliminary plat in the typical street cross-section, a five foot (5) sidewalk will be installed. Packard Subdivision #I Project 1290 - 1 - 7 I contacted Bruce Stewart of the Meridian Water Department concerning placement of fire hydrants. The locations recommended by Mr. Stewart have been incorporated into the preliminary plat drawings and will be used in the construction drawings. 8 The preliminary plat has been stamped by a licensed surveyor. 9 A traffic study for this site was prepared and submitted to the Ada County Highway District. A copy of that report is attached. 10 There are no flood hazard areas shown on F.I.R.M. panels #0 or #0251 that would affect this project. 11 Location of sanitary sewer manholes will be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. Those locations will be shown on the shown on the preliminary plat. 12 All proposed or existing utilities are now shown on the preliminary plat. 13 Statements of dedications to the public are provided on the final plat. Locations of proposed easements and public streets are shown on the preliminary plat. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Public Works Department, we are providing the following responses: The contour lines on the preliminary plat are tied to an established Benchmark referenced to the southwest corner of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of the Boise Meridian. This is an elevation of 2607.14. This datum is the same datum used for the aerial photography done for the city of Meridian by J.U.B. Engineers. 2 The master street drainage plan will be prepared before the construction phase following the approval of the preliminary plat and before submitting the final plat for approval. Estimated runoff directions and locations of retention areas have been identified on the preliminary plat. Location of street lights is shown on the preliminary plat. Specific locations for street lighting will be approved by the Meridian Public Works Department before installation by the developer. 4 Has your computer model for hydraulic analysis been performed to evaluate this proposal? 5 A revised legal description is attached. 6 Any plans for supplemental water supply for irrigation purposes will be submitted to your office for review and approval. Packard Subdivision #I Project 1290 - 2 - 7 The Government Corners referenced in the legal description are shown on the preliminary plat. 8 Location for the temporary lift station has been identified on the preliminary plat. We will work closely with your department to ensure that the I'ift station meets your criteria. 9 No response. Regarding the "Site Specific Comments" from the Planning Department, we are providing the following responses: 1 No response. 2 A minor redesign of this project has yielded two (2) smaller park/open space areas for this development. These will be private open space lots maintained by the homeowners association for use by the residents of this development. 3 Perimeter fencing will be installed for each phase before requesting building permits. 4 A development agreement will be submitted by the developers. 5 The developers support the Meridian School District's plans for needed facilities. The developers also recognize that the children living in this subdivision will not necessarily attend the nearest neighborhood school. 6 Few intervening streets or natural breaks occur around the boundaries of this plat. This makes long blocks necessary. The internal block lengths have been interrupted by access to the pocket parks. These accesses also provide internal pathways through the subdivision for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7 The eighty foot (80') frontage requirement has been met for all lots that are not fronting on a cul-de-sac or are not flag lots. Those lots meet the minimum standards for cul-de-sac or flag lot frontages. The developer will work with the city of Meridian to protect the existing natural features along the northern boundary of this development. Most of those features are, however, not on the developer's property. But, anywhere the nature features exist on-site, protection of those features will be attempted. Otherwise, the waterway will be tiled according to City Ordinance. 9 Phase lines have been included on the preliminary plat. Packard subdivision #1 -3 Project 1290 1290 Many comments and concerns expressed by your department will be addressed as part of receiving approval for a final plat. Construction drawings, engineering, and other costly preparations are not made until after the preliminary plat is approved. Developers are hesitant to expend money for those costs if there is a possibility that their project will not be approved. However, the developer is willing to work with you and'your staff to address those items to your satisfaction. We look forward to working with you and your department in the completion of this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, please let me know. Thank you again for taking time to meet with us. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying B. 4 Ted Hutchinson Padcard Subdivision # 1 Projed 1290 ` 4 ` BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION ANNEXATION AND ZONING NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4, SECTION 5, T. 3N., R. 1E., B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on April 11, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant appearing through Ted Hutchinson, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for April 11, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the April 11, 1995, 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. 2. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 reference is incorporated herein; that the property is 39.87 acres in size; it is located between Locust Grove Road and Meridian Road and between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road; surrounding subdivisions are Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, Kearney Place Subdivision, Chateau Meadows Subdivision, which are in the City of Meridian, and Carol Subdivision, which is not in the City; the South Slough, also known as the Finch Lateral, runs along the North boundary of the proposed subdivision. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County RT (Rural Transition) and the proposed use is requested to be for R-4 Residential development. 4. Most of the general area surrounding the property is either developed or is proposed to be developed. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. The Applicant is shown on the subdivision application to be the owner of record of the property. 7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 8. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned R-4 Residential; that the present use of the property is for one house and for agricultural uses; that the applicant indicated that the intended development of the property is for an COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 2 R-4 type subdivision use with lots ranging from 8,000 to over 18,000 square feet; that the Applicant did submit a request for approval of a subdivision plat at the time of submitting the application for annexation. That after the public testified the Applicant, through Ted Hutchinson, stated that Wingate Lane would not be affected by this development and it was not their proposal to utilize Wingate Lane, he explained the situation with larger lots being next to Carol Subdivision but not next to the lots where the Sharps and others live, that the developer would like to extend the South Slough sewer to serve the development but they will have to use temporary lift stations. He also stated that the irrigation water would be protected. 10. There were several property owners in the immediate area who testified about the Application; the testimony can be summarized as follows: a. Helen Sharp testified that there were already difficulties with lgr, that the density was already too high in Meridian and that there was no need for additional houses, that there were water drainage problems that need to be addressed, and that she was apposed to the high density. b. Jon Barnes testified that the redesign of the subdivision was much improved, that he understood that there was going to be a 30 foot setback on the lots next to his in Carol Subdivision when the lots are already 140 deep, that he would like a fence between the new homes and Carol Subdivision and that a neighborhood park would be nice. C. Vern Alleman testified that his concern was over parks and that not enough of them are provided in developments, that impact fees are possibly the best and fairest solution to need created by additional development, and his additional concern was the use of lift stations for sewers. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 3 d. Douglas Miller testified that he was concerned about privacy, that the idea of berms, fences and setbacks was very good, that the density was fairly high in regard to the other areas where people had already built, and that the design was much improved. e. Dale Sharp stated that she was opposed to the subdivision because of the school and traffic problems; that he did not want Wingate Lane cut off; he questioned where the sewer was going to come from; that he had the same problems as Mr. Barnes, but nothing was being done for him and his land. f. Bob Golse testified that he questioned by such high density would be allowed with only two accesses and that there would be too many cars coming in and out of the subdivision for the limited access. g. Don Bryan testified that he was concerned with the irrigation water, that he wanted know what was going to be done with the head gate on southwest corner, which is his headgate and it needed to be addressed in this development. h. John Schey testified that he was in agreement with the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Sharp and that he was concerned about the traffic and stated that the subdivision did not have sufficient access. 