Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBear Creek Sub. AZ 99-010Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE Council Members CHARLESROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD.. 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 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264. PUBLIC WORKS s< BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-22ll ~ I 4 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: July 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 7, 1999 HEARING DATE: July 13, 1999 FILE NUMBER: AZ-99-010 REQUEST: ~ ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES (FOR R-4 ZONING FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION) BY: BEAR CREEK L.L.C. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: EAST OF STODDARD RD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND RD TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C `KEITH BIRD, C/C JGLENN 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) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ' ~ ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: MAY-28-1999., 1613 BRIGGS ENGINEERiNGr INC. 12083x52950 'P.02 "' -° 3 Fast Idaho Street, Meridian, !ll 2S:S64 ~, Phone:..(208).S$8-4433.. Fax: (208} 887-4813 ~ECEI~T1 Ci1`YQ~' NtERIDIAN APPLICATION FUR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OR REZONE PLANNING & ZONING caa~ ~a a~ -,- .a PROPOSED NAME OF S[TBDIVISIUN: _ _ BEAR C FEIN SUBDIVISION - GTrNF.RAL LOCATION: Portion of E'/a Section 24 T3N R1 W (East of Stgddard Ruad & South of Uverl~nd kdl 1"Yf'E (RESIDIrNTIAL, INDUSTftIAT., COMIVLERCIAY.): RESIDEN"1'IAL ACRi:S OF LAND IN PROPOSED ANNEXATION: 150.79 ACRES PRESENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURAi & RESIDEN'1~IAL PROPOSED LAND USI's: _ (3~6) SINGLY I~AMII Y DWELLING LOTS _ PRESENfi 7..QNING DISTRICT: RT PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT: R 4 APPLICANT: BLAB CREE L L C. FHONE: 888-0946 ADUI~SS: _,~._~~ BOX 344 MERIDIAN IDAHO 83684 F.NGINI;ER, SURVEYOR, OR PLANNER: Bri s Engineering, Inc. PHONE: 344-9700 ADDRESS: 1800 W Overland Road. Boise Idaho 83745 t7VJNER(S) OF RECORD: SEE ATTACHED SHEET PHONE: ADDRESS: 99021 t\anncx-reaone-mer ~, T~TAI_ P . 02 ~~: , ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~3 East Idaho Street, Meridian, ID 8364` Phone: (208) 888-4433 ~r Fax: (208) 887-4813. t F ,~ °„a 9 p~ ~ C APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OR REZONE PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION: BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION GENERAL LOCATION: Portion of E '/2 Section.24,. T3N.. R1 W (East of Stoddard Road & South of Overland Rd TYPE (RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL): RESIDENTIAL f ~~ ACRES OF LAND IN PROPOSED ANNEXATION: 150.79 ACRES PRESENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURAL & RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: (326) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOTS PRESENT ZONING DISTRICT: RT PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT: R-4 ~ ~p - .~ ~ f APPLICANT: BEAR CREEK, L. L. C. PHONE: 888-9946 ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 344 MERIDIAN IDAHO 83680 1 1 r ENGINEER, SURVEYOR, OR PLANNER: Briggs En ing eerin~, Inc. PHONE: 344-9700 ADDRESS: 1800 W. Overland Road. Boise. Idaho 83705 a r OWNER(S) OF RECORD: SEE ATTACHED SHEET PHONE: ADDRESS. $ ;tl r F k 990211 \annex-rezone-mer t i Signature of applicant _ F iz~ Thence S 00°45'52" W 1076.81 feet along the east line of the NW'/4 of the SE'/4 of said Section 24 to a point; Thence S 85°12'02" W 266.72 feetto a point; Thence S 05°32'58" W 422.82 feet to a point; Thence S 00°46'44" W 232.28 feet to a point; F r, ~~; Thence S 20°10'06" E 113.21.. feet to a point; ~ ~ Thence S 29°35'11" E 132.19 feet to a point; Thence S 00°12'00" W 190.85 feet to a point; Thence S 08°35'44" 'E 203.05 feet to a point; ~ Thence S 04°03'12" W 266.88 feet to a point on the north right-of-way of W. Victory Road; l Thence S 00°38'53" W 25.00 feet to a point on the south line of the SE %4 of said Section 24 and the centerline of W. Victorv Road: Thence N 89°21'07" W 1145.51 feet along the south line of the SE'/4 of said Section 24 and the centerline of W. Victory Road to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; Said parcel of land contains 154.03 acres, more or less. Michael E. Marks, P.L.S. No.4998 77i 7 E 990211 \annex. des. doc • DESCRIPTION FOR ANNEXATION PROPOSED BEAR CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION May 28, 1999 A parcel of land lying in the E'/ of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of the E'/z of Section 24, T.3N., R.1 W., B.M., the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; Thence N 00°51'45" E 2656.10 feet along the west line of the E'/z of said Section 24, being the centerline of S. Stoddard Road, to the southwest corner of the NE'/4 of said Section 24; Thence N 00°51'53" E 1881.43 feet along the west line of the NE'/ of said Section 24 and the centerline of S. Stoddard Road to a point; Thence S 89°46'45" E 1706.88 feet to a point on the centerline of the Kennedy Lateral, also being the northwest corner of Elk Run Subdivision; Along the centerline of the Kennedy Lateral, and the westerly boundary of Elk Run Subdivision and Elk Run Subdivision No. 2: Thence S 05°05'50" W 290.43 feet to a point; Thence S 05°46'22" W 496.02 feet to a point; Thence along a curve to the left 163.76 feet, said curve having a delta angle of 46°54'45", radius of 200.00 feet, tangents of 86.78 feet, and a long chord bearing S 17°41'01" E 159.22 feet to a point; Thence S 41°08'23" E 989.03 feet to a point; Thence S 30°37'30" E 139.10 feet to a point; Leaving said centerline and boundary: Thence S 32°17'30" E 117.64 feet to a point on the north line of the SE % of said Section 24; Thence N 89°27'07" W 1177.57 feet along the north line of the SE %4 of said Section 24 to the northeast corner of the NW'/4 of the SE'/4 of said Section 24; 990211 \annex. des. doc l ANNEXATION OF BEAR CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION ~" 1. Beaz Creek, L. L. C., P. O. Box 344, Meridian, Idaho 83680 (Phone: 888-9946 and Fax 888-9947. 2. Bear Creek, L. L. C., P. O. Box 344, Meridian, Idaho 83680 (Phone: 888-9946 and Fax 888-9947 Queenland Acres, Inc., 1Q32 E. Caymon Drive, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Affidavit of Legal Interest attached. 4. Legal description attached. Present Land Use: The parcel is currently used for agricultural and residential purposes. 6. Proposed Lane Use: A residential development consisting of (326) single family residential lots, (3 I) common lots, and (1) Meridian park lot. The proposed density is 2.16 dwellings per acre. 7. Present District: The property is zoned RT (Rural Transition) and outside the City limits of Meridian. 8. Proposed District: The applicant is requesting annexation and rezone to R-4 designation. 9. The property adjoins the City limits of Meridian along the east portion of the parcel. The adjacent Elk Run Subdivision is currently zoned R-4 and R-$. The request for a R-4 zoning designation would be consistent with previous annexation/rezones in the vicinity. The request for an R-4 zone is compatible and consistent with the. Meridian Comprehensive Plan, which designates this area as single-family residential. 10. The proposed development has a low density of 2.16 dwellings per acre. This density is far less than other approved developments in the Victory Road and Kuna-Meridian Road area. Two types of lot sixes have been provided to utilize a mix in lot and home values. Lot sizes range from 9319 to 35,758 square feet. 11. The annexation/rezone is supported by the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The plan allows for urban development when urban services (ie. sewer and water) can be extended to the property. The proposed lift station would be constructed by the applicant and maintenance costs would be provided by Homeowner's Association dues. When the Black Cat trunk line is extended south of Interstate 84, the lift station could be abandoned and a gravity connection could be made. The requested R-4 zoning is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Map, which identifies this area as single family residential. 9902111annex.req r . .. ~ 12. Map attached. 13. 300 Scale maps attached. 14. List of property owners is attached. 15. Fees attached. 16. Affidavit attached. 17. Affidavit of application preparation is attached. 990211\annex.req ...MAY-1~i-1~ ib~4~S STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF AOA I, -~ ~r, Name l7RiNala Cf`IUi~'/CC.Raiarr •~.,.. ~FFtbAV1T GF LEQAL INTEREST e F ~'G 670 l.,J. G ,t ~1~~~~/1~h . ~, being first duly swum upon may) _ (state) oath, depose and say: ~ ~ E~, f F~ a r 1. That 1 am the nscord owner of the property described on the sttad~ed, and 1 grant my permission to 30~~E-::Franklin Road, Suite 60 Bear Gre_ kg L.,.Lr,C. Meridian, ID 83642 (narme~ (address) ,. to submit the ecx;ort,panyitrg spp~ic~tivn Ps:taimng to that pro-pes#y. , . 2. 1 agree t4 indemnify, defend and hokt ttie City of Nbridiar- and il"s employees tiarrnless from any clan or ~ab~iiy resulting ir+om any disptttie as to the statements contained herein or as m the ownership of the property which is the subject of the app~cafion. ~ Dated this ~. a!~,G.~. day of ~~ SUBSCRIBE[ AND SWORN fio before me the day and year fast above written. ,,,A~~~ a aa~aaa ~ ~tJP~~ / ~~`~`' ~~ ~~ ``-= ~= Notary Pubi'ic inr dsh ".. ~~zx~~ ~.;`~ ~'~~t '';° Residing ~ z ~ n0 s. ~~ "~~ P My Commission Expires: ^ 28- i ~a~ aNaaaaa 8 ~ TOTAL P.02 s r Address' ~~ ..,, ~~.,/ AFFIDAVIT OF ACCURACY - " ~` t ~~ I ~~ STATE OF IDAHO ) ss ' COUNTY~OF ADA ) 1, Becky L. Bowcutt (Brigas Engineering Inc) 1800 W Overland Road ~ r (name) , ~ ¢. : , ; a ~ " -~ - (address) _ti ~]]I ~ @ ~ ! ~ i Boise Idaho, 83705 ,being first duly sworn upon ' i~ (city) -(state)~ ~ oath,.depose~and say: 4~ , C ~ 777 That I prepared the attached applications and the information contained is true and correct:' - ~- ,}.,, ~, ~~ ~j~ l t Dated this ~_day of ~(ib~.Pi 19 7 ~, a (Signature) ~! ~1 I SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before. me,the day~and year first above written. fit. 3T~O ~' ~~TAR~ ~ 4®®. '~ ~ : 1, d Y ~~~~1~ Ag©~~~ 990211 \affid-accuracy cJ1a, N tary Public for Idaho Residing at ~ _ ~~~, My Commission,Expires: ~ C' F t ` - _~ --- Gaorg D. • ~ Carol B. ~ ~ Yi~i~'T'fC flESD - I , AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF IDAHO ) COUNTY OF ADA ) I, Becky L. Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, Inc.~1800 W. Overland Road (name) (address) Boise Idaho 83705 ,being first duly sworn upon (city) (state) oath, depose and say: That I will personally post the subject property with a hearing notice one week prior to the public hearing for annexation, variance and preliminary plat. r G~' Dated this day of 19 (Signature) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the day and year first above written. ,~ ~n~ otary Public f I~d~hO ~pTA~~ ~~~ Residing at ~ ®e..~ ~~ ' .~ a My Commission Expires: 0 U]B L1O ~ n~°4 ~~ ~ ®F L~°° • 990211 \affid-posting F'dfK rolnte ~ommerciai rax •o~~o~~t ~~~ay ~~ JJ i~/'w • • v+~ ~ a;rtTr~s is:~~ Fat uossi =_._._ atu~ =3~F.,.._ ~ ®~_~ J ,...__._ .r... --- -- RErO' '~~ ~F57 Of - ~' .fir. Sd~~' .7N ~,. ~ ca~mr t~~xi~ ~~tt 9 04966 I' ~u~ wasaerrrn ~ ~rarc, urn. co., +w s~o lssstoa a!r~ °~a ~~~ lt~s sstsrsod to as e>sr arast~at, ba ,p~aMsi~bszq~si:ss.~ ~ ~ sddx~ss sffiax'~ to as dcsnttt, idv M d,~scoe .i praaris~s sitnarod la+ Ada Covnsy~ atat~ o! ss~s~, dos za, s. Sat. , A. i~•, B.Y. , ~ cosaitY. 2da~iao B,YC~'! ~ 9e~ thas~ot 3+ocisaa vsth~a sou ~~-ot-~r Las scoaar.sd ~• ~ r~tssetioes of s~r'd ~'at°~~1' ~,Yapaetg ts~ces aad assrssasnts loot tt~t mat 1999 aDd ~esttsr. '! viler all as;d s3.n~lsr t~s t il.~S, aad app~as~t~a~+s unto a aad Yiaasss, toots; sus sawssiam std , fa ~ ~ baePaa~`eY~iw w11~ia~2a~- as ~~ egn3tY• ~d TO !!Soli ~ '~'4 ~~ sll a~ singn].~r tha ptopa~R7l+ ~~ xa~ ~. ~ ~ ostto tics . oraatra~s ssueessot~. IlltD p~tOr shall sad Mill ttarrsat aad y7 t>~t >~~~ los+swx dsl~ t!~ Dza~isos in the 4aiat aad p~-sassbl9r posss~esi~emt o! C'l'3uttQ~, ~ s s~tis0~li, lyaii''s and 39if~ ~ ~ a~ ~'BQ~,a° ,~ ~ la~rlnliY ~al-siaq t~hs sass.. ~ 9fi w~!'~M~`at°r D"a has~utta .Y.satad t2tis Dud ts~t „~. "~ .,. ~Y o! . ~ ..ter.. , 1998 . HCY~AC Ta'D. , CO. ~ aA 2dabo Trf~a3tad ~ i,,iabflitp DYY Gaosg D. ~ Caroi H. • X~~FlY ~ - Z f.{ 4. ~. f'df'K rUl(itr W~n~r ~iai ran•v~cvcva Oi/Z'1/!t 13:1! Phi 12003 i7 ~- ,~~ s• v w ~ s. ~! 0! Z~~ i ss, .;. Ca leis ,~, "~r ,~~~- ~ ~~°~d i m it ~~ ~ ~ ss. svl~• ~""a °'r t~b.~s 't+~d tads s~wtees' ~ t~ ii~i~ o= ~ ~La~i~li~ °O~ ~ ~l~d to ~=t D~` ~ ~'~`~ ~ sM atli~oK sOt ztr wz ~~'' asttiG~sl s••l. s2~-~s , oar z~eo ~` o_~i~ts t3.~t a~a~~ ~ saio~ l~CP~s~ ss. _ ~r d~2 +/ 3,99, ~~ '~• +~~ 7t°~t°sy pab13A ~ ~ ~ a~~~its~t~~litA ~P~~~ ~ s 1~si~~iisb~l~tT s2sse = au lwhsit of iabflitY tie ,.. shat # ~sd aor ~ ~~~ e~ti~o#s~ sit • ~tiao.a. ~ n aad s!= ~ li~osta tizst 'yOr= ~ r '' sets Qt s ye~ls st "` ~'!! ~D - 2 .w....0.~a~.a~ t; i ~: ~~003 t'aPK 1'011'TL@ 1A11Mt~f Cldl relx•or.o~ul ray w %~ +~•~- .,r.,...._.~.. .~• . a • ~~ ~~ .~~~~ ~.--- ~ .~ ~. t~ov~t ~ ~'a'01 ~ _ ,~,, 1999. zstoa~s Ira. ~' ~ ~ Dlis~`i~"°'d~l ~lin3listsiiit7 'uolL ~~+a~at befit h~i aoosca~ t~ ~' s+0! Co ~ thst _ ~ 11YT~ ~°!' Z b''v~ b~t~is cif tics ~~ isa1. ~ t ~os~utr # ~ .,..,• v stets of I~ rvsti~° ~ ac ..~ ~:' OF Z ~ ss. qty of ~-da ~ botaac~ as, t?~S oaA t~tis ~~~ ~~ ~, !o= mid to a~- ~~` tio~aes3~1~ ~o~va or iQ~t p~O~L ~ 13i'13.ZY ~Y tbit ~csc~tsd this 1i~~1t7T a~ ~t ~ matt shy t~ s~• .ate „~ st~~ ~' ~ 11I • ~ ~~~t~ iLCacle =izs~ ~~ . * s~r'~! ~~' a ~tatCS o! =d+aho ti~ ~ ~ ~ ~~tic ~ ~ 1 a ~''racyixsst, ~~ rew~ ~~-a F: r rar'K trolrlZe t,.omlilerciat rax~OrGO[Vl ~'~y cv » sv•v~ , ..r-.~ ~~~OOS bs~l7/f! is:l! p~I 1=Of.13 t -- • v ~%~ ~ ~ ~. eat! ~ e~•ar ~ ~ ~,~y:aC~~t~~ Oe thus ~~ ~~ ,~ ~s ~ ~ t!!t s~+iM~ ~ tit 1~'~ s! tl~ 13s~~ ias ~ srst ~ "°°K"t"d !iN s~• ~1c y,i~d sed s!lixa~ ~4 a ~ ~'' _ ~nrs t~s tilt abe+~ o ~„ ~ Qa0- and 7ce+~ •adclM+• ~~~ ~~ ~+Mr~~ f~'~ O! ~PA ~ ~ •s. ~arss, ~0~rsa~sSt 4++~ os ._..A y4 ~ oa t~ia ~ c ~f~M ~is!-~ t~ ~ ~ o! t~s aQC~ '~ ,~. twat ~. t~s ~' stli~aed ~ e~rri~s ~. a~nr ,~stttea- 1_ ".~, ww•r~~"" ` ~~ ~' _ • 7 jr~Ylli',lt.~.:.`'fl_ 1. I~i~~1:f $. sl th,r „i:.nt ~ _, ~!,, F. rn ,•i„~ i,. ,•:iih, .a~...,,~i ~, ,: r._ 4 ~[UL.41VLtL`D r'~Cf2:;$, I ;C •. , an Ic~,ho ...:i ~ ~T:tt'_lc:.':, , ;~„ ~ eridian, Id.iito the ~,raate~ [itr fr;hruit;•~ r!;•;,•riiied jirc~nc.~- _ -., ... ,; j•, ?;, , 'y ~ J ~ From the section. corn_r com.^,:aa to Sectio:,: 1~ .,:_~i 2~, ~. ., , R. 1 W. , B.M. and Section 18 an:. 19 , T. 3 ... ,?. 1 E. .. _•?. thence South along the Meridian line 753. 50 .f •~t ..eace•::ou-:; `~~~J,~ 89`12' T.•Jest 918.80, feet to t}?e center of n L•_.... i •:,;-.ich _.~ tr._ .J point of beyinnir.g, thenc'~ Sout:) 89'12' i:cst ,~;. !~ foc_t oinL o •7 ' ~` ~jsr O p nMthe test line of the F1/2, i:::i/:, SnCtion 2n .. .,. ~j W•i thence South 0°07' Eas*_ i885.9U feet aloac th~_ :•;est 1inc~ ~ the F1/2, NElj4, said Section 24 to a point or: thc• Ea>t-::'J~% i'.id -~ 63 y. y v Section line of said Section 2 ~ , thence North 89°~1' Fast 1171.70 feet alen? t!. - ,,:i:' - ! tion line to a point which h~~ar~ South c!9°4I' ,,, • 3.7.v J. -•~ _ _ from the 1/A corner. co:rt^;on to Section 24 , 'C. ., -• .,, i,;._ ' and Section 19 , T. 3 N. , Y.. 1, H t3, thence North 33°02' :ies t 117, 99 • fc•. ~ 'tc *_},~ , ._ thence worth 31°22' t:ast 139.1G feet orlon ce~•~ ., j, U ..•~- thence North Al°37' i•ICSt ].U19.Q0 fe:_t alo.~ r:: ••:*r•r/ ,~ ,. ,, :~ thrd P.Ce ,forth 25°~5' :'i C'St 22. G~ ;. C'<tt 310nc: rL r., %,nr rt(" „_'~_ thence Plorth •,°28' Bast 833. UY fe, t ~ic^ cer. ~ c. f H r~ _ _ c,^a_ _o .,c point of b~gir.aing and con~c_ ..__ ~5.3^•~~~.__ _.. .,.__ cr ._., <s: ~ - In t1"t^ E1/2, tvlil/~i, $C ^.t2._.. •%. , .. _. , L.. v`:• ~:f , ...:. ..._._ i . , County, T_daho. a ~ SUt3~ECT TO Taxes and a~_,_~s;r.___~~ o. !' 7- sui~sequer.t years tog~t.~c~- .._...= ~ _ ~_--. ~_: c .-.,~._.. _,:•~._- ._.... and richts o` .:~y ~~` recc,rc. '!'O ii:1l'I': .i\1l 'CV il~~'.i! .. -. _. .. .. its 1t~r:.. ... ,n . ~ ~. .. :+i i :.: ,. .~ ... :.. ;• .._ . `I, 1 ) E" 7 E, z ~,.L ,. ,t.:. ~. / ~I~V 1', i.~l~i1 ,~r'S i. i. ~i~. :.~i ~.~ ! QUEE:IL.v::U Ac:r:. , I::C ct;. i.(:;al:(i ~''Jr• ':~: ....:)Yt , i. .'r)lAL.. ~ , .eridian , Idai~o .ill' ;; t':lSl (.l'~' ~{ll• f(III[~\'. ll:}', Cl(-: i!';f.r(j (;!'.-i:11 :=--~, _. .. - 3 From the corner co~mor. tc ~~ct_.oa~ 13 ,~:... 2', ';'. .. R. 1 W. , B,. f4. and sections i3 and 19, 'C. ., ~. , E<. ~ -, i E.f•1. , thence South 89°12' P;. , 352.7.0 `cet, al~r.:~ `~'.::+ i Section line, to the noir:c of bec~i^.*i_ncr, _::enc:: dot:"':: /~ 89°12' L•7., 45G.U0 feet t-o the ... c;. .:vrrc_ ,f t::_ .:..'l./- ~ ?. ZU ~j :dEl/4 of said Section 24; ~~ ~D thence South 7~3..J :--et; ~ ~' thence 27orth S9°12' La:;:. 3~~". . , riot; 3 : t• 7 ~8 - th ' ° 19' Ea ,. th ~ ZU ( f Z ' . .. ~.- _ _ . . •-- . s ence or point of 5eginninr, at:d containi^g 7.294 c~cr~•°~, :-.urn yr less, all in the A;E1/~, ..,1/=, 5., ..t_io_^. 2- _. -. .. _ ~ II:'•?. , A3a Count. Idai;o. SCJ3JECT TO 'Faxes and as., .~:~..._at~ fo- *_:. _%~'.'r - - . - -.--_. subseauer.t dears tcc ~thc<_. .._~i~ _:n; .. :.. a~'_ ,_.-_ ,-. , , O~ .. ;li ~'C C=%. _.. easements and rigr:ts _t.. ..~. .,. ..- ., .. _,.. ... ..._ ., .. .. .. J t .'~ t ~ • • ~.. ~ _._ . :7th ~~ t _ -. ~~~:~1«~~lti~l~~~ r~~~,~~~~; 1'•ot' val:a~ 1:<•C~•t•;~'d ~r~!1."•~,[1 G. .., ....~ ?t:, i husban~' a;:d .. .r~c,, , I ~ thv ,;raut~u~ ,,. .. fc•n by •r,~t:t i;, ~ :ir. ,'',' ,~ ... .. ..u:r•, ui:. ~ QUEENLANli ,',CPi'"- IidC L.. l u,:t:v c'} r. a<~r<t t. ~ o:; , ~%,_ Meridian, Ida:to~ ~ Cllr ~tanter :Ile Polltiu'in~ de,ct'iirad (!t'~~rn:.ir !~, ,:it.: ;r (i I j NWl/4 SE1/4, Sec`_ion ?4, To;~nsliia 3 :;ort}t, Tung;- i West, E.i~i. i ALSO that portion de:;crined folL;::ss Beginning at the i.S•I corner ofJ the .:;:1 %~: 53 i/c, , Section 24, T. 3 N. R. 1Y1. , B.id the :~e Souti_ 28.3 feet- thence it a Northeastcr.ly dlrectic^ t<~ j a point on the North boundary line of s<.i~3 *:E1/4 SE1/4 a distance of 23.3 feet fro^i the _,.. corner of said '_QE1/4 SE1/4; thence kest alone t}-.e north boundary line of said ?:P.l/? Sii/< *o t,., poi,tt of beginning. SUBJECT TO 'faxes am". as~~s~.;:e :,.' fur t^c lc and subsequent years, toaatrter`.rith ~~~ a~+.d~a11, existing easements and _~ghts o~ ,ra,' r,= record. 'Ctr iIR~}•::~\Ir'IU itttl.l% .... ...:iii ..i:.. ..~ ..:iii C itnU ti::. u ~ z: r .,`.. , i `.... ,,..~r .a. f~ ~ frotr .. ic... .. _..,~... .._ .. ...... a 'l. ~J 6 . .~ m ~ ~ ~ .. ..__ ~ d fly .~ ~!j r) `` '(v ( t ti~ir~,'~, f'L ~ :'1 1 V r! 1 .I I ! / f'; )j. f J -. (.. .. +~~);.~ i'fLAiv ~] :1(.-1\~. , t.... , _.. t~ .. i ,-.1 ~1. ~_l ~. i. ti. is 'i'.LGILtIl, lU aC:G, • .. ... , Ch~~ ,;rc,tttl'~ thh f.ui .... .;_ , tr fi,t:(i t,r snt r•, L; ~ .i T~.