11. That the property is in an area marked on the Generalized Land Use Map of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a single family residential area; that in the Comprehensive Plan property inside the Urban Service Planning Area may be developed at greater densities than one dwelling unit per acre. 12. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use, Rural Areas, Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can be provided. 13. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots. 14. That the property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer if the Applicant extends the lines and constructs and installs necessary equipment and facilities. 15. The Assistant to the Meridian City Engineer and Meridian City Planner did submit comments and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. That some of the comments of the Meridian Planning Director were that perimeter fencing is required prior to construction; that a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation; that the previous plat showed a 5 -acre park but the subdivision was redesigned with some small "pocket" parks; that there is no school capacity to serve the subdivision; that some block lengths exceed 1,000 feet; that pedestrian walkways will be required from Chandra through to Meadow Wood Court with a lighting system; and that frontage on several lots does not meet the 80 foot minimum requirement for R-4. 16. That the Assistant to the City Engineer commented and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that some of the general comments were that any existing irrigation ditches crossing the property shall be tiled; that the high seasonal ground water needed to be established; that water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis; that sidewalks to meet City ordinance must be constructed; that perimeter fencing is required prior to obtaining building permits; existing wells and/or septic systems will have to be removed and that the wells may be COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 used for non-domestic and irrigation purposes; determine high seasonal ground water; provide sidewalks in accordance with Meridian ordinance; the preliminary plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by a land surveyor. That the site specific comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, some of which were that the legal description does not follow the boundaries of adjacent plats and correction needs to be made; that a temporary sewer lift station will need to be installed; and that a master street drainage plan needed to be submitted. 17. That the Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire and Police Departments, Meridian School District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Central District Health Department, and other agencies submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 18. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3 as follows: R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only Single Family Dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for Planned Residential Development and public schools. The purpose of the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a maximum of four ( 4 ) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square feet to be included in houses in that zone. 19. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows: "Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural, single-family, multi -family, town houses, apartments, condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with a range of affordable housing opportunities." 20. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows: "Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided . 21. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use, Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows: "Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low, Medium and High density residential may be considered. All residential development must also comply with the other appropriate sections of this plan." 22. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Housing, Housing Policies, at page 66, it states as follows: "1.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile homes, multi -family, town houses arrangements), . . .if "1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background." "1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged." 23. That there is a population influx into the City of Meridian at the present time which has been going on for some time and is likely to continue; that the land is relatively close to Meridian and economic conditions are making it difficult to COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 continue farming in the area. 24. That the City Engineer has previously submitted comment in different applications that a determination of ground water level and subsurface soil conditions should be made; that such a comment is equally applicable to this Application. 25. That in prior requests for annexation and zoning in this area the Zoning Administrator has commented that annexation should be conditioned on a development agreement including an impact fee to help acquire a future school or park site to serve the area and that annexations should be subject to impact fees for park, police, and fire services as determined by the City and designated in an approved development agreement. 26. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for school services to current and future students. 27. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in the City because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 28. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101) wide." 29. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 30. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 31. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 9 "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi - improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 32. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments. 33. That Section 11-9-605 M, PIPING OF DITCHES states, in part, as follows: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 10 34. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That 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 Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho Code, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That 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. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 11 the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant, PNE/Edmonds Construction, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land, if annexed, 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, Piping of Ditches, and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation; that the Applicant would be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer; that the development of the property would be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance; that, as a condition of annexation the Applicant is 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 the inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, M, and prior comments of the previous Planning Director, Wayne Forrey, relating to the lack of adequate recreation facilities and that land set aside for a future park would be desirable, that the City is in need of land set -asides for future public service use; that the development agreement shall, as a condition of annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 12 executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City; that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be subject to de - annexation and loss of City services, if the requirements of this paragraph are not met. 10. That proper and adequate access to the property has not been shown and the Applicant must work to obtain better access. 11. That since the Applicant's property is in an area marked as a single family residential area, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies; however, there are very large lots in the Wingate Lane area and in Carol Subdivision and they shall be buffered by the Applicant and the subdivision covenants shall let the home owners in the proposed subdivision know that those lots are there and that the buffering must remain; that this matter shall be addressed in the development agreement. 12. That the development of R-4 as suggested by the Applicant would be compatible to the homes across Wingate Lane and in Carol Subdivision if they are buffered as required above; that R-4 development would be compatible with the lots and homes in Chateau Meadows, Dove Meadows, Wingate Place Subdivision, and Kearney Place Subdivision. 13. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and evidence, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 13 Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned and the zoning of the property should be R-4 Residential; that the conditions would be those stated above if the property is eventually annexed and zoned; that the annexation would be orderly development and reasonable if the necessary buffering is completed between this subdivision and the lots in the Wingate area and in Carol Subdivision; that the property shall be subject to de -annexation if the requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not met. 14. That it is concluded that a fence should be placed along Wingate Lane to prevent home owners on this land from gaining access to Wingate Lane, particularly because it is a private lane, until . 15. That the South Slough runs along the north boundary of the property, and as a condition of annexation the South Slough must be landscaped to fit into other improvements that have been made along the slough with a pedestrian and bike path or it must be tiled; that the South Slough shall be addressed in the development agreement. 16. That all ditches, canals, and waterways required to be tiled by City Ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled the property shall be subject to de -annexation. 17. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 18. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property should not annexed. COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 14 19. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER VOTED COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that the Application for annexation and zoning be granted under the terms and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law and any other requirements set by the City Council; if the Applicant shall not meet these conditions, the Application shall be denied or the land shall be de -annexed. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: COUNCIL FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 15 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: APRIL 11, 1995 APPLICANT: PNEfEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 9 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION AND ZONNG OF R-4 FOR 39.87 ACRES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY ATTORNEY: 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: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SETTLERS IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS IDAHO POWER: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning April 6, 1995 Re: Annexation and Zoning of R-4 with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision by PNE/Edmonds Construction We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-104A. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and profile the subsurface soil conditions. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 5. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. 6. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 7. Coordinate the fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 8. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor. HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City g JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineine er BRUCE 0. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning April 6, 1995 Re: Annexation and Zoning of R-4 with a Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision by PNE/Edmonds Construction We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, for your information and consideration as conditions of the Applicant during the hearing process: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. 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. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-104A. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and profile the subsurface soil conditions. 4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions. 5. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. 6. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 7. Coordinate the fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. 8. The Preliminary Plat map needs to be stamped, signed, and dated by the Land Surveyor. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 2 9. Please submit information detailing the traffic impact on existing or adjacent roadways and intersections. 10. Indicate any floodplain boundaries as determined by FEMA and measures to amend this boundary. 11. Horizontal location and spacing of sanitary sewer manholes to be coordinated with the Meridian Public Works Department. 12. Show all proposed or existing utilities, including, but not limited to, storm and sanitary sewers, irrigation laterals, ditches, drainage, bridges, culverts, water mains, fire hydrants, streetlights, and pressurized irrigation. 13. Provide statements of dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimension and purpose of such. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. The Preliminary Plat map contour lines need to be tied to an established Benchmark. 2. Please submit, to the Public Works Department, a master street drainage plan including method of disposal and approval from the affected drainage district. 3. Streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. These will be installed at the subdivider's expense. 4. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. 5. The legal description submitted with this application and the Preliminary Plat map doesn't follow the boundaries of the adjacent Plats of Record. Bearing and distance calls that don't match should be referenced as "Information of Record". Please clear up these discrepancies and resubmit a new legal description per Resolution 158 (Aug. 16, 1994). 6. 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. 7. Government Corners referenced in the legal description need to be shown on the Preliminary Plat map. Mayor and Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 6, 1995 Page 3 8. A temporary sanitary sewage lift station will need to be installed to service this property. Details for the placement and configuration of this temporary lift station need to be worked out with the Public Works Department. 9. The lots adjacent to Carol's Subdivision range in size from 0.3 acre to 0.42 acre. SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Applicant has submitted a proposed plan of future phases of Packard Subdivision for review. 2. This subdivision was previously submitted as a 128 -lot subdivision with a 5 -acre park. As a result of redesign, two building lots and the park have been absorbed. Some small "pocket" parks remain. The Comprehensive Plan indicates the need for a park in this area. 3. Perimeter fencing will be required prior to obtaining building permits. 4. A development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 5. No school capacity is available to serve this subdivision. 6. Block lengths exceed 1,000'. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided to minimize walking distances. For example, walkways will be required from Chandra Way through to Meadow Wood Court. Applicant should also install lighting system for the walkway for safety purposes. 7. Frontage on several of the lots do not meet the 80' minimum. Some corner lots will need arrows indicating front of lot. 8. Existing natural features along the northerly boundary could possibly be lost if this sub - lateral is tiled. 9. Phasing of this project, if applicable, shall be indicated on the preliminary plat. 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA Clerk WILLIJANIC L. GASSG. JR., T Treasurer JANICE L GASS, City Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIANMAX ROBERT D.ICORgtE GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer WALT W. MORROW BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO SHARI STILES KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Planner & Zoning Administrator W.L. 'BILL" GORDON. Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-3813 Chairman - Planning S Zcnirg Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) MAR 2 3 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk LTS Treasurer CITY OF MERIDIAN MAX RINGTON ROBERT RRICE W P.E. City Engineer WALWMORRO0. BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO STILES JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. & Zoning Planner &Zng Administrator KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief JIM JOHNSON WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Phone (208) 888-0433 • FAX (208) 8874813 Chairman - Planning & Zoning Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD 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: April 4, 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR RONALD TOLSMA, C/C BOB CORRIE, C/C WALT MORROW, C/C MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MAR 2 2 10-95 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Ttie O -Pe � S D#4c 2 s- # / . 7r q aw } 4 GCo .c. trot 2 f Al A m c Si4,,oL/ Aolc•tcv tb %3 e P&. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Development Services Division Preliminary Report Preliminary Plat and Annexation - Packard Meridian Packard is a 126 -lot residential subdivision on 39.9 -acres. The site is located 1/4 -mile north of Fairview Avenue and 1/4 -mile west of Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 1204 additional vehicle trips per day. Roads impacted by development are: FAIRVIEW AVENUE - Arterial street with a bike lane designation - Traffic count 16,470 in 1990 EAGLE ROAD - ITD jurisdiction - Arterial street - Traffic count 12,000 from traffic study (350 trips will be added) HICKORY AVENUE - Collector street with no pathway designation (1,200 trips added) Issues to be addressed are: 1. Right-of-way requirements 2. Road improvements 3. Medians needed in knuckles or bulbs packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 r USTICK RD. — ' i SI TE o a � I 4 Z W TAZ 265 (Y TAZ 144 td 11J M DOVE dEZ00WS sof W FAIRVIEW AVE I TREASURE a 'VALLEY I V BUSINESS PARK J O TAZ 145 _Q PINE ST. I I --------------- TAZ 266 I FRANKLIN RD. packard ACHD Commission Date April 5, 1995 QV•a ¢i 1 n s , . xp ,� � ly �n� ! .$••+'�� ��� } 'R�•�/_i ..�'!+ fir /•^ ��' ., r^Illi I i alp s .,, c�/ i . S� e� 1 �"'•J _ i A .g � e • 1'� ? v a �•� tsR � /`•ire ' ;..n Y .a$' :� 9 .+,oi�*�\` � ��o i•�.{ _ u � � � o� =x [\� �-e ,s �� �; '+yR'I r .�'•~11 S ��"�.• r;•�� = � ag�oa r 1 • 'i► • "� �\ of s :C 1 R$ •� . 