` ,;or+~in;est Quarter o±: _.h~ [:orthr_"-:~;~ :;~,~._~~c.r c, . ,~ _~-or: ''- - Township 3 PJorth, Itanye ::est cf ill so ~ ;: :~ , ^,; 4~ aCreS , 1^,ore OT less , ~.i:ICthL'r :•JY t.- ~ 1 1 ...1 .:_ " n~f ~ ..lr = _ di tch and ditch rights arpart~anant co sa'.d l-:nd~, .. -c _~Lir _: *:!,r ,; ;. _,; ~ the west 25 feet of said n-e,,lises ilcreto~crc duc3icatl~d to r?; ~ publi•o for its use as a public hi~rilway. E,~~D Lot i, b~ no tr:`: ~ Northwest Qaarter of the '.•:orth:vesc of Section 1J, ~ ;hi, 3 ;,,;,~Lf,, Range 1 East of the Boise ~:eridian, lying on the b:estc:rl;~ :.ic?~.. of the center of that Drain DitcY: , -unning tYlroug ~ , d ?.mot 1, a_:<i fu,,-ther. less the fol.lcJ%ng descr~.Led real _-~ron,~rt•rc Lots 1 through and includi^g 7.2, Queeniand T:crc Sa::divzsicn, ' according to the plat on file 4%1th the Recorder c' i:d C~,::nty, ~ Idaho, in Boo: 28 of Plats, page 17,7, records ut: ~::a<d Co~~nty, SUBJECT TO Taxes and assossP^eat~, for. t.^.c eai- 197 anc suase+:,~c:a years, together :•Jith a^~, and ail e~:i ~,.iny e,,~e.-:~^ts ar~d ri Guts of • J%ay of reccrd. ~. ,~ . .:I 111.. i` ..~.. ~ L?.. .._ , ... ._ .... ...... .... n}_ 1. .i^1 .,. .. __. _.. _!:~:'. _ _.~_. ,. , t . .. .. ..t ., t ,.. _..."._ .. .., .. ,.l t...... .r._.. .....:..: _,., ... .. ..... r[~. .~' .. .. 1~, .. _ r . -. i ~. .. .. : __. 1 1 7 a i 3 1 r a a F t __ _ , WAIZI~ ~ iti'T ~" I~:~II~~I~ '/ ~' ~~ ~'~ t•ur b'::lur I:.~c~rice,i 'PRGh!l,:d G. SCC'I~1' ar... !;JIt.,, i:. ....'ii _ c , }iUS rI Cl `l!: ..i:d r11. fL , rig.. c:ra,~v,r -, d.; h:r.~i,: ,, ;uii, iru'ra:n, r;(_i: _....t , _ ..._ .. ,, ,. . . ~J[,.~.L:''ii,/+r,,U AULiS, L:,c_. , •=:'l IC?._s:iG .~..,t;.'__.~tr. < .:~ - .:- ,..... .,.,, lug ['!O, .. _.. __ ~- th, ,, ;uitce ,file io'.i~r..i~:,, t~'sc.ii:,rti Ir, ,r.in,.., ..iL. 1'he Sc,ut-h:d~-,.;*. Quarter (:9~ ~j of t:^.e ..,~._.:F_._~_ Quarter tS~l/»? of Se-:c.iC;a ?^ ..:..,.. 3 .,.._~. , P.aP.:~r. _. .: EGSt O° t}iC ECi_SC .:'ridY<i":, ..,_- r.r~`~^t': , Idat1O. 'I'CCJe tl"1 G'r Wl t}: .1~ 1 4:dtE'r ri'; ,_. C~1 r. ~,._„ and ri .ts of i•:ay for ditcht. , t~:c~r:_o~bcL~:,...... . or usc~ in coa.^.*~ction ti,:cre•.,itii. T.'}:CLCiDT.P:G T:iF.RL•:FP,OL? the. follotai.^.a ce:;ci'i:ci real p.-o,~c~tt./: A one acre tract of .a^d in t ~ S:i_/ _~~ ~ %=_ , Section 24 T~:lrship 3 .:ortr; , Runge _. ..~:. _ - more partlCUlariy described ~s follc-::s: Beginning at the South uuarte- Ccr~^_r o` Sectio:, 24, `L'o:lnship 3 ..orti~, Ya^qn 1 .._~t; thence .dortii 29°57' East ale. the Sc;:t: Ser_tion li^.o of Sectio.-. 2», tho ~enter_i..~ c Victory Road a distance of 3r~.»G t. to the true point of beainnir.g; theac•_ ..~_tP: 0°03' st a distance o~ 20'u.7 ft. tc , r. iron pi^, tha .co Idort`: 2:+'S7' East a distance of 203.7 ft. ±% _ron ;;i^; the.^.::_ Souc.. 0°03' 3ast ._ ~_-..~.._ o.` 200.7 rt. t!i t:e _.-n L~r='.--- ~. ':i~•_U_'7 Sect_cri 3. t`:_r.cc :;v~~_.. ., „' ..::.~ of 208.7 . ~. tc i:hc -,::_._ __: r_e :ir._.__ _ , SLL~ ..~ CL i3 2~ t. _ >__.._ ___~. .... ..~ 'C.. Vict..rf T::u. ..~,_ ~_w._._ ~.,:.~_.._._._. _.t... acres. J~'_.~_:C_ _i; . .....-_ ~..._ ..:.___,-.."_..~_ a ~,. ~ r J' __ _ .. "frr li:~~ is :i ~{r'C!~ fIC+: UYti:r ..:iii i;. .,. ~ t~ ._~.. _.,..._. .._ .. .. ~:r: (:~ .. _. -_., heirs _. .. .. Vin, . ,., ~.. :,r.~i ti.. (.... .. -- . ... . .......... .. ... _ .. .. f• ._ ._. ... . a ... __.....:. ~ ~ AM~RICA?'~ ~,Ah~D T~TL~ ~4MlPA~1Y 8050 W. Rifleman Street P.O. Box 9245 Boise, Idaho 83704 Phone 208-375-0485 FAX 208-375-2983 January 22, 1999f i 4 f9 .;~ ~~ i r a ~l BECKY BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 'ORDER NO: -LD-52958 1551 FEDERAL WAY REFERENCE:THE WESTPARK CO. BOISE, ID QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. i i ' ATTN: BECKY BRIGGS i DELIVER BY i. '~-'---------'-------------------------------------------------------------------- i y9 IN CONNECTION WITH THE ABOVE TRANSACTION, WE ENCLOSE: XX COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE V ~ ~ '1VE.34' ~~IY~1 -t.7~~~ THANK~YOU FOR GIVING US THE OPPORTUNITY OF SERVING YOU. AMERICAN LAND TITLE COMPANY BY L DARLING . ~HICArO TITLE INSURANCE COMPAN~ COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A i. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 24, 1998 AT 7:30 A.M. 2. POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED: (A) ALTA OFGNERS POLICY - (10-17-92) PROPOSED INSURED: THE WESTPARK COMPANY, INC. (B) ALTA LOAN POLICY - (10-17-92) PROPOSED INSURED: (C) ENDORSEMENTS: FILE NO. AMOUNT $ PREMIUM $ AMOUNT $ PREMIUM $ AMOUNT $ (~ -LD-`92958 J " 3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT AND COVERED HEREIN IS: FEE SIMPLE 4. TITLE TO THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN SAID LAND IS AT THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF IS VESTED IN: QUEENLAND ACRES, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION 5. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A (CONTINUED) NOTE: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: NO ADDRESS AVAILABLE COUNTERSIGNED AT: BOISE, IDAHO AMERICAN LAND TITLE COMPANY AUTHORIZED OFFICER OR AGENT S k LEGT"., DESCRIPTION - (~tinued) EXHIBIT A TRACT A: • FILE NO: 52958 i THE NE1/4 NE1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 753.5 FEET THEREOF. ALSO EXCEPT THE WEST 25 FEET THEREOF. TRACT B: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE E1/2 NE1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BELOW: COMMENCING AT THE SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 13 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND SECTION 18 AND 19, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE MERIDIAN LINE 753.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°12' WEST 918.80 FEET TO THE CENTER OF A CANAL, WHICH IS THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°12' WEST 393.40 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE E1/2 NE1/4, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., THENCE SOUTH 0°07' EAST 1885.90 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE E1/2 NE1/4 OF SECTION 24 TO A POINT ON THE EAST-WEST MID SECTION LINE OF SECTION 24; THENCE NORTH 89°41' EAST 1171.70 FEET ALONG THE MID SECTION LINE TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 89°41' WEST 137.10 FEET FROM THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., AND SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, B.M.; THENCE NORTH 33°02' WEST 117.90 FEET TO THE CENTER OF A CANAL; THENCE NORTH 31°22' WEST 139.10 FEET ALONG CENTER OF CANAL; THENCE NORTH 41°37' WEST 1019.00 FEET ALONG CENTER OF CANAL; THENCE NORTH 25°06' WEST 82.05 FEET ALONG CENTER OF CANAL; THENCE NORTH 4°28' EAST 833.04 FEET ALONG CENTER OF CANAL TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TRACT C: THE SW1/4 SE1/4 AND THE NW1/4 SE1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, AND THAT PARCEL DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF THE NE1/4 SE1/4, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M.; THENCE SOUTH 28.3 FEET; THENCE IN A NORTHEASTERLY DIRECTION TO A POINT ON THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF THE NE1/4 SE1/4 A DISTANCE OF 28.3 FEET FROM THE NW CORNER OF THE NE1/4 SE1/4; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF THE NE1/4 SE1/4 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A TRACT OF LAND IN THE SW1/4 SE1/4, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST; (CONTINUED) . c E. ' LEGAL DESCRIPTIO*I - ;~tin~~efl) • FILE NO :- 52958 .~ THEI`TCE NORTH 89°57' EAST ALONG THE SOUTH SECTION LINE OF SECTION 24, THE CENTERLINE OF VICTORY ROAD A DISTANCE OF 300.40 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ~` ~;.~ NORTH 0°03' WEST A DISTANCE OF 208.7 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 89°57' EAST A DISTANCE OF 208.7 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE SOUTH 0°03' EAST A DISTANCE OF 208.7 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF VICTORY ROAD ALSO THE SOUTH SECTION LINE OF SECTT_ON 24; THENCE SOUTH 89°57' WEST ALONG CENTERLINE OF VICTORY ROAD A DISTANCE OF 208.7 FEET TO, THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN A PORTION OF THE W1/2 SE1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: E t COMMENCING AT THE QUARTER SECTION CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 24 AND 25; THENCE NORTH 89°47'15" EAST 1,144.34 FEET (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS 1,227.62 FEET) ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SECTION 24 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 3°10'49" EAST 291.88 FEET (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 3°03'18"°EAST 291.58 FEET) TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 9°28'07" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 9°35'38" WEST} 203.05 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 0°40'23" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 0°47'54" WEST} 190.85 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 30°27'34" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 30°35'05" WEST) 132.19 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 21°02'29" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 21°10'00" WEST) 113.21 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 0°05'39" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 0°13'10" WEST) 232.28 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 4°40'35" EAST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 4°33'04" EAST) 422.82 FEET TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 84°19'39" EAST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 84°12'08" EAST) 266.58 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH-SOUTH SIXTEENTH-LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 0°06'49" EAST (FORMERLY DESCRIED AS SOUTH 0°14'20" EAST) 1,416.56 ALONG SAID SIXTEENTH LINE TO AN IRON PIN, WHICH IRON PIN ALSO BEING NORTH 0°06'49" WEST (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS NORTH 0°14'20" WEST) 165.00 FEET OF THE EAST 1/16 CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 24 AND 25; THENCE SOUTH 27°29'44" WEST 186.37 FEET (FORMERLY DESCRIBED AS SOUTH 27°22'02" WEST 186.19 FEET) TO AN IRON PIN ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SECTION 24; THENCE SOUTH 89°47'15" WEST 89.02 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SECTION 24 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. r ... . ~ ~ ~ ~ --~. ~ ~,~ CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPAI t SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 m FILE NO. -LD-52SS8 1 THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH: ...~# ~~ 1. PAYMENT TO OR FOR THE ACCOUNT OF THE GRANTORS OR MORTGAGORS OF THE FULL CONSIDERATION FOR THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED. 2. PROPER~INSTRUMENT(S) CREATING THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED MUST BE ' ~ ,3 ~ EXECUTED AND ,DULY FILED FOR RECORD, TO WIT: .~. , ITEM A: ?EXECUTION AND RECORDATION"OF A WARRANTY DEED.. FROM QUEENLAND ACRES, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION, TO THE WESTPARK COMPANY, INC. t~,: { NOTE: .FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, NOT UNDER THE INSURING PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY. [ TAXES FOR THE YEAR 1998 WERE $1,774.62, PARCEL N0. 51224438800, (CODE AREA 242), f BALANCE IS $887.31. ,,~ 4 (AFFECTS PART OF PARCEL C) ~~ ( cr ~ ~ NOTE: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, NOT UNDER THE INSURING PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY. ,° TAXES FOR THE~YEAR 1998 WERE $590.42,~PARCEL NO. S1224427900, (CODE AREA~242);~', BALANCE. IS $295.21. i (AFFECTS PART OF PARCEL C) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.i E }~ e ~ ~ NOTE: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, NOT UNDER THE INSURING PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY: a ,TAXES FOR THE YEAR 1998 WERE $407.22, PARCEL NO. 51224141900, (CODE AREA~242),, f BALANCE IS $203.61. t f ~ y (AFFECTS PART OF °PARCEL B) + ~ ~.~~ ~ NOTE: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, NOT UNDER THE INSURING PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY. TAXES FOR THE YEAR 1998 WERE $600.22, PARCEL_NO.°51224120800, (CODE AREA~242'), ~~ i ! ! BALANCE.IS,$300.11. ' (AFFECTS PARCEL A AND ADDITIONAL PROPERTY).. c,~ ~' `~ ~ ~ rr THE INFORMATION FOR THIS COMMITMENT WAS PREPARED BY LYNN DARLING. IF YOU HAVE`ANY - QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL (208) 375,0485. a` ~ ~' t ¢ ~~ { .~ t ~. ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ , 4 •-~ k J ,. r .m - ,6 , .- v S" .J d NOTE: FOR A DEED OF TRUST, THE TRUSTEE SHOULD APPEAR AS FOLLOWS: i AMERICAN LAND TITLE COMPANY, LLC .o - ~ ~ ~ PURSUANT TO THE IDAHO STATE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE REGULATION 25 AND 56, A CANCELLATION FSE WILL SE CHARGED AND COLLECTED FOR THIS COMMITMENT SHOULD THIS TRANSACTION FAIL i~TO CLOSE. ~E r I e~ 3 r~ ~ r f. i k z I • E • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPA~ SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 FILE N"iJMBER: -1LD-5258 !a_ , SCHEDULE B OF THE POLICY TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO THE FOLLOWING MATTERS UNLESS THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OF TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPANX: A. DEFECTS, LIENS, ENCUMBRANCES, ADVERSE CLAIMS OR OTHER MATTERS, IF ANY, CREATED, FIRST APPEARING IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS, OR ATTACHING SUBSEQUENT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BUT PRIOR TO THE DATE THE PROPOSED INSURED ACQUIRES OF RECORD FOR VALUE THE ESTATE OR INTEREST OR MORTGAGE THEREON COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT. B. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: (1) RIGHTS OR CLAIMS OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. (2) ENCROACHMENTS, OVERLAPS, BOUNDARY LINE DISPUTES, AND ANY OTHER MATTERS WHICH WOULD BE DISCLOSED BY AN ACCURATE SURVEY OR INSPECTION OF THE PREMISES INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, INSUFFICIENT OR IMPAIRED ACCESS OR MATTERS CONTRADICTORY TO ANY SURVEY PLAT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. (3) EASEMENTS, OR CLAIMS OF EASEMENTS, NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. (4) ANY LIEN, OR RIGHT TO A LIEN, FOR SERVICES, LABOR, OR MATERIAL HERETOFORE OR HEREAFTER FURNISHED, IMPOSED BY LAW AND NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORD. (5} (A) UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS; (B) RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN PATENTS OR IN ACTS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF; (C) WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER, WHETHER OR NOT THE MATTERS EXCEPTED UNDER (A), (B), OR (C) ARE SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. (6) TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN AS EXISTING LIENS BY THE RECORDS OF ANY TAXING AUTHORITY THAT LEVIES TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY OR BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. PROCEEDINGS BY A PUBLIC AGENCY WHICH MAY RESULT IN TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS, OR NOTICES OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN BY THE RECORDS OF SUCH AGENCY OR BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. C. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: (SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 CONTINUED) SCHEDULE'B - SECTION 2 COMMITMENT • • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 a f1 FILE NUMBER: -LD-52958 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED THEREWITH, FOR THE YEAR 1998, WHICH ARE A LIEN, OF WHICH THE FIRST INSTALLMENT IS PAID AND THE SECOND INSTALLMENT IS DUE AND PAYABLE ON OR BEFORE JUNE 20, 1999; AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS WHICH ARE A LIEN NOT YET PAYABLE.. 2. LIENS, LEVIES, AND ASSESSMENTS OF THE NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT, AND THE RIGHTS, POWERS, AND EASEMENTS OF SAID DISTRICT AS BY LAW PROVIDED.. NO DELINQUENCIES APPEAR OF RECORD IN THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE. 3. RIGHT OF WAY FOR A LATERAL DITCH UNDER QUITCLAIM DEED EXECUTED BY JAMES MARLATT TO BERTHA L. HESS, UNMARRIED, BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 5, 1895, IN BOOK 29 OF DEEDS AT PAGE 501, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO. (AFFECTS PARCELS A AND B) 4. EASEMENT TO NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT AS SET FORTH IN AN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 28, 1964, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 597115, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO. (AFFECTS PARCEL C) 5. RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR RIDENBALTGH CANAL AND THE RIGHTS OF ACCESS THERETO FOR MAINTENANCE. (AFFECTS PARCEL C) 6. RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR HARDIN DRAIN AND THE RIGHTS OF ACCESS THERETO FOR MAINTENANCE. (AFFECTS PARCEL C) 7. RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR KENNEDY LATERAL AND THE RIGHTS OF ACCESS THERETO FOR MAINTENANCE. (AFFECTS PARCEL B) 8. RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR VICTORY ROAD AND STODDARD ROAD. END OF SCHEDULE B C~ PFMR02PUB 99 N E W M A S T E R U P D A T E AMLAND ~ 1/1~1/99 Parcel S1224438800 Code Area 242 Type Sty Value ACTIVE Name QUEENLAND ACRES INC 010 20.000 30045 100 1.000 45000 Buyer 180 10.040 60000 Bank Code C/0 CAROL LOTSPEICH 190 4.000 Address 1032 E CAYMAN DR 310 69400 Prepaid L.I.D. MERIDIAN ID Bankrupt 83642 - 6661 Sub.Code Last Change 98/10/25 By ASR_.BYING Annexation *NO Total 204445 Notes Desc. PAR #8800 OF SW4SE4 SEC 24 3N 1W Exemption 03NO1W248800 3N 1W 24 Hardship -- Property Zoning RT Flag Address 03114 S STODDARD RD MERIDIAN ID 8364 2-0000 D.D. Space Type 1 REAL Roll 1 PRIMARY Occ. 0 N ON-OCC Action: F2=Select F3=Exit F9=UR F10=Tax Alt-Z FOR HELPS VT100 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSE D 3 PRINT OFF 3 ON-LINE TAX*MAIN *PUBLIC TAX COLLECTION SYSTEM ( MASTER) 1/11/99 00000 S1224438800 09:30:56 ©UEENLAND ACRES INC Bank: Tax Value: $129.445 CAROL LOTSPEICH Prepaid: H/0: 1032 E CAYMAN DR Bankrupt: HA: MERIDIAN ID 83642-6661 Sub Code; CB Amt: Bill# 98110105379 Cd Area: 242 Year BASE CHARGE Hlf NET TAX RECEIVED HALF DUE TOTAL DUE 98 1774.62 1 887.31 887.31- 2 887.31 887.31 887.31 97 1546.15 1 773.09 773.09- 2 773.09 773.09- 96 1528.54 1 764.27 764.27- 2 764.27 764.27- 95 1442.50 1 721.25 721.25- 2 721.25 721.25- 94 1553.66 1 776.83 776.83- 2 776.83 776.83- + *ACTION 98 Interest as of 1/11/99 .000% 887.31 CF02-SELECT CF03-EXIT CF05-CALC Alt-Z FOR .HELPS VT100 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSED 3 PRINT OFF 3 ON-LINE ~. r Ih .. /. ~~:.. PFMR02PUB 9~? N E W M A S T E R U P D A T E AMLAND 1/11/99 Parcel 51224120~i00 Code Area 242 Type . Qty Value ACTIVE Name QUEENLAND ACRES INC 010 25-.720 30782 Data From 190 .800 Mas'te r buyer 310 13000 Bank Code C/0 CAROL LOTSPEICH Address 1032 E CAYMAN DR Prepaid L.I.D. MERIDIAN ID Bankrupt W 83642 - 6661 Sub.Code Last Change 98/06/09 Sy ASDORISM Annexation *NO Total 43782 Notes Desc. NW4NE4 EXC QUEENLAND ACRES SU6 Exemption SEC 24 3N 1W Grp 000 Typ 000 Ap 03NO1W240800 Property Address 00485 W OVERLAND Space Type 1 REAL ^F2=Select F3=Exit AIt-Z FOR HELPS VT100 TAX*MAIN *PU6LIC S1224120800 9UEENLAND ACRES INC ~~AROL LOTSPEICH 1032 E CAYMAN DR MERIDIAN 3N 1W 24 Hardship Zoning RT Flag RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-0000 D.D. Roll 1 PRIMARY Occ. 0 NON-OCC Action: F9=UR F10=Tax 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSED 3 PRINT OFF 3 ON-LINE TAX COLLECTION SYSTEM (MASTER) 1/11/99 00000 09:29:55 Bank: Tax Value: $43,782 Prepaid: H/0: Bankrupt: HA: ID 83642-6661 Sub Code: CS Amt: 8i11# 98110105342 Year EASE CHARGE Hlf NET TAX RECEIVED 98 600.22 1 300.11 300.11- 2 300.11 97 726.60 1 363.30 363.30- 2 363.30 363.30= 96 706.78 1 353.39 353.39- 2 353.39 353.39- 95 644.18 1 322.09 322.09- 2 322.09 322.09- 94 702.64 1 351.32 351.32- 2 351.32 351.32- *ACTION 98 Interest as of 1/11/99 Cd Area: HALF DUE 300.11 .000% 300.11 CF02-SELECT CF03-EXIT CFOS-CALC Alt-Z FOR HELPS VT100 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSED 3 PRINT OFF 3 ON-LINE 242 TOTAL DUE 300.11 ' .. i~ ~ 6~ k t s HI. ~ PFMR02PUB 9$ N E W M A S T E R U P D A T E AMLAND'"-' `1/11/99 Parcel S12~244279004 Code Area 242 Type Qty Value ACTIVE Name QUEENLAND'ACRES INC 010 37.000 43067 Data, From 190 1.000 Master buyer Bank Code " C/0 CAROL LOTSPEICH ~ Address 1032 E CAYMAN DR PrePai d MERIDIAN ID ~ Bankrupt =~ ` 83642 -- 6661 Sub.Code Last Change 93/06/10 By ASR_MASON Annexation *NO ' Total 43067 Notes Desc. PAR #7900 OF N2SE4 ' SEC 24 3N iW '~ °~ Exemption ~ ' ~ , Grp 000 Typ 000 Aq , ` ' ~ . , / 03NO1W247900 3N 1W 24 Hardship Property Zoning RT Flag ' Address~00000 STODDARD ID '-D- ~ l D Space Type 1 REAL Roll 1 PRIMARY Occ. 0 NON-OCC Action: F2"=Select F3=Exit F9=UR F10=Tax '~ ~ ' A12t-Z FOR HELPS°VT100 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSED 3 PRINT OFF 3~ ON-LINE TAX*MAIN *PUBLIC TAX COLLECTION SYSTEM (MASTER) 1/11/99 00000 S1224427900 09:31:28 QUEENLAND ACRES INC Sank: Tax Value: {$43,067- CAROL LOTSPEICH Prepaid; H/0: 1032 E CAYMAN DR Bankrupt: HA: MERIDIAN ID 83642-6661 Sub Code: CB Amt: ~ Bill# 98110105378 Cd Area : 242 Year BASE CHARGE Hlf NET TAX RECEIVED HALF DUE TOTAL DUE 98 590.42 1 295.21 295.21- 2 295.21 295.21 295.21 97 438.68 1 219.34 219.34- 2 219.34 219.34- 96 409.24 1 20.4.62 204.62- 2 204.62 204.62- 95 334.88 1 167.44 167.44- , 2 167.44 167.44- ' ` 94 350.82 1 175.41 175.41- 2 175.41 175.41- a + *ACTIOIV 98 Interest as of 1/1]./99 .000% ~ F 295.21 CF02-SELECT CF03-EXIT CF05-CALC ~ Alt-Z FOR HELPS VT100 3 FDX 3 9600 N81 3 LOG CLOSED 3 PRINT OFF 3 ON-LI'NE _ ~ /~ II • ' :'FI~:R02PUB 98 .; N E W M A S T E R U P D A T E AMLAND Parcel S1224141900 Code Area 242 Type Qty Value Name QUEENLAND ACRES INC 010 27.000 29704 190 1.570 Buyer C/0 CAROL LOTSPEICH Address 1032 E CAYMAN DR MERIDIAN ID 83642 - 6661 Last Change 93/06/10 By ASR_MASON \ Desc . E2NE4 S & W OF CAN ~ 3~~ ~~ J EXC N, 753.5' ~~~-~~ SEC 24'3N 1W 03NO1W241900 Property Address 00000 S MERIDIAN Space Type 1 REAL F2=Select F3=Exit Alt-Z FOR HELP° VT100 Total 29704 1/19/99 ACTIVE Data'~From :Zas ter Bank Code Prepaid ` `' L.I.D.. Bankrupt Sub.Code Annexation *NO Notes Exemption Grp 000 Typ 000 Ap 3N 1W 24 Hardship Zoning RT ID Roll 1 PRIMARY Occ. 0 NON-OCC F9=UR F10=Tax Flag D.D. Action: ° FDX 38400 N81 LOG CLOSED. PRINT OFF ON-LINE TAX*MAIN *PUBLIC TAX COLLECTION SYSTEM (MASTER) I/19/99 00000 S1224141900 15:17:12 QUEENLAND ACRES INC Bank: Tax Value: $29,704 CAROL LOTSPEICH Prepaid: H/O: 1032 E CAYMAN DR Bankrupt: HA: MERIDIAN ID 83642-6661 Sub Code: CB Amt: Bill# 98110105344 Cd Area: 242 Year BASE CHARGE Hlf NET TAX RECEIVED 98 407.22 1 203.61 203.61- 2 203.61 97 299.48 1 149.74 149.74- 2 149.74 149.74- 96 279.38 1 139.69 139.69- 2 139.69 139.69- 95 238.84 1 119.42 119.42- 2 119.42 119.42- 94 249.88 1 124.94 124.94- 2 124.94 124.94- *ACTION 98 Interest as of 1/19/99 CF02-SELECT CF03-EXIT HALF DUE 203.61 .000 CF05-CALC * TOTAL DUE 203.61 203.61 Alt-Z FOR HELP° VT100 FDX 38400 N81 LOG CLOSED PRINT OFF ON-LINE .. • OPTION TO PURGE REAL ESTATE ' THIS OPTION is made and entered into effective the ~`~ day of December, 1998, by and between QUEENLAND ACRES, INC., an Idaho corporation (Optionor) and THE WESTPARR COMPANY, INC., an Idaho corporation (Optionee). 1. GRANT OF OPTION. In consideration of the sum of TEN TiIOUSAND and N4/100 DOLLARS ($10,000.00) paid by Optionee to the Optionor, receipt and sufficiency whereof is hereby acknowledged, Optionor hereby grants to the Optionee the exclusive option to purchase the real property more particularly described below: 4ract As The NW~NE~ of Section 24, T. 3N., R. 1W. 8. M., Ada County, Idaho, excepting therefrom the North 753.5 feet thereof. sraat Hs A parcel of lzend located iri the E~tNE~ of Section 24, T. 32~., R. 1 W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described below: Commencing at the section corner common to Sections 13 and 24, T. 3N., R. 1W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, and Section. 18 and 19, T. 3N., R. 1 B., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, thence South along the Meridian Line 753.50 feet; thence South 89012' West 918.80 feet to the center of a canal, which is the point of beginning; thence South 89012' West 393.40 feet to a point on the West line of the 8~N8'~, Section 24, T. 3N., R. 1 W., B.M., thence South Oo07' East 1885.90 feet along the West line of the E~tNE~C, of Section 24 to a point on the East- West Mid Section line of Section 24, thence North 89041' East 2171.70 feet along the mid section line to a point which bears South 89x41' West 137.10 fast from the quarter corner common to Section 24, T. 3N., R. 1 W., B.M., a»d Section 19, T. 3N., R. 1 E., B.M., thence North 33002' West 117.90 feet to the center of a canal thence North 32022' West 139.10 feet along center of canal thence North 41037' West 1019.00 feet along center of canal thence North 25006 thence Horth 4028' to the point acres more or 3N., R. 1 W., ' West 82.05 feet along center of canal East 833.04 feet along center of canal of beginning and containing 25:345 lase all in the E~NE~, Section 24, T. B.M., Ada County, Idaho. The SW'~SE~ and the ~NW~SE~t of Section 24, T. 3N. , R. iW. , B.M. , Ada County, Idaho, and that parcel described as follows: Beginning at the NW corner of the NE~SE~, Section 24, T. 3N., R. 1 N., H.M.; thence South 28.3 feet; thence in a north- easterly direction to a point on the north boundary line of the NE~SE~t a distance of 28.3 feet from the NW corner of the NE~SE~; thence West along the north boundary line of ''the N8~3E~to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM approximately one acre of land along West Victory Road which is the property of Theron Scott and Sharon Scott and is taxed by the Ada County Assessor as Parcel No. 51224438900. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM a parcel of land lying in a portion of the W~SE~C of Section 24, T. 2N., R. 1 W., B.K., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Comzaenci~g at the Quarter Section comer common to Sectione 24 and 25; thence. t~Iorth 89n47' 15" East 1,144.34 feet (f©n~e'r3.y described as 1,227.62 feet) along the south boundary of Section 24 to the true point of beginning; thence North 3010'49" East 291.88 feet (formerly described as North 3003'18" East 291.58 feet) to an iron pin; thence North 9028'07 West (formerly described as North 9035'38" West) 203.05 feet to an iron pin; thence North Oa40'23" West (foz~merly described as North Oo47'S4" Westj 190.85 feet to an iron pin; thence North 30°27'34" West {formerly described ae North 30035' 05" West) 132.19 feet to an iron pfn; thence North 21002' 29" West (fonperly described as North 21010' 00" West) 113.21 feet to an iron pin; thence North Oo05'39" West (formerly described as North OQ13'10" West) 232.28 feet to an iron pin; thence North 4040'35" East (formerly described as North 4033'04" Eastj 422.82 feet to an iron pin; thence North 84019'39" East (formerly described as North 84°12'0$" Eastj 266.58 feet to a point on the north-south sixteenth line of the southeast quarter; thence South Oa06'49" Last (formerly described as South Qo14'20" Eastj 1,416.56 feet along said sixteenth line to an iron pin, which iron pin also being North Oo06'49" West (formerly described as North 014'20" West) 165.00 feet of the East 1/16 corner common to Sections 24 and 25; thence South 27029'44" West 186.37 feet (formerly described as South 27022'02" West 186.19 feet to an iron pin on the South boundary of Section 24; thence South 89047'15" • West 89.02 feet along the South boundary of Section 24 to ahe true point of beginning, j The above three parcels are subject to real property taxes land, assessm:anta for the year 199$ and thereafter together wit~° easements, reservations and restrictions of record or ,apparent. ~ p x2. PURCHASE PRICE. The optionee may exercise its optiori'to purchase the proP~rty in parcels of 20~acres ar more (Parcels).E The. ,Optionee -must exercise its option for the first .parcel `~~(1'`~ Parcel) on or before March 31, 2000 and for each additional Pa~ el on or before the 31't day of; March of each succeeding year; ,. thereafter..t ~, Y ~ , The purchase price of each Parcel~Optionee ,exercises its Option to Purchase is as follows: - ~ ,` Parcel rchassd ~ase~Pr3oe 1 € 1't Parcel $20,000.00 per acre if exercised on or before March 21,. 200®; `' 2:~d Farcel $21, 200.00 per acre if exercised an or bef~ re R - s March 21, 2001; ~ t Std Parcel $22,400.00 per acre if exercised on or before March 21, 2002; I .4`h Parcel $23,600.00 per acre if exercised on or before March 21, 2003; 5th~Parcel $24,800.00 per acre if exercised on or bef~re March 21, 2004; 6"' Parcel $25,000.00 per acre if exercised'on or before .March 21,.2005; Forthe~purpose of computing the total purchase price for a Parcel if the Parcel shall contain a fraction of an acre, the purc2 ~ se price for that fractional acre shall be the product of the purchase .. ~ price per acre for that Parcel multiplied by the amount of that fraction. For example, if the 1't Parcel contains. 22..786 acres, the purchase price for that Parcel would be $445,120.00. a, 3. EXPIRATION DATE. If Optionee does not timely exercise ,. ~++.~.-~~~ T~ ws*s+i-.try nr :sr ~ ~ r~nrt. ~ •wr~ ~ _ ,+ _ _ ~~, i ~ ~ nn~nt-T ern »Y to nu ~ cc n~c ~ ~ r_ o~r ~ mr~ ~ ~ ~ its option to purchase the 1'` Parcel on or before March 21, 2000 and timely close that purchase, this Option shall terminate and be of no further force or effect without any notice to the Optionee and Optionee shall have no further right or claim with respect'to the property. If tha Optionee exercises its option to purchase the 1'` Parcel and timely closes the purchase but does not acquire all of the groperty, then this option shall be extended through March 21, 2001. If by March 21, 2001 Optionee does not exercise its option to purchase the balance of the property but exercises its option to purchase the 2nd Parcel, then to extend the expiration date of this option beyond March 21, 2001, Optionee shall pay to Optionor additional option money and shall have exercised its option to purchase a Parcel in accordance with the schedule set forth below which shall extend Date Additional Option Money ~,~hal,l Be „paid Date of closing of purchase of 2°d Parcel Date of closing of purchase of 3rd Parcel Date of closing of purchase of 4"' Parcel the ®ption to the dates listed. Additional Expiration Date Option Money of To Be Paid Option Extensio $3,000 per acre for March 21, 2002 each acre included in the 2nd Parcel purchased $3,000 per acre for March 21, 2003 each acre included in the 3`d Parcel purchased $3,000 per acre for March 21, 2004 each acre included in the 4`" Parcel purchased Data of closing $3,000 per acre for March 21, 2005 of purchase of each acre included in 5C° Parcel the 5`h Parcel purchased For the purpose of computing the additional option money to be paid to extend the Option, if the Parcel purchased contains a fraction AifTTAI-T TA Y!T tD /~T1 A OC A ~ A T T CT A TT` A i ~ e~ t' .. of an acre, the additional option money to be paid for that ~. fraction of an acre shall be the product of $3, 000.00 multiplied by 1, the amount of that fraction. For example, if the Optionee •has ®xercised its option to purchase the 3rd Parcel and it contained 20.164 acres and wants to extend the Option to March 21, 2003, Optionee shall pay to Optionor the sum of $60, 492.00 on the closing of the purchase of the 3rd Parcel. j In the event the Optionee shall not timely tender to the Optionor the additional option money for extension of the Option, the Option shall automatically terminate and be of no further force or effect without any notice to the Optionee and Optionee shall have no further right or claim with respect to the property. The $10,000.00 paid for this Option as referred to in section 1 shall be a credit toward the purchase price of the 1't Parcel purchased. All of the remainder of the money paid for extending the Option beyond March 21, 2001 shall be a credit toward the purchase price of the final Parcel comprising all of the property described in section 1. Failure of the Optionee to purchase all of the property shall cause a forfeiture of the additional option money paid for extension of this Option. 4. LOCATION OF PARCELS. The 1°` Parcel purchased shall consist of no more than two separate pieces of land. One pi®ce shall be located in Tract A having one boundary common to Stoddard Road, and the other piece shall be located in the Northeast corner of Tract C having one boundary adjacent to Stoddard Road. If the ist Parcel purchased comprises a single piece of land it shall~be located in Tract A and have one boundary common to Stoddard Road. Ati~TTf1N Tf1 pYTrt!`T.TACF ARAT FCT4T'R _ i ~ . a f S Each Parcel purchased thereafter. shall be adjacent to a prior piece of land which has been purchased. Each Parcel shall consist of no 1 ', more than two separate pieces of land. Each Parcel selected shall be accompanied with a plat of that property capable of being recorded which shall have streets dedicated to the public extending to the boundaries of the Parcel of sufficient width so as to permit the platting of the remainder of the property which has not been purchased. Also, before any Parcel other than the 1't Parcel can be purchased there must also be underground water, sewer, telecommunication, natural gas, electricity lines and required utilities in place in the streets at the outer boundaries of all prior Parcels or pieces of land purchased. Development of the property and selection of Parcels to be purchased shall generally be on the north end of the property ,and proceeding in a southerly direction to Victory Road on the south boundary. No Parcels shall be selected in the SW~SE~ of Section 24 until. ali land north of that fractional section has been purchased. 5. CONTINGENCY. Tn the event the Optionee is unable to obtain approval from the City of Meridian allowing for 'the construction of a pump or lift station for sewer service in the area of where Hardin Drain crosses Stoddard Road by June 1, 1999, this Option shall terminate and the option money of $10,000.00 paid in accordance with section i shall be returned to the optionee. In the event the Optionee shall be unable to obtain annexation of all of the real property to the City of Meridian and approva3 by the City of Meridian of its preliminary plat for subdividing all of nn~rrn~.r ern m m ew ~ or. n r. ~ r r. oar w ~rr_ c I ~" . ~~ • ~ • the real property into a residential subdivision at an average density of 2.8 lots per acre by January 1, 2000, this Option sh~ll automatically terminate. In the event the Option terminates for this reason, the option money paid by the Optionee to the Optionor shall be retained by the Optionor. The Optionor agrees to cooperate with the Optionee in the annexation and platting of the real property and shall execute all required documents that are necessary for those purposes after reasonable notice to the Optionor. All of the cost of obtaining annexation and platting of the real property shall be the sole responsibility of the Ogtionee. ' All of Optionee's activities on the property including, without limitation, the annexation and platting of the real property is at the Optionee's election, and Optionor is not requiring the captionee to conduct any activities on the property or to annex the real property to the City of Meridian or to subdivide the real. property. 6. ACCESS TO PROPERTY. During the term this Option shall be in effect, the Optionee shall have reasonable access to the real property for the- purpose of testing water levels, soils and for such other purposes as required by the City of Meridian or the State of Idaho in the platting of the real property and for Fits consultants in surveying the real property and performing an environmental audit or audits. t?ptionee shall repair any damage to the property occasioned by such activities placing it back in its present condition and shall hold Optionor and the property harmless from all liability or obligations resulting from such activities. AM'TA7\T T/~ 71T 771 MT A QL' n 1; A j C QT A TC' 7 A In conducting its activities on the property, optionee shall perform those activities so as to not damage crops growing or to~ be i grown on the property. 9 The optionee shall also have access to the property for the purpose of cleaning up that portion of the real property lying southwesterly of the south bank of the Ridenbaugh Canal. As further consideration for this Option, optionee agrees to clear that property of debris, structures and concrete before March 31, 2003. 