1 � � i; I � ' � 3 � , • j '+ bJ w 1 i �• • 8 y .e `•r r„"S� 4. •: f•s `:a'S�! Y• a 1 S " � � i ' `I °s � �^.... •�' t • = i l "MST— _ s',..r - yT...P �.J..i • '1�T1 �.'� v I- .. ■� s a J r � 1 s. i .n •R 2 vg a _? .'� $ -! .� _ ! 9 .= 4 t ;. q ! i - `''♦. I. ' a OJ K ] 1/1 :•+ 3.1 33Ni 1 - 9NIA."u-S aNV-1S.A3lr3l LIOISIAIOH:IS (IH"0Vd , 30 .I.t" ld .1,HVNIWI'13Hd II. z ~ O i O •� F � �y'•W, i �c O boi u.. KEG �Lp �� iia Q� � •,_ � a _ o a � � ���� w Olt L W n •w�� Q ? "i a l i • L• U T V� J � � � E � O Ill Z w I l j '16 u '• ,. U J r •1 � W Q U O m W ��„U-LL,F d • L 6 6 RQ Ll L WJI J _ OLyi u 41,6 i++r Y a,Z3 a „ W J �• Ou a a J CL .mnm0 mow < YI QV•a ¢i 1 n s , . xp ,� � ly �n� ! .$••+'�� ��� } 'R�•�/_i ..�'!+ fir /•^ ��' ., r^Illi I i alp s .,, c�/ i . S� e� 1 �"'•J _ i A .g � e • 1'� ? v a �•� tsR � /`•ire ' ;..n Y .a$' :� 9 .+,oi�*�\` � ��o i•�.{ _ u � � � o� =x [\� �-e ,s �� �; '+yR'I r .�'•~11 S ��"�.• r;•�� = � ag�oa r 1 • 'i► • "� �\ of s :C 1 R$ •� . 1 � � i; I � ' � 3 � , • j '+ bJ w 1 i �• • 8 y .e `•r r„"S� 4. •: f•s `:a'S�! Y• a 1 S " � � i ' `I °s � �^.... •�' t • = i l "MST— _ s',..r - yT...P �.J..i • '1�T1 �.'� v I- .. ■� s a J r � 1 s. i .n •R 2 vg a _? .'� $ -! .� _ ! 9 .= 4 t ;. q ! i - `''♦. I. ' Facts and Findings: A. General Information R-4 - Zoning 126 - Lots 39.9 - Acres 265 - Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment District Hickory Avenue Collector with no pathway designation 60 -feet of frontage 60 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 60 -feet required right-of-way (45 -feet from centerline) Hickory Avenue is improved with a 41 -feet street section. The improvements do not reach the site, but will with the completion of a later phase of Dove Meadows. B. This is a modification to the original preliminary plat submittal. No action was taken on the original submittal. Staff has had several meetings with the representatives of this subdivision to discuss stub streets and traffic flow. Staff supports the stub streets as proposed. C. A traffic study was submitted and review for this subdivision. The traffic study was completed for 135 residential lots; the number of lots has been reduced to 126 buildable lots. D. Staff recommends that Hickory Avenue continue as a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with a 60 -foot right-of-way from the south boundary to the first internal intersection. Direct lot access will be restricted to Hickory Avenue. The preliminary plat shows Hickory Avenue with 60 -feet of right-of-way with a landscaped median in the center of it. Both travel lanes of Hickory Avenue will needed to maintain an minimum back of curb width of 21 -feet. E. Unless otherwise specified, staff recommends that all internal local streets be constructed as 37 -foot street sections and 4 -foot minimum (5 -foot required by Meridian) with a 40 -foot right-of-way. F. Several curves are shown the preliminary plat with radii less than 100 -feet. If the turn or curve is a right-angle a lesser radii can be accepted. Staff recommends that the streets be modified to maintain a minimum radii of 100 -feet unless it is a right-angle. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 2 G. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shown are deep enough that a median island is required to focus traffic. A minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb is necessary. H. There are four stub streets proposed in this subdivision, one in each direction. The northern and western stub street extend into undeveloped land. No additional stub streets are being proposed or recommended by staff to the south since the property to the south is 25 acres of property held in contiguous ownership by the Capitol Christian Center Inc. and can be accessed from Hickory Avenue to the south. A residential collector road (41 -foot street section with no direct lots access) is anticipated to be extended from Eagle Road to Chandra Way when the intervening property is developed. J. Staff recommends that only the 126 -lots of Packard Subdivision be approved in this area until additional streets are constructed that connect to the other three stub streets and eventually to arterials. Development of more lots than this will cause the generation of traffic in excess of that allowed on a residential collectors (Hickory Avenue) by District Policy. K. A portion of the funds allocated to Ada County Highway District from the Highway Distribution Account are predicated on the number of improved road miles (under the District's jurisdiction) that are located outside the limits of any incorporated city. Consequently, annexation of subject lands will adversely affect a major revenue base of the District without any compatible decrease in the District's responsibility to continue to maintain those public roadways located within the annexation area. L. This application is scheduled for a public hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 11, 1995. The following requirements are provided to Meridian City as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Construct Hickory Avenue to a 41 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot sidewalks and a 60 -foot right-of-way. If a landscaped median is constructed, maintain a minimum width of 21 -feet from back of curb to back of curb in each direction. 2. Direct lot or parcel access to Hickory Avenue is prohibited, in compliance with District policy. Lot access restrictions shall be stated on the final plat. 3. The District will not sign the final plat for any part of this subdivision until the adjacent street system that it connects to, Hickory Avenue, becomes part of the public street system. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 3 4. Construct all other internal streets to a 37 -foot back-to-back street section with 5 -foot (Meridian width requirement) and a 50 -foot right-of-way. 5. Two of the knuckles or half culdesacs shall be constructed with median islands, maintaining a minimum travel width of 21 -feet to the back of curb. Coordinate with District Traffic Services Division. 6. All landscaped medians shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. 7. Maintain a minimum radius of 100 -feet on all curves other than 90 -degree corners. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made, in writing, to the Manager of Engineering Services within 15 calendar days of the original Commission action. The request shall include a statement explaining why such a requirement would result in substantial hardship or inequity and minimum fee of $110.00. 2. Locate driveway curb cuts a minimum of 5 -feet from the side lot property lines when driveways are not being shared with the adjacent property. 3. Locate obstructions (utility facilities, irrigation and drainage appurtenances, etc.) outside of the proposed street improvements. Authorization for relocations shall be obtained from the appropriate entity. 4. A right-of-way permit must be obtained from ACHD for any street or utility construction within the public right-of-way. Utility cuts should be combined where practical to limit pavement damage. Contact Construction Services at 345-7667 (with zoning file number) for details. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project street to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross -street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project street is first accessible to the motoring public. 6. The developer is required to install street name signs at the locations approved by the Ada County Highway District. Purchase street nave signs, sign poles, and mounting hardware from ACHD's Traffic Operations Department or an approved outside supplier. The District will not manufacture street signs until a copy of the recorded plat showing the recording data has been provided to Development Services staff. Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 4 7. Provide a clear vision sight triangle at all street intersections. Within this triangle no obstruction higher than 36 -inches will be allowed, including landscaping, berms, fences, walls or shrubs. The triangle shall be defined by the long leg measured down the centerline of any collector 350 -feet; and the short leg measured down the centerline from the collector street curb line 20 -feet. Provide notes on the plat and street construction plans of these restrictions. 8. Submit site drainage plans and calculations for review and appropriate action by ACHD. The proposed drainage system shall conform to the requirements of Meridian and shall retain all storm water on-site. Public street drainage facilities shall be located in the public right-of-way or in a common lot owned by a homeowners association set aside specifically for that use. There shall be no trees, fences, bushes, sheds, or other valuable amenities placed in said easement. Drainage lots and their use restrictions shall be noted on the plat (when applicable). 9. Continue existing irrigation and drainage systems across parcel. 10. Continue borrow ditch drainage abutting parcel (culvert may be required). 11. Provide written approval from the appropriate irrigation/drainage district authorizing storm runoff into their system. 12. All public streets and drainage systems shall be designed and constructed in conformance with District standards and policies. 13. Specifications, land surveys, reports, plats, drawings, plans, design information and calculations presented to ACHD shall be sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer or Professional Land Surveyor, in compliance with Idaho Code, Section 54-1215. 14. Provide design data for proposed access to public streets for review and appropriate action by ACHD. 15. Submit three sets of street construction plans to the District for review and appropriate action. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Development Services Division at 345-7662. Staff • t' D. • • •� �� • Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 5 Preliminary Plat - Packard Page 6 CENTRAL REVIEW SHEET C DISTRICTEnvironmental Health Division Return to: HEALTH #:_ _ ,.� ❑ Boise DEPARTMENT }�' '� K ^``' ❑ Eagle Rezone # ❑ Garden city ,Meridian Co tional Use # ❑ Kuna Preliminary Final / Short Plat R tP-,O l/�%fi�r�' ❑ ACZ ❑ I. We have 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 ZZ 7. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: central sewage E]community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage ,central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water 8. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: �entral sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines central water �. Street Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 12. 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 Sm Date: 3 red By: CDHD I0/91 rcb, rev. II/93 ill CENTRAL :P,ff= 4 DISTRICT 'HEALTH DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE • 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL • BOISE, ID. 83704-0825 • (208) 375.5211 • FAX: 327-8500 To prevent and treat disease and disability; to promote healthy lifestyles; and to protect and promote the health and quality of our environment. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 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) STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND, State of Washington Department of Ecology, February 19892 2) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER AND SITE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT 3) CALIFORNIA BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE HANDBOOK Prepared by Camp Dresser and McKee, Larry Walker Assoc., Uribe and Assoc., Resources Planning Assoc., for the Stormwater Quality Task Force 4) URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL Volume 3, Best Management Practices Stormwater Quality Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada I Base County Office WIC Boise . Meridian 707 N. Arrnstrong PI. 1606 Robert St. Boise, ID. 83704-0825 Boise. D. 63705 Ermro. Health: 327-7499 Ph. 334-3355 Family Planning: 327-7400 324 Meridian Rd. Immunizations: 327-7450 Meridian, ID. 83642 Nutrition: 327-7460 Ph. 888.6525 WC 321.1489 emore County Office Elmore County Office 520 E. Bib Sheet N. of Ernironmerdd Health Mountain Home. ID. 190 S. 4th Street E. 83647 Ph. 587-4401 Mountain Home, ID. 83641 Ph. 581.9225 9 Valley County Office P.O. Box 1448 Mccafi.ID. 83638 Ph. 634-7194 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: April 4 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, South of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z •;1�li HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z COUNCIL MEMBERS OFFICIALS A Good Place to Live RONALD R. TOLSMA WILLIROBERT JANIC L. GASS, City T eas rer JANICE L. GASS, City Treasurer MAX YERRINGTON D. COPPIE CITY OF MERIDIAN WALT W MORROW GARY D. SMITH, P.E. City Engineer SHARI STILES BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt. 33 EAST IDAHO Planner &Zoning Administrator JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY W. BOWERS, Fire Chief MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 JIM JOHNSON W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813 Chairman - Planning 3 Zoning WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 (� hf%T p ry L. � MAX YERRINGTON, C/C GRANT P. KINGSFORD WATER DEPARTMENT Mayor P+ ° ° ` C 7 it k;l; u 'add SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT NA'MPA u P, j-R!D1AN TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVE Ptd&dj1B)J_ECTS YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation 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: April 4 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, South of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z •;1�li MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) JIM SHEARER, P/Z ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION TIM HEPPER, P/Z CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT RONALD TOLSMA, C/C SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT BOB CORRIE, C/C IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WALT MORROW, C/C U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) MAX YERRINGTON, C/C INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) WATER DEPARTMENT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) SEWER DEPARTMENT CITY FILES BUILDING DEPARTMENT OTHER: FIRE DEPARTMENT YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation POLICE DEPARTMENT District's Stokesberry Lateral courses along the north CITY ATTORNEY boundary of the project. The right-of-way of the Stokes - CITY ENGINEER berry Lateral is 40 feet: 20 feet from the center each CITY PLANNER way. See Idaho Code 42 -1208 --RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John Anderson or Bill Henson at 466-0663 or 45-2431 for approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-way occurs. This District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. Contact Donna Moore at 343-1884 or 466-7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. Municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. It is recommended thatirrigation water be made available to all developments within this District. 4,-V� Bill Henson, Assistant Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District 30 March 1995 Tealey's Land Surveying 109 South 4th Street Boise, ID 83702 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-888-6201 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 Boise 343-1884 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Boise 345-2431 RE: Land Use Change Application for Packard Subdivision Dear Tealey's: - Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above - referenced development. You were previously sent a complete packet of information concerning Land Use Change, urban irrigation, and exclusion. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call on Donna Moore at the District's office or John Anderson, the District's Water Superintendent at the District's shop. Sincerely, DAREN R. COON, SECRETARY/TREASURER NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DRC/dnm cc: File Water Superintendent PNE/Edmonds Construction ✓City of Meridian enc. .I-- �\l (( �-` 00 F APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 SETTLERS' IRRIGATION DISTRICT P.O. BOX 7571 • BOISE, IOAHO 83707 PHONE 344-2471 L1 i i v 'VaLi1.1U�r'. March 22, 1995 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning 33 E Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: The above referenced subdivision lies within the Settlers Irrigation District; however, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District delivers the water for us. We are pleased to see that this development will comply with Settlers' policy by providing a pressurized irrigation system for the homeowners. If you have any questions, please phone me at 343-5271. Sincerely, Troy L. shaw, Manager Settlers Irrigation District TLU/vrk OFFICIALS WILLIAM G. BERG. JR., City Clark JANICE L. GASB, City Trea user GARY 0. SMITH, P.E. City Englneer BRUCE 0. STUART, Water Work• 3UDt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY W. BOWERS- Fire CNet W.L." BILL" GORDON, PmIC6 Cnlet WAYNE G. CROOKSTON. JR,, Allomey HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888443 • FAX (108) 887-4813 Public Works/Building Department (208) 887.2211 GRAM' P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERArNOTON ROSERTO CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner& Zoning Adminleuelor JIM JOHNSON Chairman • Pli.mmng & Zoning 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: April 4. 1895 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3120195 HEARING DATE: 4/1115 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary/ Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNEIEdmoads Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z _GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C _BOB CORRIE, CIC WALT MORROW, C/O MAX YERRINGTON, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: We require a permanent 10 -foot wide public utilities easement along all lots adjacent to a road right-of-way dedicated to public or private use. Tim Adams Idaho Power 322-2047 Tu) AD 9s APR 04 '95 17:00 2083222032 PRGE.03 TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING April 6, 1995 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision Dear Members of the Commission.- Attached ommission: 109 South 41" Street Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 RECEIVED APR - 6 1995 CITY OF MERIDIAN Attached is a copy of the next phase of the Packard Subdivision development. Although not before you at this time, this proposal will be submitted for public hearing on the next application cutoff date. We are providing copies so that you can tell how the total plan for the development of these properties fit together. Also attached is a copy of the proposal at a one inch equals three hundred feet (1" = 300') scale. Both proposals comply with the provisions of the R-4 Zone. The minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet. We hope that this information helps you as you deliberate the Packard Subdivision proposal on April 11. We look forward to answering any questions you might have about these projects. Thank you for considering this additional information. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's LanSurveyin Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivisions #1 & #2 Projects 1290 & 1408 OFFICIALS W ERG. JR., Cily Clerk SS, City Treasurer H, P.E. City Engineer UART, Water Works Supt. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt. KENNY 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 Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 GRANT P. KINGSFORD Mayor COUNCIL MEMBERS RONALD R. TOLSMA MAX YERRINGTON ROBERT D. CORRIE WALT W. MORROW SHARI STILES Planner & Zoning Administrator JIM JOHNSON Chairman - Planning & Zoning 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: April 4. 1995 TRANSMITTAL DATE: 3/20/95 HEARING DATE: 4/11/95 REQUEST: Annexation/Zoning/Preliminary Plat for Packard Subdivision BY: PNE/Edmonds Construction LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: North of Dove Meadows Subdivision, south of Carol's Subdivision #2 JIM JOHNSON, P/Z MOE ALIDJANI, P/Z JIM SHEARER, P/Z _CHARLES ROUNTREE, P/Z _TIM HEPPER, P/Z GRANT KINGSFORD, MAYOR _RONALD TOLSMA, C/C _BOB CORRIE, C/C _WALT MORROW, C/C _MAX YERRINGTON, 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 & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) CITY FILES OTHER: YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: March 17, 1995 TEALETS LAND SURVEYING Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission 33 East Idaho Street Meridian Idaho 83642 RE: Packard Subdivision Preliminary Plat Dear Members of the Commission: 109 South 41 Street Boise, Idaho 83702 (208) 385-0636 Fax (208) 385-0696 This application is a redesigned preliminary plat of Packard Subdivision. Following public hearing in October 1994, the Commission voted to table the preliminary plat request by Pacific Northwest Electric (PNE) and Edmond's Construction. The Commission recommended that the preliminary plat for Packard Subdivision be redesigned. After considerable discussion and design work, a new proposal is ready for the Commission's consideration. Packard Subdivision is located in the southeast quarter of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 West of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. It is contiguous to the Meridian City limits along its southern and western boundaries. Developments in the area surrounding the site are primarily single-family residential subdivisions. Included in the surrounding developments are the Dove Meadows Subdivision (Zoned R-4), the Wingate Place Subdivision (Zoned R-8), the Kearney Place Subdivision (Zoned R-8), the Chateau Meadows Subdivision (Zoned R-8), and the Carol's Subdivision (Zoned R-1). The Capitol Christian Center (Zoned L -O) is located south of Packard Subdivision. A request for annexation accompanied the original subdivision application. Annexation is still part of this request. To comply with the city of Meridian requirements for annexation, a development agreement will be entered between the developer and the city of Meridian. The developer will extend city services to the site. Those services include municipal sewer service and municipal water service. Of principal concern to the Commission in the earlier application was the transition from one -acre lots in Carol's Subdivision to smaller lots in Packard Subdivision. This new proposal includes larger lots near Carol's Subdivision. Depth was added to the lots next to Carol's Subdivision. The street plan within Packard Subdivision was also redesigned to reduce vehicle speed within the. development. Packard Subdivision Project 1290 - 1 - Another significant change in design is the removal of 4.95 acres of open area. To provide larger lots for transition from Carol's Subdivision through Packard Subdivision, the park area was removed. Instead of one large park, linear landscape/pathway areas will be provided along the street frontages. The restrictive covenants for Packard Subdivision will include specific requirements for the maintenance of landscape strips and other street -front details. Lot sizes in Packard Subdivision range from 8,000 square feet to over 18,000 square feet. All building lots meet or. exceed the street frontage requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Minimum house sizes will also meet the Zoning Ordinance requirements. Previously, the proposal was for one -hundred twenty-eight (128) building lots. Our current proposal contains one -hundred twenty-six (126) building lots. The new design has a density of 3.16 dwelling units per acre. Landscaped entries and pocket -parks are included with the linear landscape/pathway areas. Considerable effort undertaken by the developer addresses the concerns of the Commission. Larger lots with greater depth have been placed along the boundary between Carol's Subdivision and Packard Subdivision. Extra landscaping requirements are being placed in the restrictive covenants to make Packard Subdivision compatible with the surrounding developments and to make Packard Subdivision unique. Packard Subdivision will not be a series of small lots with "starter" homes. It is intended for mid -entry and higher, quality homes. Although the redesign resulted in the loss of a park, the redesign addresses the concerns of the Commission and those who testified at the public hearing. This new design complies with the provisions of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the Meridian Zoning Ordinance. Packard Subdivision will be a quality addition to the city of Meridian. We ask the Commission for a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Respectfully, Patrick A. Tealey Tealey's Land Surveying By: Ted Hutchinson Packard Subdivision _ Project 1290 - 2 REQUEST FOR SUBDMSION APPROVAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION W11 13 10111 .3 •• A request for preliminary plat approval must be in the City Clerk's possession no later than three days following the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear the request at the monthly meeting following the month the request was made. After a proposal enters the process, it may be acted upon at subsequent monthly meetings provided the necessary procedures and documentation are received before 5:00 P.M., Thursday following the Planning and Zoning Commission action. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name of Annexation and Subdivision: Packard Subdivision 2. General Location: north of Dove Meadows Subdivision;south of Carol's Subdivision #2 3. Owners of record: PNE/Edmonds Construction Address: 3131 Lanark Meridian , Zip 83642 Telephone 888-7255 4. Applicant: Same Address: 5. Engineer: Firm: Tealey's Land Surveying Address: 109 S 4th St Boise , Zip 83702 Telephone 385-0636 6. Name and address to receive City billings: Name: PNE/Edmonds Construction Address 3131 Lanark Meridian Telephone 888-7255 PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST: Subdivision Features 1. Acres 39.87 2. Number of lots 126 (buildable) 3. Lots per acre 3.16 4. Density per acre 5. Zoning Classification(s) R-4 6. If the proposed subdivision is outside the Meridian City Limits but within the jurisdictional mile, what is the existing zoning classification? An annexation request was part of the D. *nal armlication. 7. Does the plat border a potential green belt? No 8. Have recreational easements been provided for? No 9. Are there proposed recreational amenities to the City? No Explain 10. Are there proposed dedications of common areas? No Explain The common areas will be landscaped areas that are owned by the Homeowners Association, 11. What school(s) service the area? Chief Joseph Elementary Do you propose any agreements for future school sites? No Explain Other proposed amenities to the City Fire Department City of Meridian Other Explain Water Supply City of Meridian Type of Building (Residential, Commercial, Industrial or combination) Residential Type of dwelling(s) (Single Family, Duplexes, Multiplexes, other)Si gle-family Proposed Development features: a. b. C. d. Minimum square footage of lot(s): 8,000 Minimum square footage of structure(s): 1,400 Are garages provided for? Are other coverings provided for? (2) Square footage: e. Landscaping has been provided for? Yes Describe The entryways will be landscaped as well as an interior landscape program covenant for each lot. f. Trees will be provided for? Yes Trees will be maintained by Homeowners and the Home Owners Association. g. Sprinkler systems are provided for as required by City Ordinance h. Are there multiple units No Type i. Are there special set back requirements? No Explain j. Has off-street parking been provided for? Explain k. Value range of property Type of financing for development M. Protective covenants were submitted? Date: 16. Does the proposal land -lock other property? No Does it create enclaves? No STATEMENTS OF COMPLIANCE: 1. Streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are to be constructed to the standards as required by the Ada County Highway District and Meridian Ordinance. Dimensions will be determined by the City Engineer. All sidewalks will be five feet (5') in width. 2. Proposed use is in conformance with the city of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 3. Development will connect to City services. 4. Development will comply with City ordinances. 5. Preliminary plat will include all appropriate easements. 6. Street names must not conflict with City grid system. (3) 9-604 B PRE -APPLICATION MEETING The developer shall meet with the Administrator prior to the submission of the Preliminary Development Plan. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss early and informally the purpose and effect of this Ordinance and the criteria and standards contained herein, and to familiarize the developer with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and such other plans and ordinances as deemed appropriate. The developer may also meet with the Commission or Council prior to submitting an application. 