7. FARM LEASE. The property is subject to a Farm Lease dated December 13, 1997 between Optionor as Landlord and James D, Patterson as Tenant. optionee acknowledges having received a copy of the Farm Lease. The Lease is from year to year and is automatically renewed if neither party gives notice of termination of the Lease by September 1 in the year in which the party wants the Lease to terminate. In the event the optionee exercises its option to purchase a Parcel of the property and the Lease shall still remain in effect, the optionee shall .acquire the Parcel subject to the terms of that Lease and will be required to negotiate with the tenant for termination of the Lease as to that Parcel. If optionee desires that the Lease terminate as to any part of the property, optionee shall. give written notice of that election no later than August 15, and Optionor shall terminate the Lease as to that portion of the property commencing January 1 of the follow- ing year. optionee shall pay to Optionor the sum of $100.00 per acre per year until purchased for each acre included in that por- ('~DTTf1N T!1 piTR~'HACF RF4T. FCT4TF _ R 1 ~~ l ~ ~1 tion of the property for which the Farm Lease is terminated. The payment shall be made upon proof of notice by Optionor to Optio~ee of the ter~ination of the Lease as to th'a't portion of the property. ~~- 8. TITLE COMMITMENT. Optionor agrees to provide to Opti nee _ I , a-ttle3commit~aent in the estimated amount of the total purchase price of all Parcels ($2,604,000.OOj from American Land Title Company within fifteen (15) days of execution "of this agreement. The ~ptioriee shall then have ten (10) days from the date the title. comntiitment` ~i"s delivered to it within which to submit in writing for the Optionor any exceptions to 'the title which are not acceptable. to'~t2ie Optionee. The form of the title commitment shall be f r a ~: standard owner's policy~of title insurance. The cost of the title ' conmtitment shall be born by~the Optionor. If the Optionee ti ely` deliversa any exceptions to th® title commitment, Optionor shall remove those exceptions within thirty (30) days of receipt.. of Optionee''s =exceptions. If Optionor is unable to remove those exc®ptions within that'30-day period, this Option shall terminate. r ~ 4 acid be oftno gurther force or effect and Optionor shall return to . Optoinee the option money paid under section 1. 9. NOTICE. OP EXERCISE. Should Optionee desir8 ~to aff~.r'rcatively °exere`ise the Option and e1~ct to purchase a Parcel or' extend the Option as provided above, Optionee shall signify such- . ''f a f election by written notice thereof giver to Optionor within the 9 time period `set forth in section 2 and in the manner set forth~ir~ section`15. and notice of exercise or extension shall~~be qiv®n to" ~~ Optiono~ by either personal delivery or by'c®rtified'mail, returns a receipt requested in accordance with the provisions of section•I5: E g k l1aTT(1N Tf1 pTTRf'~TACF RFAT. FCTATF _ 9 e Bach »otice to exercise the Option to purchase a Parcel shall be accompanied by a meets and bounds description of the Parc®1 prepared by an Zdaho licensed professional engineer or an Idaho licensed surveyor certifying the number of acres included within the boundaries of the Parcel. All roads lying within the Parcel shall be included in the total acreage. Presently existing road rights-of-way on Victory Road and Stoddard Road shall be excluded in the determination of the number of acres within the Parcel. Z0. CLOSING. If Optionee properly and timely exercises the Option to Purchase a Parcel of property, then the closing shall occur thirty (30) days after the date the notice to exercise is given. The parties shall have the closing of the purchase at the offices of American Land Title Company, 8050 W. Rifleman, Boise, lD 83704. At the closing, the Optionee shall deliver to the closing agent the entire purchase price for the Parcel less any option money which can be credited for that purchase as provided in section 3. Also at the closing, the Optionor shall execute and deliver to the closing agent for delivery to the Optionee a warranty 'deed tc the Parcel subject only to the exceptions set forth in the commitment for title insurance which were acceptable to the optionee. The parties will equally share the cost of the closing agent's fee and all docwaent preparation costs charged by the closing agent. The Optione~e shall pay the cost of recording the deed, and the Optionar shall pay the cost of the standard ALTA Owner's policy Aw/.Y.A17 T/~ T~ TA /9T7 . AT !.T . T 7i4nT . TT 1 A 1 ~- ~ i of title insurance fn the amount. of the purchase price for than ~~ Parcel. All taxes and assessments for the year in which ''the; ~ ~ ~ ~, closing occurs shall be prorated between the parties as of the closing date. The parties shall also execute all documents reasonably requested by the closing agent to effect the closing. The parties shall pay their own respective attorneys' fees incurred in the review of any documents and any document preparation. 11. TAX FREE EXCHANGE. The Optionor shall be free to initiate a tax free exchange of any Parcel as part of the closing as long as such does not interfere with the closing and as long as the Optionor bears the cost and expense for that exchange. 12. TERMINATION OF OPTION. If the Optionee dues not timely exercise or extend the Option or does not timely elves the purchase within the time and in the manner as herein provided or if this Option is to terminate in accordance with this agreement, ;the Option shall ba of no further binding force or effect between the parties and the Optionee shall thereafter have no further right or claim with respect to the property. Except as provided in sections 5 and 8, all money paid for this Option and far its extensions shall be kept and retained by the Optionor. 13. ASSIGNMENT. It is expressly understood and agreed between the parties that this agreement may not be assigned or a transferred by Optionee without the express written consent of Optionor which shall not be unreasonably denied provided that the credit worthiness of the transferee is equal to or better than the Optionee based upon the credit report of the Optionee given to the Optionor on execution of this agreement. nPT[()N Tn P[TRC'.HASF RFAt, FSTATF - 11 -~ 3 14. TZME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is th® essence of this option? ~ ,; 15. NOTICES. AlI notices provided for in this Option which may be given or may be required ahal~, be in writing and may be served personally upon the party intended to receive the notice or shall be sent by registered or certified mail to such party. Mailed notices for the Optionor shall be addressed to: Queenland Acres, Inc. c/o carol Lotspeich 1032 E. Cayman Drive Meridian, ID 83642 and Queenland Acres, Inc. c/o Theron Scott 670 W. Victory Road Meridian, ID 83642 ' Mailed notices for the Optionee shall be addressed to: The Westpark Compaay, Inc. c/o Greg Johnson P. O. Box 344 Meridian, ID 83580 Notice, if mailed, shall be effectively given if postmarked by the United States Post Offfce on or before the last date for giving the notice. In the event either party desires to change the address to which a mailed notice shall be sent to them, that party shall similarly give to the other party written notice of that change'in accordance with the provisions of this section. 16. CONSENT TO ZONING. Optionee agrees to consent and will not object to a rezone to any one of the City of Meridian's zoning classifications of commercial or light industrial use of the north ?53.5 feet of the NW#NE~ of Section 24 and the adjacent parcel described below: ww.w~w~ . 1w ~- w. ~.~ /r.7 . Ar T.7+ • 7 Tf~T J Tf" 1 q ~ ~ From the corner common to Sections 13 and 24, T. 3N., R.~1W., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, and Sections 18 and 19 T. 3N., R. 1 S., B.M. thence South 89°12' W., 852.20 Peet, along the Section line common to Sections 13 and 24, to the point oP beginning, thence South 89°12' W., 450.00 Peet to the-N.W. corner of the NE~tNB~ of Section 24; thence South 753.80 feet; thence North 89°12' East 393.40 feet; thence North 4°19' East 758.35 feet to the point of beginning. 17. COURT COSTS AND ATTORNEYS' FEES. In the event either party shall institute any suit or action to enforce any of the provisions or tetras of this option or to bring an action for damages, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in the prosecution of such suit or action as determined by the Court. 18. BINDING EFFECT. The obligations of this agreement shall extend to and bind the heirs, administrators, personal representatives, assigns and successors of the respective parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: Secretary OPTIONOR: QUEENI~AND ACRES, INC., an Idaho corporation - -~ /' By L~ Theron G. Scott, Pzesident o~rroNEE: WESTPART COMPANY, INC., an Idaho corporation ;~ y! ~req;Jo so ~~ ~- ~ OPTi(3N TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE - 13 t g~ STATE OF IDAHO ) ~~ ss. County of Ada ) on this ~,a"-- day of December, 1998, before me, the~under- signed Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared 9$ERO~T 8. SCOTT, known or identified to me to be the President of QII$ENLAaTD I1CRL8, INC., the corporation that executed the within instrument and tht person who executed the instrument on behalf of the corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. ~„„,~„a,„... _ ~oTa~y ~.~- = Res ~°'U81.~G ~: MY L _. A STATE OF IDAHO ) ss . County of Ada ) Publi~.fo; State of Idaho a at: ~~s.~_ _ Expires: on this_:8___ day of December, 1998, before me, the under- signed Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ClIROL 71. LOTBP$ICB, known or identified to m® to be the Secretary of QtI88IiL~1DTD 7~CR88, INC. , the corporation that executed the within. instrument and the person who executed the instrument on behalf of the corporation, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hav® hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Publi for Statee}} of Idaho Residing at:~~se~"Zda My Commission Expires: ~-2'7-zoo3 OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE • 14 t~ • • STATE ~F IDAHO } ss. '9 County o f Ada } , .. ''i r On this __...3,~ day of December, 1998, before me, the~under- signed Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared AR3!!a SO~isOlt, known ar identified to me to be the President o! 'PSS 1B8TB71Rl~ COMPA&Y, IIIC. , the corporation that executed the within instrument and the person who executed the instrument on behalf of the corporation, and acknowledged to ma that Ruch corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, i have h®reunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year in this certificate first above written. a Notary Public ~r stat~"of Idaho' Residing at: D iss- My Commission Expires: ~-2"1- ~. ~„ OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE - 15 { .F. ,. .,. . ~ . y } JI.w' fM ,~;„. , BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300' BOWDEN PROPERTIES INC LA COMBE NORMAN A & 680 S PROGRESS AVE LA COMBE DEANNA M a SUITE 1 230 W bAVENPORT DR ;1 MERIDIAN ID 83642 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6575 ~ 474 W OVERLAND RD 438 W OVERLAND RD MARELLI MICHAEL S 392 W OVERLAND RD 2463 MEADOW LARK DR SAN DIEGO CA°92123-3315 ~j MOORE WINSTON H 214 W DAVENPORT~DR ,, PO~BOX 8204 BOISE ID 83707 WEST PATRICIA OHARA W OVERLAND RD 196 W DAVENPORT DR ,,~ MERIDIAN ID 83642 WRIGHT BILLS t{ 1635 STODDARD RD COLSON KENNETH {~ MERIDIAN ID 83642 1875 S RIPTIDE AVE ,~ ' 1VIERIDIAIV'ID 8364216572 KELLY JOHN W & RUTH E ~ t RAINEY SHERWIN D ETAL TWAIT BRIAN M & ., 245 W OVERLAND RD TWAIT TIFFANY ~ MERIDIAN ID 83642-6554 1893 S RIPTIDE AVE ~ 265 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 E ,~ MEYET WILLIAM H & LOIS M FRITZEMEIER KATHLEEN M ' 795 W OVERLAND RD 1896 S RIPTIDE AVE E k~ MERIDIAN ID 83642-6511 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 ~ SCOTT THERON AND HOPKINS RANDALL' `I LOTSPEICH CAROL SCOTT 1921 S RIPTIDE AVE ' 3642-6572 1032 E CAYMAN DR MERIDIAN IDr 8 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6661 745 W OVERLAND RD LEWIS PHILIP T & 705 W OVERLAND RD LEWIS`SANDRA H ~~ 665 W OVERLAND RD 1908 S RIPTIDE AVE 615 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 565 W OVERLAND RD 525 VJ OVERLAND RD HARTUNG CIIET & 515~W OVERLAND RD HARTUNG KATHERINE C E OVERLAND RD 1945 S RIPTIDE AVE 485 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 1710 S STODDARD RD `~ S MERIDIAN BOYER KEITH R & ' ` STODDARDI b BOYER' SHANNON C ~ 3114 S STODDARD RD 1936 S RIPTIDE AVE OVERLAND MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 ,. ~ ~' + t MCCARTHY JACK JOHN & MARJORIE KINGSTON CHARLES W JR & ~ 1750 STODDARD RD PHYLLIS I [~ MERIDIAN ID 83642-6538 2045 STODDARD RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6539 tj E f ,fi I. ~r..P...a .i. BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300' BOWDEN PROPERTIES INC LA COMBS NORMAN A & 680 S PROGRESS AVE LA COMBS DEANNA M SUITE 1 230 W DAVENPORT DR MERIDIAN ID 83642 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6575 474 W OVERLAND RD 438 W OVERLAND RD MARELLI MICHAEL S 392 W OVERLAND RD 2463 MEADOW LARK DR SAN DIEGO CA 92123-3315 MOORS WINSTON H 214 W DAVENPORT DR PO BOX 8204 BOISE ID 83707 WEST PATRICIA OHARA W OVERLAND RD 196 W DAVENPORT DR MERIDIAN ID 83642 WRIGHT BILL S 1635 STODDARD RD COLSON KENNETH MERIDIAN ID 83642 1875 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 KELLY JOHN W & RUTH E RAINEY SHERWIN D ETAL TWAIT BRIAN M & 245 W OVERLAND RD TWAIT TIFFANY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6554 1893 S RIPTIDE AVE 265 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 MEYET WILLIAM H & LOIS M FRITZEMEIER KATHLEEN M 795 W OVERLAND RD 1896 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6511 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 SCOTT THERON AND HOPKINS RANDALL LOTSPEICH CAROL SCOTT 1921 S RIPTIDE AVE 1032 E CAYMAN DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6661 745 W OVERLAND RD LEWIS PHILIP T & 705 W OVERLAND RD LEWIS SANDRA H 665 W OVERLAND RD 1908 S RIPTIDE AVE 615 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 565 W OVERLAND RD 525 W OVERLAND RD HARTUNG CHET & 515 W OVERLAND RD HARTUNG KATHERINE C E OVERLAND RD 1945 S RIPTIDE AVE 485 W OVERLAND RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 1710 S STODDARD RD S MERIDIAN BOYER KEITH R & STODDARD BOYER SHANNON C 3114 S STODDARD RD 1936 S RIl'TIDE AVE OVERLAND MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 MCCARTHY JACK JOHN & MARJORIE KINGSTON CHARLES W JR & 1750 STODDARD RD PHYLLIS I MERIDIAN ID 83642-6538 2045 STODDARD RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6539 r ~ 3I ~. ~ .~ A.~ i` ~~. DEMOND WALTER E & DEMOND TERRI 2090 S RIPTIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 F MADISON JOLENE R 1971 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 DENGSOTH OTH & DENGSOTH KOUN 2089 5 COVEY AVE 1 MERIDIAN ID 83642 ' CARSON PHILIP K & KUYPER-CARSON MERRY L 1962 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY THE 1903 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6574 ' S GULL COVE PL ANDERSON BRADLEY K & ANDREA AND TAYLOR ROY N & CHERYL ANN 2108 S RIPTIDE PL ~ MERIDIAN ID 83642-6582 LOWERY WILLIAM W ' 2109 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 HOELZLE BURDETTE L 1995 S RIl'TIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 SHAW MICHAEL H & SHAW ELLEN M 1988 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 SMITH JANICE L & v SMITH GARY D 2019 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 FISHER THOMAS A II & FISHER DENISE A 2151 S RIPTIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 GALLOWAY KARL T & GALLOWAY NONA L 2020 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 TILDEN MARK D & TILDEN ALLISON R 2132 S RII'TIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 FOGG JOHN CHARLES JR & FOGG STEPHANIE J 2135 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 BOYACK ROSS J ET UX TRUSTEES BOYACK GEORGE D TRUSTEE 6210 N MERIDIAN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-5163 2370 S STODDARD RD ,~ STEWART BERTHA SUNDAE 2035 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 BOVEE RONALD & BOVEE TANA 2168 S RIPTIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 MUSHLITZ A R & MUSHLITZ KARMA L 2032 S RIPTIDE AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6572 GREEN. JUSTIN N & GREEN BRYON ANN , 2093 S RIPTIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6583 MEDINA VILMA 2167 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN.ID 83642 NOYES RICHARD L & NOYES KATHLEEN J I 1177 N ETHERIDGE PL BOISE ID 83704-8478 2166 S COVEY AVE REAMAN JOHN G & REAMAN PAYIA M 2174 S RIPTIDE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6582 LAMB DARRIN 2189 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 BROWN MARLIN & BROWN KATHRYN A 2194 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6584 SOMAZZI ROGER A & SOMAZZI JENNIFER L 77 W CHRISTOPHER ST MERIDIAN ID 83642 JOHNSON MICHAEL S & JOHNSON ANDRE L 2221 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 BECKSTEAD BRIAN A & ZERELDA GAY 2218 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 OWEN COLLEEN M & OWEN KENNETH E 2219 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6591 SNOW LINDA V 2228 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-7601 SCHMIDT TRUDY AND SCHMIDT KENNETH A & CONSTANCE 2247 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 ARNOLDSEN FAMILY TRUST > ARNOLDSEN M H & C A TRUSTEES 2252 S COVEY AVE MERIDIAN ID 83642 BUERKLE DWIGHT J & BUERKLE BRENDA L 2250 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 JENSEN BRAD H & JENSEN LEE ANN 2273 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6591 LUV MINH V AND LEWANDOW5KI TEENA M 2278 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 FITZGERALD JAMESON & FITZGERALD JUANITA 2315 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642-6591 GEIS ADAM P & GEIS KIMBERLY S 2302 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 SMITH LAURI L 2318 S GULL COVE PL MERIDIAN ID 83642 MERIDIAN 50 6874 FAIRVIEW AVE BOISE ID 83704-8501 S STODDARD RD AARON WILLIAM O & JEAN L 2435 S MERIDIAN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6543 VALLEY SHEPHERD CHURCH OF THE NAZARENEINC 83 I E 1ST ST ~ MERIDIAN ID 83642 2475 S MERIDIAN RD CRITELL WILFORD J & CAROLYN P 2875 STODDARD RD A t ~' + ~~ 1 i MERIDIAN ID 83642-6539 S STODDARD RD 2875 STODDARD RD ADKINS JACK L & JOAN G 400 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6902 PAINTER MAURICE E & JEAN M NELSON CLOYD W 3015 S MERIDIAN RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6545 MONTGOMERY DENNIS & L JEANNIE 855 W SEASONAL CREEK LANE MERIDIAN ID 83642-6539 HEPPER TIMOTHY L & KRISTINA K 448 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6902 REID KAREN ANN 3135 STODDARD RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6565 OWENS ROBERT E & BARBARA J 900 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6906 PAINTER MAURICE E & JEAN M JOHNSON GREGORY D PO BOX 821 MERIDIAN ID 83680 S MERIDIAN RD SCOTT THERON G & SHARON 670 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6904 LARREA JOSE I & LARREA JANICE E 100 ROSALYN CT MERIDIAN ID 83642-6602 LARREA JOSE RAMON 105 ROSALYN CT MERIDIAN ID 83642-6603 MERIDIAN HEIGHTS WATER & SEWER ASSOCIATION INC PO BOX 472 MERIDIAN ID 83680-0472 S MERIDIAN RD SCHMIDT JAMES R 355 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6903 SABALA FRANCISCO & RICKI ANN 1100 W RIODOSA MERIDIAN ID 83642 835 W VICTORY RD HANSEN M A & F L TRUST 655 W VICTORY RD MERIDIAN ID 83642-6905 q i F ~~ o t ~ ~ i r ''" t T f I ~, -I ~ ~ ~ if ~, :~ .. ~-. Memo Ta Bnu;e Feddeton Fr+onn Brad,Watson, PE CC: File Datbee 07/09/99 ~ Rea Bear Creek Estates Subdivision Preliminary Plat a As you know, my attempts to model the impacts of the proposed Bear Creek Estates subdivison on the e~asting sewer system stopped short of canpletion due to serious computer problems. Prior to my system crashing, 1 had completed preliminary routing, siting and analysis of proposed lift station and discharge into the e~asting sewer in Elk Run subdivision. The preliminary. results indcated the addfion of the Bear Cr+eelc lift station would cause sur~char+ging in the e~asting system. In addition, JUB Engineers' master sewer.plan, adopted by Coundl last month, showed a 24-inch trunk traversing the Bear Creek Estates parcel. I had yet to confirm that the r~ignment necessitated by the subdivision would allow sufficient slope to conform to the master plan. ~` In summary, the potential problems t+egar+dng sewer with this subdivision are significant and adequate computer modeling must be done prior to proceeding with final Public. Works Departrnent crornnlents. ~~~i ~: 1 ~ Page 1 i L ' From the desk of... tit t j Brad Waton, P.E. ~ ~ g .Assistant City Engineer Meridian Public Works Departrnent 200 E. Carlton St.,-Suite 1'00 Meridian, Idaho 83642-2600 , ~ (208)887-2211 a 4 Fax (208) 887-1297 f l s g i ~) ~M t ~ ,~., . „~ E~~~ Y G ,D JUL. 0 91999 City of 1Vleri~dian - City Clerk Office d t 1 .