9-604 C PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. Application - The applicant shall file with the Administrator a complete subdivision application form and preliminary plat data as required in this Ordinance, not less than thirty (30) days prior to the Commission's public hearing. The Commission will not schedule any hearing or workshops or put the application on the agenda unless the above conditions have been met. 2. Public Hearing to be Held Prior to Subdivision Plat Approval - A public hearing shall be held at the time of presentation of the preliminary plat by the developer to the Commission for the purpose of allowing public input on the proposed subdivision. 3. Combining Preliminary and Final Plats - The applicant may request that the subdivision application be processed as both a preliminary and final plat if all of the following exists: a. The proposed subdivision does not exceed four (4) lots; b. No new street dedication or street widening is involved; No major special development considerations are involved, such as development in a flood plain, hillside development or the like; and d. All required information for both preliminary and final plat is complete and in an acceptable form. .A request to combine both preliminary plat and final plat into one application shall be acted upon by the Commission, upon recommendation by the Administrator. (4) 4. The Aoolicant a. The applicant shall submit all required copies of plats, maps, application form, conceptual engineering forms, and any other appropriate supplementary information required by the Administrator, Commission, or Council. See 9- 604C5. 5. Content of Preliminary Plat - The contents of the preliminary plat and related information shall be in such form as stipulated by the Commission; however, additional maps and supporting data deemed necessary by the Administrator or the Commission or Council may also be required. The subdivider shall submit to the Administrator at least the following: a. Thirty (30) copies of the preliminary plat of the proposed subdivision, drawn in accordance with the requirements hereinafter stated; each copy of the preliminary plat shall be on good quality paper, shall have dimensions of not less than twenty-four (24) inches by thirty six (36) inches, shall be drawn to a scale suitable to insure clarity of all lines, dimensions and other data, shall show the drafting date, and shall indicate thereon, by arrow, the general northerly direction; b. Thirty (30) copies of a one (1) inch equals three hundred (300) feet scale map on 6-1/2"x11" paper indicating thereon, all adjacent development and/or lots of record within three hundred (300) feet of any boundary of the proposed development, and the layout of the proposed development in bold outline; C. Thirty (30) copies of the completed and executed subdivision application form; d. Four (4) sets of conceptual engineering plans (not meant to be detailed designs) for streets, water, severs, sidewalks and other required public improvements. Such engineering plans shall contain sufficient information and detail to enable the Administrator to make a determination as to conformance of the proposed improvements to applicable regulations, ordinances and standards. e. Appropriate supplementary information that sufficiently details the proposed development within any special development area, such as hillside, planned unit development, floodplain, cemetery, mobile home, large-scale development, hazardous and unique areas of development. (5) 6. Requirement of Preliminary Plats - The following shall be shown on the preliminary plat or shall be submitted separately: a. The name of the proposed subdivision and general location; b. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, the subdivider or subdividers and the engineer, surveyor or planner who prepared the preliminary plat; C. Name and address of the party to receive City billings and/or correspondence; d. The legal description of the subdivision; e. A statement of the intended use of the proposed subdivision, such as: residential single-family, two (2) family and multiple housing, commercial, industrial, recreational or multiple housing, commercial, industrial, recreational or, agricultural and a showing of any sites proposed for parks, playgrounds, schools, churches or other public uses; f. A map of the entire area scheduled for development if the proposed subdivision is a portion of a larger holding intended for subsequent development; g. A vicinity map showing the relationship of the proposed plat to the surrounding area (one-half (1/2) mile minimum radius, scale optional); h. The land use and existing zone of the proposed subdivision and the adjacent land; i. Streets, street names, right of way and roadway widths, including adjoining streets or roadways; j. Lot lines and blocks showing scaled dimensions and numbers of each; k. Contour lines, shown at five (5) foot intervals where land slope is greater than ten percent (10X) and at two (2) foot intervals where land slip is ter, percent (10X) or less, referenced to an established benchmark, including location and elevation; 1. A site report as required by the appropriate health district where individual wells or septic tanks are proposed; (6) M. Any proposed or existing utilities, including, but not limited to, storm and sanitary severs, irrigation, laterals, ditches, drainages, bridges, culverts, water mains, fire hydrants, and their respective profiles; n. A copy of any proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions; o. Any dedications to the public and/or easements, together with a statement of location, dimensions and purposes of such; P. Any additional required information for special development as specified in this Ordinance; q. A statement as to whether or not a variance will be requested with respect to any provision, of this Ordinance describing the particular- provision, the variance requested, and the reason, therefor; r. A statement of development features. 7. Fee - At the time of submission of an application for a preliminary plat, the applicant shall pay the applicable fee as approved by the Council: 4 Lots = $300.00 Over 4 Lots = $300.00 + $10.00 per lot In addition, to above fees applicant shall pay cost of certified mailings at rate of 5 per notice. /. HY Final Plats = $10.00 per lot B. Administrator Review - a. Certification, - Upon receipt of the preliminary plat and all other required data as provided for herein, the Administrator shall affix the date of application acceptance thereon. The Administrator shall, thereafter, place the preliminary plat on the agenda for consideration at the next regular meeting of the Commission if there is sufficient time prior to the date of certification, for the Commission, to consider and review the application, and to give proper notice of a public hearing as required in 9-604 C. 8b. b. Notice will be published in the City's newspaper of record at the expense of the requesting party at least one (1) edition, fifteen, (15) days prior to the hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission meting, which notice shall also give a summary of the request and the location. (7) C. Review by Other Agencies - The Administrator shall refer the preliminary plat and application to as many agencies as deemed necessary. Such agencies may include the following: 1. Other governing bodies paving point jurisdiction; 2. The appropriate utility companies, irrigation, companies or districts and drainage districts; 3. The Superintendent of the School District; and 4. Other agencies having an interest in the proposed subdivision. 9. Commission Action a. Hearing by Commission - Following the receipt of application and after notice, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing, at which time they shall -review the preliminary plat and receive comments from concerned persons and agencies to arrive at a decision, on the preliminary plat. b. Commission's Finding - In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission, shall consider the objectives of this Ordinance and at least the following: 1. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; 2. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; �. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; 4. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; and 5. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. (6) C. Action on Preliminary Plat - The Commission may approve, approve conditionally, deny or table the preliminary plat for additional information. Approved or conditionally approved preliminary plats are forwarded to the Council. If the plan is denied, it is not forwarded to the Council. If the plan is tabled, it may be reconsidered by the Commission within forty-five (45) days of the public hearing. The Administrator shall notify the applicant of the Commission's action within ter, ( 10 ) days. d. Action on Combined Preliminary and Final Plat - If the Commission's conclusion is favorable to the subdivider's request for the subdivision to be considered as both a preliminary plat and final subdivision, then a recommendation shall be forwarded to the Council in the same manner as herein specified for a final plat. The Commission, may recommend that the combined application be approved, approved conditionally or disapproved. 11. Appeals - Any person or aggrieved party who appeared in person or writing before the Commission or the subdivider may appeal in writing the decision of the Commission relative to the final action taken by the Commission. Such appeal must be submitted to the Council within, fifteen (15) days from such Commission action. 1-'. A record of the public hearing, findings made and action taker, shall be made and maintained. 