~ ~~ zg 3N /~ n _ ,r ~~ - e ~ ~~ ,~ ~, t ~CG Z4~- 3N /u~, ~~ a ~. 3 c ~.. ~. sg 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 July 13, 1999, fvr the purpose of reviewing ~ and considering the application of Bear Creek, LLC for'annexation 8 zoning of 150.79 r a acres of land which is generally located East of Stoddard Road 8 South of Overland. ~ The applicant requests a zone of R-4. a Further more, the applicatan requests preliminary plat approval of proposed Bear Creek Subdivision, consisting of 326 single family dwelling lots. A more particular 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 21~ day of June, 1999. _ ' ~~ PUBLISH June 23 & July 7, 1999. ~\~~'~,~~t ~ ~''~, a '~ ~ r `` ~ ~ B~AI• .~~~,,',~ rot1N~'K ' ,~``,,`~. '~~/~prytii ttil~\~~~~\ 110 T8T Z00 ~~z~~00 S--~3 L60L 888 80Z z0:0i 'IZi90 0S Sf11d1S #QW~.. SJd ~3SiNIW 3QOW WOJdi01 3WI1 31dQ NbIQIa3W d0 AlIJ a Z0'3Jdd £0 :0Z 66~ tiZ Nllt d0 Sd ** 1bOd321 NOIIHW~IIdNOJ Xl ** ~' 9 ~ - DEC-27-1999 D9.2~3 BRIGGS EtIGIhaEER..ItIG, ItiC. w ~ SEWER f3ftJ SCHEDULE ~!, vP: ,r 12~38345295U P:~2` Sear Creek Subdiuision Offsite--Lift Station at Linder ~ -0 ' Project: 990211 Date: t6-Dec•99 Prepared ay: Dean Briggs Developer: Wastpark Co. Engineer: Briggs Engineering, Ific: c - Estimated d ITEM # Description Quan6 Unit Unit PrICB al Cost Estimated T Schedul e'C' • Sancta Sewer.. a ~' C-1 2T Sewer Pipeline, ASTM D-3034 PVC Including 9 Backfil{ ~ Bedding Excavation 3000 L.F. $ 40.00 $120,000.00 _ C'2 , Standard Sewer Manholes, Complete _ 10 _ - Each $ 1,900.00- * _ $19,000.00 C-3 - Dual 6" Pressure Sewer Line, Including Excavation, eackfiil i -~ and Bedding; Complete _ 8.250 L.F. $ 16.00 $132, 000.00 C-4 Sanitary Sewer Lift Station, Complete 1 L.S. $ 240,000.00 $200,000.00 C-5 Odor Controtfor t.S ° 7 L.S. $ 50,000.00 $50,000.00 C-6 Surface Repair 1 L.S. $ 18,500.00 $18,500.00 G7 I-84 Bnre ~ L.S. _ $ 45,000.00 $45,000.00 C-8 _ Franklin Rd. Bore '` 1 L.F. $ 10,000.00 $10,000.00 G9 3 Phase Power installation 1 L.S. $ 20,000.00 $20,000.00 ' ° w !Total $614,500.00 .. - - - ~ $614,500.00 Construction Cost Construction Contingency (15%) $92,175.00 - Total Construction Cost n $706,675.00- ~: 534 00 $55 En ineering 8% . , .. 2% $14.133.50 Fees Construction Adminstration 5% _ $35,333.75 r 7ota1 Estimate Preliminary Project Cost $812, 676.25 _ , ~; 9902.11-Bear Creek Prel Bid s , t "1 t . a ~:: ~ '. i ~. ' OVERLAND ROAD _ __ .. ., ~" _ _ _ ; _~ _ . _ . __... _. :. ti., ; +;.~~ ~~ :>, 4 ~~~. r, - , O r ~- ~ 'PI~OPO-SED ~`QRCE MAIN y _._ . o` o . .. ~,~ ~ ~~ _ ~~ a ~ , ~, .. ,. r .. .._ ` o ' ~~/////// /////////~`,///// `~ // ~~/_ //////,l/ / ~ - -- //// ,p~ ~ ~/~/ RJR r W-.. '~ ADDITIONAL 43 .t // / // //////////~ .-- J ! .. vs ~R E S 0 WN E D B Y ~ ,//////// / ////////// ~, _ ~~~ ~ _ / ///~/// ,r % BEA1~ REEK LLC / ///// _.,- '- / // // /// /// % ~ ; r ® ~//////'%~ / j'~//////// `` ; % //// , : /// ~//////// /~ ~. ,~ .CAI / ~ .~f - ~ ~ / /, ~f :,,r ` '. / / ~_-_ 2 4" FUTURE TRCJ"N K__." ~_ ; :,~ j~ °='~ ~ , IDENTIFIED IN 99 ," , . ' ___,, ~=~~.SEWER MASTER...._PL,gN._ __ ~~ r~~. '^ i `. ._ ~ ~ i '...._._ .~_ ..._. "l' S _ ~ :7.aAn x~: .....__.._..~_.._.. _. _ _ _.,....... f ~\ +rs ~ ~~ f / ._ _. f: l ^"t, ~~ ; .. ` t ! ~ . ~Z''A. ~y S :~" _ _. _. __ ._ t 1 '~`i ~ t ~` PROPOSED BEAR E#REE ` ~ ~ ~ '~~~~~ ~~ ..."_ESTA.TES 326 HOCK"ES ~~ ` ~ _ `~ ~_ 150 ACRES i! _ i `~/~ \- ~/`• . / ~ '~ ~w .vim" - . 7 ...... i ~ ~ r4~ _ +a"~ ~ 7 fi 1 , _~~ AF~~A ~..., , . T ._ _ __. _.:.~_~ _ ~. .=:~, i _._ ~' i. `,• `\ ~~ ,t'} It ~ ~._ _ i ~r ~ K i _j` .~ .,, :. _ . : ~ (~ i ._ ...__ ,"..d ~ ._.. ~: ~ ~..A s _. ~.-- t i.. -- _... .: ~. ,. r. ~ _ _.. .:. ~' :,, • o e D - o ..- ~ ',IO •(1'3, +. ~° "~ ,~ ADDITIONAL 43 ~~5~ ORES OWNED BY o~ N~ P~ BEAD REEK LLC . 24 FUTURE TRU"NBC ~~ <<.. IDENTIFIED fN '99 ~~ ~ SEWER MASTEF~..--"PLA1~ _.._~_." ~* ,, ":.-" . .Y ,- ...,~ ~ `~ •-" _._. . i l ...... t ~'`y ~, ''ti t' '~a .s .......__ - -~ i -._ _ r .....~ _ ..___ ~" .zyt _ .. . .. __.~. , _"._.". r tii _.- .~ s' i .• < ,,.. 5 ._.i". 1 :.. •, ,. s ~ 'ti t € ~ ..\ a .._.._I~ ~ ~ .r` ` i. ICE /~R~A. __.~_ ~_ .. __ j ~.~.-.~..... ...-...~". f `~, '` \. _ ~-- PROP'O-SED~ F ~~,~~~ .,,:, ` ~~:~~ ~~ .."~~ ~ t '; n ~ r ~~ ~ • /` .~ 3 ~ '~ PROPOSED BEAR _.. _ESIATES, 326 HOI~~ 150 ACR.FS 1 '~ i ins,-'"~ i _ ~,~ `~ ~ `~r?4- ' t - .-•-.. -. 1 J ~..' f ~: LETTER _ F BRIGGS ENGINEERING, Inc. 1800 West Overland Road Boise, Idaho 83705 ..PHONE: (208) 344-9700 • FAX NO: (208).345-2950 TO ~ o ~~ • - ~- WE ARE SENDING YOU ^ SHOP DRAWINGS ^ WE ARE RETURNING ~EcE~D NOV 1 2 1999 City of Meridian City Clerk Office _ ~, TRAN~ M ITTA L DATE ~ I 1 ' ~ 2' ~ I ID N0. l ~ ~~ I JOB NAME ~P. S~1 ~- <7W~ JOB ADDRESS qTY, STATE ^ CHANGE ORDER ^ ~EOPY OF LETTER [~ PLANS ^ OR/G/NALS ^ F/NAL PLA T ^ SPECIFICATIONS ^ COMPUTER DISK ^ OTHER ENCLOSED ^ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA ^ FEDERAL EXPRESS L~ t;OURIER COPES DATED ~ ID NO. DESCRIPTION 0 (• f2•q gDZI I ~+ ~ Tu.xx-' p~F THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW ^ FOYT APPROVAL ^ APPROVFD AS 57/BM/T7F0 ^ ~FOlR7 YOIUR lNFG?MAIION ^ APRROVED AS NOTED ^ [~AS RElXlES1E0 ^ RETURNED FU? CORRECAOYVS ^ ^ FOI? REVIEW AND CANMENT ^ PR/CE ^ FOYP B/OS DUE ^ REMARKS RESUBM/T CApIES Fal? APPROVAL SUBMIT COI°lES FOR D/SIR/BUAGW RETURN CG?RECIED PR/NIS' COPY TO • ~ SIGNED 9 . t_ETTE R ~~~0 F TRAM. S M IT ~4 TAL BRIGGS ENGINEERING, Inc. 1800 West Overland Road Boise, Idaho 83705 j 2 q q C~G~ PHONE: (208) 344-9700 • FAX NO: (208) 345-2950 DATE ~O ~ J ~ l t ID N0. ` '` 02I' TO JOB NAME ~`~~ V ~C-~ ~`T~T~S JOB ADDRESS • ~ _ -Q.JI/ Q. CITY, STATE '1 - r LB" WE ARE SENDING YOU ^ SHOP ORAw/NGS ^ ENCLOSED ^ CHANGE ORDER ^_,~OPY OF LETTER ^ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA ^ WE ARE RETURNING L~J' PLANS ^ OR/G/NALS ^ FEDERAL EXPRESS ^ F/NAL PLA T ^ SPEC/FICA TIONS ^ COURIER ^ COMPUTER DISK ^ OTHER ^ COPIES DATED ID N0. D_ESCRIPTION (o'3~~q X021( ~ 11x(-i ` THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED ^ OR APPROVAL ~F ^ APPR04FD AS SUBM/TIED Q OK' YOIUR /NFA4MAAAN ^ APRR01~0 AS NOTED ^ AS REIX/ESIED ^ RETURNED FLa4 CGiRRECAONIS ^ FOR RENEW AND CG)NMENT ^ PR/CE ^ FOR B/OS DUE REMARKS BELOW ^ RESUBM/T CURIES FOY~ APPROVAL ^ S(/BA1/T Cla°/ES FOR D/SIR/BUAOW ^ RETURN CG)4RECTED PR/NIS' COPY TO SIGNED _ ,~ ,_. ~I~ 1000 0 ~ 1 2000 3000 Fee ~~ ; ,,. - ,r ~ 1.84 ~ ~ ~ N a 1 ( ' OVERC D ROAD ~ a i ~ -- ~ .. ~_ ~ i _ i ~ R o ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ O J ° V ~- ,~ ~ a ,SL+ rJ T 1 a BRIGGS ENGINEERING, iNC. BEAR CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION REFS'ON N ~, BRIGGS PORT. E 1/2 SECTION 24, T.3N., R.lw., B.M. ~ ~ '"` ADA COUNTY, IDAHO SHEET t (208) 3A49700 1 OF 1 1800 W. OVERLAND ROAD DESIGN DRAF7 SCALE DATE DWG. NO, BOISE, IpAHO 83705 BKB 1"= 1000' 05!28199 990211 ~990211.APR ., .. ~ ~!E rr Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meetin October 12; 1999 ~ g ~~ Page 2 . Q~', ~ ~~ wf De Weerd: I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission determine that upon review of the applicable standards and guidelines as set forth in Section 11-2- 410D of the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian, the established record, and the applicable law, that the applicant met the requisite accessory use standards. Given the foregoing, the subject application for family daycare home accessory use as set forth herein shall be granted and the use allowed subject to the conditions imposed herein. The accessory use shall be subject to review by the City upon notice to the Applicant. Borup: All in favor. Did we hear a second? Hatcher: Second. Borup: Okay, all in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~iTEM'2~ CONTINUED~P_UBLlC`HEARING: ANNEXATION,&"ZONING OF 150.79 'ACRES OF~LAND;(F.OR.R-4,ZONING)°BY'BEAR..CREEK,.LLC„=~EA'ST~ OF-STODDARD,ROAD &~SOUTH`OF-OVERLAND: Brown: Mr. Chairman, I have a conflict of interest and I need to step down from the following two items. Item 2 and Item 3. Borup: Okay Commissioner Brown, so noted. Have fun. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, before we get into this it was my understanding that Mr. Gigray was .going to--- Borup: That is correct. Thank you for reminded me. Item No. 15 is review and consideration of-for a change in zoning subdivision ordinances. Mr. Gigray has another appointment he needs to leave and get to. He had asked if he could do a presentation at this time and then we will take up discussion of that at the regular place on the agenda. We would like to give the floor to Mr. Gigray at this time. I apologize for-I did not write that down.. I have learned I have to write things down rather then try to remember things. Gigray: Amen Mr. Chairman. I have the same problem. For purposes of record, my name is Bill Gigray the third, City Attorney for the City of Meridian and I wish to thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission for allowing me to make this presentation at this time. I want to assure Gary Smith that much contempt over here for my being able to be taken out of order. I am not leaving because of band practice. I am a City Attorney for Wilder and they meet this evening, and they have some matters that need attention. I have to be in Wilder immediately following this meeting. What I wanted to talk about briefly under Item No. 15 was, and this is a project that I've been ., ~. ~. pNferid"ian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 3 working on this year and that is the adoption of the Meridian City Code. As you know your under existing ordinances of the City which are compiled and revised from previous additions that have unfortunately become sadly out of date and very hard. to work with because you can not assure, as you look in the existing Code Book, that is in fact the latest version of the ordinance that is an ordinance of the City of Meridian. The City began this process about two years ago with Sterling Codifier who is the name of the company that revises or we work with for the codification of the laws or ordinances of the City. I have been working with them closely over the past year and with the department heads of the various departments of the City that are .effected by these ordinances and we get what are called numerous worksheets. There have been numerous laws of the State of Idaho that have changed since the old code was in effect. There is some references in the code that are out of date given certain practices that exist in the City today and so what this process of recodifing does, is not only reorganize the City Code but it also brings it up to date and try to correct those technical issues which need to be changed in the process. We've handed out a memo which identifies where those changes are because a portion of this whole project does amend the zoning ordinance 'of the city. In the technical ways, we felt it was appropriate that there should be a notice and public hearing on that and that is why your having this public hearing. I would te(I you that the City-this is a very important matter to pass because all of the other changes that we need to .make to the City Ordinances which are numerous, we've been holding pending the completion of this because this assigns all the new code sections and as we do subsequent ordinances of course, we have to refer to the way that things are codified in this book and so the passage of this ordinance or this code book which the City Council can do in one ordinance when it gets before the City Council, after conducting a public hearing there on the ordinance changes here when the zoning code is very important. The one item that you have under Item 15 which will follow-the passage of the new code is an amendment of the provision that governs the transferability of conditional use permits. As you know, presently under your ordinance, they are not transferable and so every time someone who has a conditional use permit sells a property and someone else wants to continue the same type of business for which the conditional use permit has been granted along. with all the conditions, they have to come back and go back through an entire hearing process in order to get that approval for transfer and unfortunately I don't think the existing ordinance provides many standards by which the City would govern, whether or not to grant a transfer or not and generally does. The idea of the ordinance which is before you in that regard on the conditional use permits is designed to limit that so that they are transferable unless you are dealing with home occupation or something that is licensed as child care or your dealing with alcoholic beverage establishment or something licenses an adult business: Those would have to come back for transfers automatically by the provisions of the ordinance under your consideration. As far as those matters, that wouldn't change except this proscribed standards for you to review a transfer and those standards are one that the permit holder that had the permit that they comply substantially with the terms and conditions of the conditional use permit and number two is that the person to whom they will be transferred demonstrate that they will~be able to fulfill those conditions and operate in accordance with the conditions of i iA t, • Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 4 the conditional use permit. I think it gives us more tools to deal with that transfer and-a standard to which you would govern it which are not there row. The third item I want to discuss is an ordinance for consideration is the ordinance which deals with the development agreement. You have an ordinance in place now, which"authorizes the development agreement. The Idaho Legislature has amended the Idaho Code provision 676511A, which deals and authorizes City's to employ development agreements as conditions for rezoning which the City of Meridian-uses on many, many occasions as you know by your own experience. The Idaho Code provides that a City Ordinance in relationship to development agreements is to provide certain criteria regarding the creation of those development agreements, the contents of those and the process by which'they-are developed. The ordinance which you have before you for your consideration on Item No. 15, is designed to comply with that state law so that the City is clearly exercising its authority under the provisions of the now amended Idaho Code and also it does provide a form of "development agreement which we now are using in the City of Meridian and the reason for that is to standardize the form of development~agreements so that we understand how those are put together and we are not dealing with different forms coming from different developers where you have to go back and try to retrofit them to make sure they meet your standards, but yet it is a form that is flexible so that the conditions. of use and the conditions of development can be set for specifically in the agreement to meet the particular development that is the subject of the agreement. That's basically my pitch. It is very important, I think, to move forward on the zoning ordinance changes that are related to the adoption of the new code and except for the conditional use permit thing which I had mentioned, those changes that have been made in there are either come from a recommendation of a department head that what was there before was no longer a practice, or we have a state law that is changed the requirements with regards to matters, or their reference issues including definitions or a reference to rather a ordinance we are now referring to a chapter which is just language that is appropriate when updating a code. They have now split under existing codification the zoning ordinances and the subdivision ordinances are in the same title. Under the new code title 11 will be the zoning ordinance and title 12 will; be the subdivision ordinance. Borup: Any questions? I assume that Steve will be able to answer any questions later on if we have any. Commissioner Barbeiro. Barbeiro: Mr. Gigray, this is a part of the new book, is that correct? Gigray: Yes. What this is, this is all the laws. You have just the zoning and subdivision and all this does is take those, split -you know the numbers are different. These little technical references about cross referencing to other sections, of course that all has to be changed and they are really -they are not (inaudible) changes except~for the, provision in there regarding the transferability of conditional use permits and since that F was sent in, Shari and I have worked on additional language to try' to make that better and that is why you are considering that other one on that very point here. ( ~, Meridian Planning ari~:oning Commission Meeting ~-- October,12; 1.999 Page 5 Borup: Any other questions. Thank you. Gigray: I thank you for allowing me to make this,presentation. Thank you. Borup: As>noted, we will take up discussion on Item 15 as printed on the agenda. `Back to Item 2 and 3. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, one more thing. I see that the application -there is a request to table Item No. 8: and 9. You may want to note that incase any one is here. Borup: Yes; that would be good for the record. Yes, Item No. 8 and 9 which is the Walgreen's application on the corner of Fairview and Locust Grove, the applicant has asked to be put on next months agenda. They wanted time to review staff comments, ACHD comments. This has been noticed as a public hearing. We, as the time comes up on the agenda we would be open to any. comments if someone has come to make them this evening and feels~they rather do it tonight rather then at the next meeting. So there will not be a presentation from the applicant and there will be another regular scheduled hearing on-that item. If that effects anyone here, that is for your information. Thank you Commissioner. de Weerd: That way they don't have to sit through the rest ofi this. Borup: ,Yes, but-you are welcome to if you want to. Staff, I think we received a report. Is there any additional items, comments that anyone would like to make on this application. Yes, Item No. 2. K Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, hopefully you've had time to go over the report that we submitted at a fate hour. I think from staff's perspective here, we'd like to wait to have any comments until after the applicant is presented. r Borup: Okay, thank you. Any questions from the Commissioner's before we hear from the applicant.- Is the applicant here .and like to come forward. Bowcutt: Becky Bowcutt. Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland, Boise. I think where we left off last month, you- asked the planning staff to make some comments. We asked for some°input from the Parks Department. You asked us to have our traffic engineer to come before you to answer some questions concerning the traffic impact of this project. I think those three items have all been accomplished and we are here tonight to basicaNy report back to you. First of all, we did receive the response from the Planning and. Public Works Department. Obviously, most of the items we concur with, with the exception of obviously the analysis of the preliminary plat sites specific requirements, item one concerning sewer. Then we had some questions concerning a couple of other comments that the staff had. made as far. as sewer or clarification on the issue of capacity, where they discussed reservation of capacity: -Our question there was, does that pertain to .the qualification for latecomers fees or does that pertain to a reservation Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 6 of capacity. That was item,616. We have gone through the sewer issue over and over and over again. My comments to your staff were short, but I think (inaudible). They talk about the issue of philosophy-the philosophical standard where they basically reserve capacity for each .particular drainage area and exceptions are rarely made and only under what they refer to circumstances where there is a critical reason. If you read my response, it states there have been multiple exceptions that we've been aware of. Borup: Becky,. when did you turn that response in? Bowcutt: The response was faxed back at 2:30 p.m. Borup:_ Did anybody here get it in their box? s Bowcutt: I received staff's comments just a little bit before 9 a.m. this morning. Borup: I don't think it made it to us. Sorry. Bowcutt: Okay,. f have some extra copies. Borup: Which office? Bowcutt: I faxed it to ~P.ublic Works.Department, to Bruce and Shari's"attention. ~. Borup: Just for your information--- Bowcutt: Oh, I did not fax it to Will's office. Borup: That's what I was going to say---when it's a last minute thing, that would probably -help. Bowcutt: Yes sir. I apologize. I was frantically trying to hurry and get it on paper and back to your staff because they had asked for a response by noon. Borup; So next time it's the day of, do both. It would probably help. Bowcutt: The projects that I'am aware of where they have been allowed to sewer outside of their drainage districts-Ashford Greens is one. Turnberry Subdivision is another one. Those particular projects were in the identical situation that we had where they were designated for the, Black Cat Trunk and a temporary lift station or interim lift station was provided for sewering that particular area. Based on the information that I acquired today, Meridian Greens was another one. I guess a lift station was installed at Linder Road that provided sewer service to Meridian Greens prior to a gravity trunk line being extended. The other one I reference in my letter is the Vienna Woods situation up there in the far northeast area of the impact zone. In my conversations with staff they've stated, well some of these their sewering other projects then just one F Meridian Planning ar~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 7 subdivision. Well, there is the potential to do that. There is a potential to do some type of a regional station. We have looked at so many options and it seems like every time we solve a problem then two or three road blocks are put up in front of us. We have offered to upgrade the Ten Mile Trunk Line-a substantial expense-therefore creating a substantial amount of capacity in that Ten Mile Trunk .that does not currently exist. We offered to come up some special assessment. The staff came up with a number of 1500 dollars per lot. We have gone through many scenarios and I don't want to repeat and go back through it again and waste the time this evening because it looks like there ~is a lot of people here that would like to testify on other projects. But what it boils down to is that this is good project. We've worked hard.. We've tried to solve the problems that have been .put before us. We don't feel this is precedence setting. I guess I would challenge anybody to come up with a project that has the benefits that this one`has, with the exceptional low density; the park site and the varying lot sizes going for the larger lot sizes. I think that is going to be hard to match. It is going to be hard to match anywhere where gravity sewer is at your door step and easily available because the cost is just too great. and we can't, in most instances, convince those clients because of the excessive cost of the land to provide the amenities that we are trying to offer here. One of staffs comments was that the priority was to the north. Well, my statement there is we are not trying to change"the cities priorities. We understand that the No Name Trunk is•a very important trunk. We are not asking the city to take those funds that they are allocating for that No Name Trunk and allocate them to this project. We are saying let. us bear our own burden. Let us provide our capacity and in return you will- get a really good project. I think one of the reasons that staff opposes the project, it's not an issue of design, density, poor planning. It is the issue of complexity. This is not cut and dried. This,,is not the cookie cutter cut and dried subdivision. It is more complex.. The complexity issue happens to be the sewer: We feel that we can solve that and we've done a lot of research and spent a lot of .effort in trying to come up with what we consider to be a good compromise. This is probably one of the best projects that I have ever had the opportunity to work on, especially in the City of Meridian. I am proud of that. The impact upon this community is not going to be excessive. Yes, it add traffic. All developments add traffic, whether they be residential, commercial or industrial. It does add traffic, but when you consider the whole picture as staff mentioned in their analysis, they have to look at the whole picture and the capacity at the treatment plant and those dollars allocated to expand that treatment plant, we would pick up just a little bit over 1 per cent of the capacity of that plant. That is not very much when you look at the whole (inaudible) scale. Staff states that because of the urgency north to provide sewer service that there basically should not be any commitment to this particular area. .Well I content that there is obviously has to be some type of obligation to provide service to an area of impact within what people consider a reasonable amount of time. Obviously, you can't provide sewer service to every corner of your impact area all at once. That is not feasible but there are certain things that property owners consider and when you have such as this project, with the Elk Run Development right next door, they have.central sewer, they have central water-this property does adjoin the city limits and then to be locked out due to the fact that there is a dashed or swiggly line that runs through your property. We think this project makes sense because it has access to the ,..- ~ k .. Meridian Planning aria mooning Commission Meeting ~---' October 12, 1999 Page 8 freeway. As I stated before, I don't think it is good planning to take a particular area, an isolated area and say this is the only place the city is going to grow for the next 5-10 years, whatever. That is not balanced growth. We've tried to answer the questions the best of our ability. I hope you bear with us because I know it is complicated and its been drawn out. If the solution is a regional lift station, we are willing to look at that. We have done-.that before in the Kuna area. I had a particular project that required a lift station and the City Engineer stated if you want to build the lift station and incur the cost then we need to look at what adjoins you-and we did. We built a regional lift station and it worked out very well. Some nice developments came online. You can't gravity sewer everything. One thing I would like to read to you-this is in the Idaho Planning Act. When a city is defining its. area of impact there are three factors the state law says it needs to consider. One, its trade area. Two, its geographic factors and three, areas that reasonable be expected o be annexed to the city in the future. When we talk geographic factors, that can mean many things. One thing I believe it does mean is obviously topography, sewer ability providing service to the parcels. It:is going to take some lift stations in the city: You can't'avoid them. There are regional lift stations that are designated on your master plan. They are not a bad thing. It is cheaper if you can .do .gravity. That is the optimum way of doing things but that is not the way. We don't live in a perfect world and we are not everything doesn't slope to the Meridian Sewer Treatment Plant. There is properties that are far south and so some provisions are going to have to be made. 'The issue as stated is areas that can reasonable be expected to be annexed to .,the city in the future. We adjoin the city limits but we are basically being told you can't be annexed and it could be anywhere from ten, fifteen maybe 20 years. We don'tknow. I don't think that that's a ppropriate. You .received a letter from the Parks Department. Did everyone get a copy of that? That's pretty much consistent with the conversations that we've had with Mr. Kuntz in the past. We have. had multiple meetings with him and discussed the needs of the Parks Dept. What they want to see. Exactly what type of location they would want within our project and we also consulted the City of Boise to discuss parking ratios, number of ball fields that could be accommodated, sizing. and so forth, to make sure that we were on the: right track. Mr. Kuntz has obviously sent a letter that he thinks it would be a good idea if we could resolve the sewer problems. I will go ahead and stop there and bring Mr. Dobie, up. Borup: Becky maybe just one item that you touched on again that can maybe some clarification from last meeting that was on the upgrade-the parallel line. What was the capacity increase that you was anticipating from that? Bowcutt: If we ran that'parallel line we have two choices. We looked at upgrading the line from a 12 to a 15 or going ahead and running a 12 inch parallel line to fix the bottle neck within the .Crestwood Development. I believe it was approximately 2,800 lunar feet and according to the analysis it added between 900 and 1000 or 1200 hookups would be available. It all most-it doubled the capacity by going in and rectifying that from what the existing capacity is. Mr. Dobie here? Come on up. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999. Page 9 Dobie: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner's my name is Pat Dobie. My business address is 777 Heartstone Drive in Boise. I prepared this traffic impact study for the Bear Creek Subdivision project and if you like I could just walk through and explain the methodology that was used and some of the conclusions of the study. Borup: Commissioner's, how much detail would you like? Hatcher: I am trying to remember what the specific traffic issues were from our last meeting. Borup: I don't know if there is anything specific. There was just questions and concerns and what the effect would be. Barbeiro: As I recall I remember the neighbors were very concerned about the traffic impact on Stoddard Road, especially the intersection on Stoddard and Overland. Borup: Okay. So Stoddard and Overland would be one area. Hatcher: Yeah and I do remember-if,you could specifically address the ratings of the intersections in this study with Bear Creek. If Bear Creek was to be-put in, basically we are looking at LOS's of d's pretty much around the entire area and how you came about getting-1 would like to have a better and clear understanding on that because I think ACHD had some suggestions that might assist in bringing those up to a better grade. Borup: Okay, so I guess we are saying we don't need a full report unless there is something that you felt (inaudible) other than interested in Stoddard and Overland intersection and then how this project would effect the other intersections on their level. of service. Dobie: Okay. Let me try to .address those issues. This study follows a procedure that has been established by the Ada County Highway District and the Idaho Transportation Dept.'for evaluating the impacts of developments. What they look at is the capacity of the roads and the capacity of the intersections at some year of the future. In this case, I went to the year 2005. We looked at the condition of those facilities without the project and then I went through and calculated the capacity of those facilities with the traffic from the Bear Creek lots. A level of service standard is used to describe the capacity. lt's a value standard ranging from A to F, where A is very high capacity, very free flowing intersections and roads and F is a condition where the volume of traffic` approaches the theatrical capacity of the facility. In many cases, the volume of traffic can exceed the capacity, but it is an undesirable condition. The°Ada County Highway District has adopted a level of service D as the standard for arterials and for system roads and in some cases they allow the level of service, an acceptable level of service, in the E category for certain roads that have very difficult fixes; like Fairview Avenue for example. In looking at the baseline capacity'of all of the roads and intersections surrounding this site for the year 2005 without the project, they average from level of service A to level of service D, with D being the Overland Meridian Road intersection. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page-10 In the year 2005, with the site generated traffic from the development, the Overland Road intersection will continue to be a level of service D. Calderwood and Stoddard intersections would be at A and the Victory Road would be at C. All of the-both Victory Road and Meridian Road would be at A and Overland Road would be at D. The highway district reviewed these and reached a conclusion thaf~this complied with their standards and that was outlined in their staff report, fact and finding letter X, I believe. In reaching that conclusion,z-the highway district made a series of recommendations. They required of the applicant to put turn lanes on Overland Road at the Stoddard intersection and in addition to that, there will be a contribution of impact fees from this development in excess of $300,000. That $300,000 will be used by the highway department to do additional improvements to the system. With the widening of Overland Road and the construction of left turn lanes, they deemed that the system would'be adequate to accommodate it. The second part of your question dealt with some of the-there are certain turning movements where the specific level of service for those movements during the peak hour period is in the F or E category. Those conditions exist because of the traffic and because of the geometry on the arterials and are more related to the- conditions of the arterials then the traffic volumes. For example, turning out of Calderwood in the afternoon and- trying to make a left hand turn is a very difficult move. The reason it is so difficult is because of the high traffic volume on Meridian Road and the high speed on the road. The volume of traffic doesn't really affect that condition and there are some ways to improve it. Probably the best solution is to put a traffic signal at the Victory Road intersection at Meridian Road. Unfortunately the traffic volumes aren't sufficiently high right now to warrant a signal, but as the area grows and as more people use that intersection, it will reach that condition in the future. Again, some of those impact fee revenues that are being generated by this project could be used by the highway district to fund that improvement. Where there additional questions? Borup: Any questions? Mr. Barbeiro. ,Barbeiro: Mr. Dobie, is the light at Victory Road the concern or is it Amenity where you come down and can't see the intersection coming off of Meridian Road. I understood there were some concerns about putting stop lights at some of these intersections along .Meridian Road. Your not familiar with the concerns- Dobie: On Meridian Road? The site distance on Meridian Road should be adequate if your doing the speed limit. Borup: Thank you Mr. Dobie. Commissioner's have-.any questions for staff at this point Barbeiro: , Mr. Chairman I have some questions for staff. Becky made note of the four subdivisions that have lift stations as a part of their existing set up. Could you please elaborate on one of more of those and the conditions of which those lift stations were implemented and how those differ from this subdivision please. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 11 Smith: Thank:you. Mr. Chairman, Commission members my name is Gary Smith. I am the City Engineer. I made a listing of the lift stations that the City~of Meridian presently has in operation. We have 8 lift stations.in various areas of the City: Some of these were installed for reasonsYthat are, in my estimation, critical reasons and others happen for other reasons. The most recent (ift station that has been approved and ...Becky related to it referred to it is the one at Vienna Woods Subdivision out in the northeast part of our impact area. That subdivision is located between McMillan Road and Chinden Blvd: on the east side of Locust Grove. It is approximately-it is a little over a mile from our existing gravity system at Summerfield Subdivision. That particular lift station was approved. because we were protecting our area of impact from Boise City. The agreement that was reached at the time that hearings were held with Ada County Commissioner's,. City of Meridian and Boise City to determine this east boundary of our impact area resulted in a stipulation or a commitment by the City of Meridian that we .would provide sewer service, because this particular subdivision was an item of discussion of that time. The City Council agreed that this would happen, and it is happening. in that manner. To facilitate that service of that area,`we are in the design stage now for what's been termed the No Name Trunk which is located approximately midway between Ustick Road and McMillan. That trunk will serve approximatelythree and a half sections of land and each section is 640 acres so you are looking at in excess of 2000 acres of ground that could be developed with that sewer service.. The other lift station that Becky mentioned is the Ashford Greens lift station and that is located near the intersection of Black Cat Road and Ustick. That lift station serves approximately 500 acres of ground and or will serve, Ishould-say. The incentive for the construction of that lift station had to do with the development of the golf course. That is the second nine. holes that was recently completed and the associated developments around it. The developer of the Ashford Greens. Subdivision was a co-sponsor of the construction of the lift statior+ and the pressure lines. That lift station will ultimately eliminate an existing lift station that is located in Golf View Subdivision. In fact Golf View number 5 subdivision, which is the last phase of that sub, has apre-construction meeting today for construction of that sewer. That lift station will go away. It will be abandoned. All the flow.from Golf View lift station which is presently serving that subdivision, Cherry Lane Village Subdivision #1, Parkside Creek Subdivision will all now flow into the Ashford Greens lift station along with Ashford Greens, a couple of phases ~of the Lakes Subdivision, I believe Dakota Ridge also flows that way. That we term a sub-reasonal lift station. Ultimately, that lift station will be replaced by a regional lift station that is located approximately %z mile north of Ustick Road on Black Cat. That lift station would;.service the Black Cat Trunk which would ultimately end of at the front door of Bear Creek Subdivision. Under long term development or ultimate build out of our referral area, which is south of our impact boundary between Kuna Meridian Road and I' think we are a quarter mile south of Amity with our impact boundary now. A11 that area south to Columbia Road flowing into the Ten Mile Drain, some of that flow is-going to be diverted in the Black Cat Trunk: All of this sewer planning has come about through a master plan: The City of Meridian contracted with JUB Engineers to develop this master plan. Develop these points of diversion for ultimate build out has developed 10 year projections for building in the City of Meridian, the sewer lines that are going to be Meridian Manning an~oning Commission Meeting, October 12, 1999 Page 12 necessary. My concern. with this development, as I have given you in the printed material, is that we are pumping from one drainage area to another and right now we see 326 lots being proposed for-this development. I don't know what else is in this area that will come along later; but as I mentioned in the written material I can envision that as soon as the dust settles from the first start of the street excavation, the City of Meridian will see applications for development in that area adjacent to this subdivision. My concern from that standpoint is that we are looking at just this subdivision, if the City Council who give me direction for implementation of sewer lines feel that this area needs to be considered for development, obviously that is what I will look at. I will look at a larger area. By that I mean, an area where a lift station could be installed perhaps at a point on Overland .Road, one third of a mile west of Linder, which seems to be a low point, I believe, on a drainage there. Where this is pumped, I can't say right now. Whether it is pumped north on Linder Road and into this line that is being proposed to parallel pipe, or if it is pumped somewhere else, I don't know. It is a lot bigger project than what is being proposed now. We have not looked at that totally because we are so much involved in development in other areas of the city. Just to give you an idea *'~*END OF SIDE ONE*** Smith: Eleven hundred homes capacity in the Ten Mile Drain right now that can be built. Victory Road and South. That is a ten year projection for that area for building. The applicants proposal to parallel pipe the sewer line in Linder Road and through Crestwood Subdivision for a distance as I understand it, it estimated somewhere around 210 or 220 thousand dollars. We need to implement a sewer trunk fee that all development should pay for` in the City of Meridian to facilitate the construction of the sewer trunks: It is either that or bond issues because these are expansions of our systems and we can't use the monies that we.have to develop these lines. As I understand it, the applicant is not willing to enter into trunk line fees along with the cost to parallel pipe. That would take 326 units out of the formula for financing the future extension of the Black Cat Trunk Sewer. The other lift stations I can go through then if you like. They were installed for various reasons. There are some that are pumping into their designated drainage's but they are not able to get there by gravity because there happens to be a piece of ground that is undeveloped and they were not able to extend the gravity sewer and there are some that are pumping into another drainage and they were done for whatever reason. It was not a critical "reason. .Becky is right. There.is a precedence. { am just concerned that this is going to be a big precedent for this whole area- and these other ones haven't been large area developments. They have been smaller subdivisions. We do have an obligation to provide service in our impact area. That is-part of the agreement that we have with ADA County Commissioners. There is a time limit. As long as we claim the area, if the time limit went by and we had not provided service with that area, then I would assume that someone else, another entity, could request the County Commissioner's. to amend the area of impact boundary in a particular area where we are not there with sewer and/or water. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 13 Borup: Any questions for Mr. Smith? Hatcher: In regards to the Ashford Greens lift station, could you enlighten me a little bit as to why the lift station was built for that particular area in lieu of starting the construction of the Black Cat Trunk since the we are only talking about a mile or less to be able to facilitate that. Smith: Mr. Commissioner, Chairmen and Commissioner Members there was an agreement between the City of Meridian at that time, Council and Mayor, and the developer of the property to build this lift station. The size of the trunk in Black Cat is I believe 33 inch diameter pipe and the actual location of the lift station in Black Cat Road is like I said earlier, a -half mile north of Ustick. It`is a regional lift station. It would be a huge facility to be accepting capacity flows from a 33 inch diameter pipe. There just isn't any way you can finance kind of an installation based on the limited amount of property that was to be developed. We have the line that was constructed in Black Cat Road as a 12 inch diameter line. Everybody knew going in that that was not the final line that was to be constructed. Whether or not it is a throw away line I don't know. Perhaps it can be parallel piped. with another pipe to give us a 33 inch diameter. I am not sure of that. By extending that; building that lift station, extending that line, Turnberry Subdivision was able to be developed which is approximately 40 acres I believe of single family homes. All of Ashford Greens. The west half of the Lakes at Cherry Lane Subdivision was able to be developed. Dakota Ridge was able to be developed. There is probably other property along the west side of Black Cat Road that can be developed and accepted flow channeled into that lift station. The southeast corner of Black Cat Road and Cherry Lane Road, 40 acres, has been owned for f don't know for how many years; by a party in Nampa and they've wanted to develop that. The north half of that property can flow by gravity into this lift station also. This lift station also gets rid of a lift station that's been operating since Cherry Lane Village No. 1 went into effect in 1980. This lift station accomplished a lot of things. Hatcher: So how many houses do you feel that that particular lift station has served with all,.of the subdivisions that are south of Ustick between Ten Mile and Black Cat all the way to Cherry on Black Cat and even further south than Cherry along Black Cat, all being served by this lift station. Plus potential for future growth on this temporary lift station. Smith: Well the service area for this lift station is approximately east of Black Cat between Ustick and Cherry Lane plus probably a quarter south of Cherry Lane from Black Cat east to the east side of Park Side creek. I guess that goes all the way to Ten Mife Road. I don't know how many homes are in there and I don't recall the capacity of the lift station. I-know right now it is operating on the very low end as far as run time and volume of sewage being pumped. 1 just don't have those figures in my head to tell you what .it's capacity is. It does have capacity to serve all that area. When the lift 'stations are designed, we have to use a number so we assign a certain density and Meridian,Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 14 dwelling units per,acre against the service area for the lift station. That is how it is designed. Hatcher: Were any of these developments or subdivisions-was the trunk fee established at that time. Has the city gotten any money allocated to the Black Cat Trunk because of these developments. Smith: No. There are latecomer fees that were assessed against the installation of the lift station and the pressure -line. We do have one subdivision that was proposed, English Gardens I believe it is called, that would be subject to a trunk line fee. Borup: Can Mr. Smith one question on your comment. I think you said that you understood that the applicant was opposed to a trunk line fee. Smith: Yes. And the construction of the parallel piping combination. Borup: I may ask for clarification on that. The staff report said otherwise. That's why I was confused. If I read the report right, they were talking about the-Shari or who ever wrote that is that correct a thousand dollar- Hatcher: The impact fee was $1500 per lot. Borup: Well, that's what I~thought was mentioned at one time was $1500. Staff report said something about $1000 surcharge. I believe the $1500 was mentioned in past testimony. Hatcher: I was just chunching that. If we have 300- Borup: It is my understanding that-was a trunk line fee. Hatcher: It was a trunk line impact fee. I believe, I think the applicant can clarify this but {believe that the agreement was that they would improve the bottleneck and create the capacity that they need for this project without impacting the existing capacity and the project would also be subject to the impact fee of $1500 per lot, which is roughly ::$489,000 from this project~alone that would go to the Black Cat Trunk. This lift station would serve approximately about the same as the Ashford Greens lift station has a potential to do. That didn't generate any money. Borup: That was our understanding. They were proposing both. Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, I'll just read Item No. 2 on their impacts on Ten Mile Drainage. It says the applicant had requested the $1500 special sewer assessment include the Ten Mile Trunk upgrade. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 15 Hatcher: Include. So we'd have to take the cost of that improvement out of that. What was the anticipated- Smith: Include. That's a response. That's the way I read it anyway. Borup: Your saying that it was 210 to 220 on the improvement. Hatcher: That's a request of theirs. What is the approximate cost of that upgrade? Do we have any idea. Borup: $210 to`$220,000. Hatcher:. So we still to get a quarter of a million dollars for the Black Cat Trunk off this project. Smith: The Black Cat Trunk is estimated at $8.5 million dollars. Hatcher: Got to start somewhere. Smith: Yes sir, you do. Barbeiro: Mr. Smith, Becky` said that this particular projecf would be less than one per cent of the plant capacity now. Could you tell me where the capacity of the plant is now and if she is correct in that one per cent plant capacity. Smith: I can tell you where the capacity of the plant is right now. I don't know on the one per cent. Barbeiro: Okay, what is the total capacity of the plant guessing that you would design per home or- Smith: We're at 4 million gallons per day capacity right now. Barbeiro: How does that equate to a number of residents. Smith: When the plant was designed initially it was designed at 2.82 million gallons and population equivalent of 22,500 people. If you divide that, I'm sure what the answer to that question is just a second. Approximately 7500 homes. That's about 376 gallons per day per home. Barbeiro: So the 4 million gallons capacity right now would account for about 35,000 people. Smith: Approximately, yes. Meridian Planning' an~oning Commission Meeting ,~ October 12, 1999 Page 16 Barbeiro: This project with" 326 homes would bring in about 800 .people. It-would take about 2 per cent of the capacity of the plant. Smith: About 900~people. ~Is that what you said Commissioner? ~. €, s Barbeiro: Yeah, 800 or 900 people, about 2 per cent. What is the impact that the parallel line would have and what is your recommendation the'way that the developer has presented the parallel Hine. } Smith: The impact that it would have? Barbeiro: They presented it as an alternate to either waiting for the line or the other options that they have. I know that you have written in great detail could you summarize for me the public works evaluation of running that parallel line. Could you summarize that? Smith The impact of the parallel line? Well I think that the engineering that has been done said that it would add approximately 1000 dwelling units beyond the capacity required. v Barbeiro: And does the Public Works Dept. agree with their assessments and would you recommend that as an alternate. 3 Smith: My recommendation is not to pump into the, into that drainage. Barbeiro: Okay, thank you. Borup: Any other questions of the Commissioner's? We've spent a 1of of time discussing but this is a continued public hearing. Do we have any one else in the audience who would like to comment on this application. Looks like everyone is here for something else. Becky did you have any summary comments you'd like to make. I do have one question, Mr. Dobie made some reference to the traffic study. I am not sure if staff has acopy-do'we have a copy of that? That is in the file. Is that right Shari? Did not get into the City Clerk's office. That's why (wondered-if we had a copy for the file. If not, is that something you'd like to make part of the record? Bowcutt: Quickly, I'll just answer a couple of questions that arose. As far as clarification on the special sewer assessment. Originally, if you recall when we submitted the application, part of our application was a letter that stated that we would like a special assessment to go into that fund for future funding of the Black Cat Trunk line. In that letter was that we suggested $1000. We just kind of picked a nice round number. Your staff analysis, I think Mr. Watson indicated that they had calculated that they felt $1500 was .more appropriate. That was the number which was imposed upon English Gardens which came before you last month. They were up I believe the same night we were. Of that $1500 your correct, would generate $489,000. Since we were Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 } Page 17~ ' ..creating some additional capacity above and beyond ourselves, we had hoped and I want to say'hoped, that the $200 to $210 thousand dollars spent upgrading the Ten Mile. line would be a part of that $489,000. That is now I responded to staff's comments. Obviously, that would be a determination made by this body and the City Council. We did feel because we are creating 326 homes and we create a capacity of around say 1000 and we're 326. We are adding something above and beyond what we would be using,. As Mr. Smith said; there- have been many reasons why these lift stations have ,been allowed in the past. It has always been a decision of the City Council and in most instances based on circumstances and benefits. We feel that we provide a benefit here that warrants this and based on our circumstances, our location of being next to a sewer main line, that we can't access. We feel there is something unequittible about that. That's it. Borup: Any questions? Okay Mr. Hatcher. Hatcher: Becky, setting aside the sewer issue on this project, have you and the., applicant had more than ample enough time to review ACHD's comments and suggestions. The Park and Recs comments and suggestions. Staff's suggestions, if this project was approved-so on and so forth. Do you have any problems with any of the comments that have been sent back to you at this time. Bowcutt: We agreed with `all of ACHD's conditions. 