9-604 D ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING OF THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COUNCIL AND NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE Upon receipt of the Commission's action, concerning the Preliminary Development Plan or the receipt of an appeal of such action by the applicant or other aggrieved party, the Administrator shall respond as 1011 Uw£ : 1. Set the public hearing date for the Preliminary Development Plan; and 2. Review public hearing comments by concerned persons, public agencies or City departments. 9-604 E COUNCIL HEARING, NEGOTIATIONS, AND ACTION 1. Prior to taking action concerning the Preliminary Development Plan, the Council shall conduct at least one (1) public hearing in which interested persons shall have an opportunity to be heard. (9) 2. No final subdivision plat shall be approved until one (1) public hearing before the Council has been held for the purpose of allowing public input on the proposed subdivision. This public hearing shall be held at the time of the presentation of the preliminary plat by the developer to the City Council. Notice of the public hearing shall be given by mailing, by certified mail, notice of the hearing to all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed boundaries of the subdivision, which mailing shall be completed by the developer and by publishing notice of said hearing in the City's newspaper of record at least one (1) time fifteen (15) days prior to the date of such hearing, which publication shall be handled by the Administrator. The notice to be mailed to the adjacent property owners shall include a copy of the notice of hearing and a vicinity map of the area, which map shall show the proposed subdivision and the property within three hundred (300) feet. 3. During the hearing, the Administrator shall report on the status of the application. 4. In considering the proposed development, the Council shall consider the requirements of this Ordinance and at least, but not limited to, the following; a. The conformance of the proposed development with the Comprehensive Plan; b. The availability of urban services to accommodate the proposed development; C. The continuity of the proposed development within the City's capital improvement program; d. The public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; and e. Health, safety, or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. (10) 5. Prior to Council action, the Council, Administrator, applicant, and interested persons may negotiate items of the Preliminary Development Plan, which are of mutual interest. In order that the negotiations be an open process and the rights of all parties and persons shall be protected (applicant, Council, Administrator, and the general public), the following guidelines shall be observed: a. The negotiations shall not occur in private or closed meetings; b. Negotiations shall take place in open, and informal meetings; C. Where there is a quorum of the Council in attendance, appropriate records shall be kept of the negotiating session or sessions, namely minutes which shall be submitted with the proposed development; d. The negotiation process shall be separate from the decision, making process of the Council. e. Results of the negotiations shall be a recommendation to the Council and be available for public scrutiny; f. The negotiation process shall be designed and carried out in a manner which assures the general public that decisions have not been made in advance of the input and scrutiny by the general public; g. The general public shall be informed of any negotiation, that has occurred in a newspaper article in the official newspaper or paper of general circulation within, the City of Meridian fifteen (15) days prior to Council action. 6. The Council shall approve, approve with conditions, deny, or table the Preliminary Development Plan. If the Preliminary Development Plan is tabled, it may be reconsidered by the Council within, forty five (45) days of the public hearing. The Administrator shall notify the applicant of the Council's action within ter, (10) days of the Council's action. 7. A record of the hearing, findings made, and action taken shall be maintained. tll; 9-604 F APPROVAL PERIOD 1. Council approval of the Preliminary Development Plan, shall become null and void if the applicant fails to submit the Final Development Plan withir, one (1) year of Council approval of the Preliminary Development Plan. 2. Upon, written, request to the Council and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the said one (1) year period as stated in Section 9-604 F.1 of this Ordinance, the Council may authorize a single extension, of the approval of the Preliminary Development Plan fore period not to exceed one (1) year from the end of the said one (1) year period. 3. In the event that the development of the preliminary plat is made in successive contiguous segments in an orderly and reasonable manner, and conforms substantially to the approved preliminary plat, such segments, if submitted withir, successive intervals of one (1) year, may be considered for final approval without resubmission, for preliminary plat approval. 9-604 6 APPEAL OF COUNCIL ACTION Appeals of the action, of the Council concerning the administration, of this Ordinance may be taker, by any aggrieved person. Within sixty (60) days of the Council action (and after all remedies have been ex,hauEted under this Ordinance), an aggrieved person may seek JUDICIAL REVIEW of the Council's action under provision.provided by Sections 67-5215(b) through (g) and 67-5216, Idaho Code. 9-604 H FINAL PLAT 1. Arsplication - After the approval or conditional approval of the preliminary plat, the subdivider may cause the total parcel, or any part thereof, to be surveyed and a final plat prepared in accordance with the approved preliminary plat. The subdivider shall submit to the Administrator the following: a. Thirty (30) folded copies of the final plat; (12) b. Four (4) copies of the final engineering construction, drawings for streets, water, sewers, sidewalks and other public improvements; and C. Ten (10) prints of the final plat at a scale of one (1) inch equals three hundred (300) feet. 2. Contents of Final Plat - The final plat shall include and be in compliance with all items required under Title 50, Chapter 13 of the Idaho Code. The final plat submittal shall include at least: a. A written, application for approval of such final plat as stipulated by the Commission; b. Proof of current ownership of the real property included in the proposed final plat and consent of recorded owners of the plat; C. Such other information as the Administrator or -Commission may deem necessary to establish whether or not all proper parties have signed and/or approved said final plat; d. A statement of conformance with the approved preliminary plat and meeting all requirements or conditions thereof; e. A statement of conformance with all requirements and provisions of this Ordinance; and f. A statement of conformance with acceptable engineering, architectural and surveying practices and local standards. 3. Fee - At the time of submission of an application for a final plat, the applicant shall pay the applicable fee which has been approved by the Council to cover the cost of processing. 4. Administrator Review - a. Acceptance - Upon receipt of the final plat, and compliance with all other requirements as provided for herein, the Administrator shall certify the application as complete and shall affix: the date of acceptance thereon. (13) b. Resubmittal of Final Plat - The Administrator shall review the final plat for compliance with the approved or conditionally approved preliminary plat. If the Administrator determines that there is substantial difference in the final plat than that which was approved as a preliminary plat or conditions which have not yet been met, the Administrator may require that the final plat be submitted to the Commission in the same manner as required in the preliminary plat process, including a public hearing and notice thereof. C. Submission to the Council - Upon the determination that the final plat is in compliance with the preliminary plat and all conditional requirements have been met, the Administrator shall place the final plat on the Council agenda within forty-five (45) days from the date that an acceptable final plat application was received and acknowledged by the Administrator. 5,. Agency Review - The Administrator may transmit one (1) copy of the final plat, or other documents submitted, for review and recommendation to the departments and agencies as he deems necessary to insure compliance with the preliminary approval and/or conditions of preliminary approval. Such agency review shall also include the construction standards of improvements, compliance with health standards, the cost estimate for all improvements and the legal review of the performance bond. 6. Council Action - Within forty-five (45) days following receipt of the application, the Council shall consider the requirements of the preliminary plat and comments from concerned persons and agencies to arrive at a decision on the final plat. The Council shall approve, approve conditionally, disapprove, or table the final plat. If the final plat is tabled, it may be reconsidered by the Council within forty five (45) days of the date of initial consideration. A copy of the approved plat shall be filed with the Administrator. 7. The Administrator shall notify the applicant of the Council's action within ten (10) days of such action. (14) {$� m_w 5 ONIA3Auns_rS. 31 3 momIAloafIsall VMOVa / _Ly-ldNaviimma,d R LL - § 2 .§§ \ \ 2 @ §�§ $ k , B!! <|§;( I§|)!§|( !2 @ §J| \ \; • ; % 4 -.� .. Vt ) ) (Z,§ § | LU I�' f ) l�t@ •( %!!��