1 concur with all- the park directors comments. They are consistent with what we've discussed, as I stated before. I guess it all boils down to the issue of the sewer and I think the only-other thing I commented on was Item 8 and was storm drainage. We believe that there should be some hand in hand work as far as storm drainage overflows are concerned with the eastern portion of the park. We've done that in the past with other`projects such as schools and so forth. If we have a hundred year (Inaudible) it makes a big difference if we have emergency overflow areas;for storm drainage purposes. This is some that would be technical issue that would have to be worked out with the Parks Dept. and the staff. Hatcher: In a nutshell, if I understand you right what you are saying is that you want to work in agreement with the City Parks Dept. to use the eastern portion of the donated park as the on-site retainage for the overall site in a storm 100 year flood plane system. Bowcutt: No sir. That would not be our only no, no, no. We have other storm drainage facilities throughout the project. That would be an area just would serve kind of that vicinity as an overflow area. What I explained to Mr. Kuntz,, he envisioned stag ponds, severely depressed areas. , I said no, with a site of that size we would not -you know you've got a lot of area. You don't need to swale it or put ponds in. No, that was not our intent at a11. We want the park to be usable so I believe he qualified his comment that we would have to comply with any wishes of the Parks Dept. concerning storm° drainage discharge: The park would not serve as a retention or drainage area for street run off without approval from Parks and Recs Dept. We agree with that condition. Meridian Planning ar~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 18 Borup: Your saying as an emergency overflow would be something that would still be a grass area-a usable area, play area what ever. Bowcutt: Yes. We have done it with elementary school playgrounds also. Over in Kuna and in Idaho Falls where we have a substantial storm event then you have the ability for that overflow just to go out into grassy play areas. Barbeiro: Becky you said that the 326 homes would account for less than one per cent of the capacity of the sewer at this time. Mr. Smith tells us that the~capacity of the sewer is about 32,000 people. Using what I believe is a conservative figure of 2.75 people per home, that would give your subdivision about 900 people in that subdivision. That would account tb closer to 3 per cent of the capacity of the sewer, not less than one. Is that correct? Bowcutt: That depends on what your looking at. I believe Mr. Smith was looking at what is the current capacity of the plant. The current capacity is 4 million gallons. The future capacity after this upgrade that is in the works at this time will be 8 million. How we calculate it is we calced approximately 3-1/2 bedrooms which gave us 275 gallons per day per home. Obviously multiplying that by 326- it was just a little bit under 90,000 gallons per day, so if we loak at 90,000 gallons per day and take a percentage of the 8 million which will be the size of the plant after this upgrade, we are up to 1.12 per cent of capacity. z Borup: Any other questions for Miss Bowcutt? Thank you Becky. Commissioner's. We still have Item No. 2 on the annexation and zoning open. Hatcher: I have one more,question for staff to hopefully wrap this up for me. Question is, in regards to our last meeting last month we were talking about'the lift station that would service-Bear Creek-whether it was going to be a temporary lift station for the subdivision it self and I believe that staff's recommendation was that a regional lift station down around Linder and Overland be put in to service a larger area. Could you elaborate on-that because I feel a conflict. If we put in a regional lift station in that area, we saying okay we now have the capacity and ability to service this large area which in fact we don't-not until the Black Cat Trunk comes in. On the other hand if we look at this project and this project only so that we don't establish a precedent setting scenario I am envisioning more maybe along-the lines of this subdivision being built with gravity flow sewer if the black cat line existed. At that point to where it would connect to the Black Cat line temporary lift station be installed, at that point connect it to Ten Mile and then abandon it when Black Cat gets there. Can you elaborate. Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members. That was the original proposal, yes. We do know however, there is a 40 acre parcel on the west side of Stoddard Road that is owned by the same, or at least has the option by the same developer. There is property at the southwest corner of Stoddard and Overland that has expressed interest in developing. I think if, ideally, if you take just the Bear Creek Subdivision and you plug it . " Meridian- Planning an~oning Commission. Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 19 into a lift station;'you've got one situation. Realistically I think what is going to happen is that there are other properties adjacent to this that will want to develop in the near future. So, if you look at it from a longer point of view or a longer term, then you go west and you go;to Overland and .Linder or somewhere in .that area-:arid you plan for this whole area to develop. I really thing that is what will happen. It is going to be another developing area of the City of Meridian. It is not just an isolated and I same not just, because-.this is a large development; but just this development-l don't think this is as far as it is going. to go. Hatcher: ° But if the regional lift station was put in to allow for future development, besides this project, how does that effect Ten Mile. We are all ready talking aboutxnot having capacity for this project. How are we going to have capacity for other projects. Smith:. Well it is a trade off is what it is going to,be. Unless, you pump'this into the Black Cat drainage and get it far enough north where it flows into that existing or start building that Black Cat Trunk. Otherwise, if you pump it into the Ten Mile:Drainage, we are going to have trade-off with gravity flow up stream south of Victory Road for example. That is where this pumping becomes a real problem. You have to establish some ground rules if you start it. Capacities are capacities and there are just certain things you can do to increase those capacities. The existing trunk lines that you are dumping .into are you capacities. Those are your restrictions. I understand exactly what you are saying, but there are really two different scenarios that need to be~looked at. If the approval is given for just -Bear Creek Subdivision, then that is one thing. That is not going to have the impact that the whole sub-regional area will have, obviously. They are-two different things. I just don't know if you approve one, and then you get an application for the 40 acres across the street and you say no, I'm sorry you can't. I am not sure haw far that one will fly. I just don't know. De Weerd: So, in your opinion. this is a fringe property and by approving it-with a lift station, it would only serve'that development. Your thinking then our boundary moves and then the next propertyrwould be a fringe- property. Smith: Yes. We have seen that happen with -the Golf View lift station. That think has moved three times, I believe. That lift station itself has moved three times. It has been upsized as it is moved. Smaller scale, but similar situation. Hatcher: What governs the boundary? Why would it move once it is established? Just because it is going to Ten Mile,, why would you incorporate all of Bear Creek as part of that? Smith: It is not where your pumping, it is where your gathering it up by gravity that moves. That point of collection moves and it moves with the topography of the ground. As a lift station is situated and the pressure comes to build down stream of the lift station, then you can do one of two things. You can move the lift station down stream and pump back, or you can build another lift station and pump back into this first lift Meridian. Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 20 station. That is not a particularly' good scenario, so you move the lift station to accommodate the additional ground that wants to develop. De Weerd: But it would not be sufficient to say were are not setting a precedence today that your fringe boundary would move with this development. Smith: I believe that it would-that there would be sufficient pressures to move to the west. Hatcher: If it was designed for gravity flow based upon the Black Cat Trunk impact area; then were-still-that project would still be part of the Black Cat Trunk because that is how it-was designed for gravity flow. That point of which all that subdivision connects to, but that point to a temporary location at Ten Mile is a temporary service for the subdivision itself and that is it. Smith: Yes.3 Hatcher: We would not be =setting a precedent for future development because we can't connect t'o that lift station because that lift station is only for this project. In return, they would be fixing a problem in the middle of the city that would allow them to build. the project without impacting the existing capacity. In fact, I think it would be improving it and it would be generating money for a Black Cat Trunk which is the big problem.. So I kintl of think-I can of see that with a little bit of give and take, it is almost a win, win situation. Smith: Commissioner, I will certainly agree with you on the impact fee, the trunk fee. We don't have a problem with the sewer capacity in the middle of town now. We have a problem -we would have a problem with this development with parallel piping requirement. {still believe because, of what I've seen happen in the city in the past, that that lift station there would be pressure to move that even through as you say, the sewer lines, the trunk line in Bear Creek will be built so that it can be continued on as part of Black Cat Trunk, the lift station could go away, be abandoned. That is what we have done in other areas of town where the trunks have been extended and weren't for one reason or another when the development went in. Lift stations are abandoned and it becomes part of that trunk line. I also feel strongly that that lift station is not going to stay therefor very long. It may stay for the development of this subdivision and 326 lots will probably take, with the rate lots are selling in Meridian, I don't know, 5 years maybe, something like that. That's 70 lots. a year and that's a month worth of building permits in Meridian typically. It will be'there for that length or time, but it won't be there any longer. Barbeiro: I have another question for Becky if I may please. Becky, Mr. Smith talked about the need to possibly move the lift station one or more times. Considering perhaps seven years out when the development is complete, there may be needs to move the lift station in 7 to 10 years. Would the developer be willing to incur the cost of moving the Meridian Planning. an~oning Commission Meeting • October 12, 1999 Page 21 lift station one time. They might have to change it two or three or four times. That's not reasonable to assume the developer would incur the cost of that many moves. Bowcutt: To answer your question, in instances that I am aware of where lift stations have moved, the city did not incur the cost to move them, the developer incurred the cost to move them-meaning the subsequent developer down the line. What Mr. Smith indicates is that somebody installed a lift station and it was designed to service only that ,subject property at that particular time. Then somebody else came to the city later and says I want to develop, but I am even further away then he is, so I am going to pick up that lift station and move it. That next gentleman pays for the upgrade. In this particular Golf View one, I think he is indicating, it moved 3 times. In my opinion, if the issue of the domino effect is of concern, the city has the ability to limit it. Like I said, I challenge somebody to come in with this kind of density, this size of lots with the amenities and the public amenities to the city. It is going to be hard to match. Really hard. to match. The city could put its foot down and it was talked about this is the fringe and then does the fringe move. No, the fringe doesn't move. The fringe stays the same. A portion of this property is in the Ten Mile Trunk. The southeast portion, if you recall from the little map I drew you last time. So does the fringe move-No. I am still on the perimeter of -that drainage area. So the city, as far as justification could turn and say well the line is there. Your beyond. Your not fringe, your west. The other thing I want to bring to your attention is the fact that the Ten Mile Trunk will eventually be deterred into or intercepted by the Black Cat, if you recall that discussion also. Eventually, Nine Mile, Ten Mile will all be diverted into the Black Cat in the future. What we send down Ten Mile eventually will work its way into the appropriate Black Cat future trunk line. I think that is another important issue that we need to recognize. Borup: Becky, would the current location of the lift-station be able to service any property to the west without moving it? Bowcutt: f wouldn't want to answer that question because I don't have a topographic map of what is west of me. I believe staff is correct that the low point in that vicinity would be around that Linder road area. I think Gary said 1/3 mile west of Linder is typically the tow points of the drains and everything kind of slopes in a northwesterly direction typically. Borup: Thank you. Commissioners. We can discuss this. We can discuss with the closing this hearing and we still have the option of asking staff anything. Barbeiro: Bruce is that customary the way that Becky describe it where the subsequent developer will pay to abandon an existing lift station and built a new one. Freckleton: Commissioner Barbeiro that has happened. I believe in Golf View, the case there the original lift station was installed by Cherry Lane Village Sub 1. It was relocated. The lift station that was in Cherry Lane was abandon. There was a new lift station built in cherry Lane Village. That lift station had to be built to accept the flow ,`--~, ~ Meridian Planning an`t~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 22 from Cherry Lane and Parkside Creek so he did incur costs to in essence to move the lift station. Borup: The city did not. Freckleton: Correct. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we close the public hearing on Annexation and Zoning of Bear Creek. Barbeiro: I second the motion. Borup: Albin favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES z p r Borup: Okay, probably appropriate for discussion. Would anyone like to step in first or tlo we want to go down the line. Barbeiro: -So much of the discussion comes back to the funding, direction and priorities of the sewer lines'as set forth by the City Council. These are items we can not have power over. If we were to recommend and City Council were to approve this, it would then come to City Council to prioritize, fund and direct sewer lines in this area. The two exceptions that Mr. Smith made note of-one was intended to keep the City of Boise out of our impact to service an area so that the City of Boise would not take it over. The other was to add the nine holes to Cherry Lane. Both of these exceptions appear to me to be more political exceptions and (inaudible) exceptions then they were critical. I do agree that by approving this we .would move ttie fringe boundary and be setting a precedent for future development in the area, but as it is now I would recommend to City Council that we approve-this and leave it to them to direct, fund and set the priorities for the sewer in this area. If they so choose to approve it, then it become to. them to develop those priorities. Borup: Thank you. Commissioner Hatcher. Hatcher: Basically, the way that I seeing it is if we were to go ahead and approve it, this is not only an asset to the city in regards to creating funds for the sewer, which is such a big problem. We've got a potential solution or start of a solution. Second, this town is screaming for parks- and here we are being given a rather large park. Plus, this development, although it is 326 houses, it is an extremely low density development. Far lower than the average subdivision in this town. I see that-I wouldn't classify this as breaking the rules. Maybe bending it a little because it is on the fringe, but I disagree. I don't think that this is precedent setting. I say that we keep the boundaries for Ten Mile and Black Cat as they are~because that is established by geographic location and the reason that I think we should approve it is because this property is in both drainage's. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 23 We build it for Black Cat. We temporarily connect it for Ten Mile, because it is in both. That way we get the benefit of it. Borup: Thank you. Commissioner De Weerd any comment? De Weerd: No. Borup: I guess one of the factors that had a lot of influence on me is the statement has been made over and over that we need some money for the Black Cat Trunk line. We went through a whole list of subdivisions-at least 6 subdivisions and capacity for others that are all ready on a lift station that was put in. Specifically for those. The opportunity to get a fund going-the earlier concern was taking away capacity for the Ten Mile Trunk by running the parallel line upgrading the other, they've eliminated that problem. They created a capacity of approximately which beats 674 more of what they are adding. if those 1-000 homes were allowed to be developed, at 1500 per home, that is a million and ahalf-including Bear Creek that would be a million and a half that could go toward the trunk line fund. Even if the $200,000 is subtracted from that. That would be 1.3 million. ~ We all ready have some coming from English Gardens. It would be close to two million dollars, which is 25% I think of what the estimated-was it 8 million-am I remembering right. Probably more by the time it is ready to go. It is a~ start. I think that is all I've got to say. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Borup': Oh now you decide to say something. De Weerd: Well yeah. It's been hard to stay quiet. I'm really not concerned about opening up the land for future development. I do agree with Commissioner Barbeiro that that needs to be a direction from City Council and something they need to look. They do have a master plan in planning and those plans are put in place so, Gary's concerns are very. valid in that respect. However, I do see how this development can benefit our community with the park land. 1 certainly appreciate design and the density that it is a lower density. I don't think we are going to set precedence with the fringe. In my opinion the fringe is not going to move. It is going to stay where it is, but I really hesitate. I know how strongly staff is opposed to this and I really have a problem going against one of their-such a strong objection. Borup: I think we all have that same feeling. A11 we are going to be doing is recommendation. De Weerd: That's true. Borup: I think I like Commissioner Barbeiro's idea. Let City Council-- 1 am ready for a motion. ~~ r Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting • October 12, 1999 Page 24 Barbeiro: I move that we recommend to City Council annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 Zoning for Bear Creek, LLC. Hatcher: I second it. Borup: We have a motion and second. All in favor. That's 2 ayes and 1 nay. MOTION CARRIED: Rutherford: Point of clarification. Is that to include staff comments, some of staff comments, little of staff comments, maybe none of them. ***END OF SIDE TWO**'` Borup: Staff did not end up making on single recommendation-well sorry. They did make one. De Weerd: They made a strong recommendation. Borup: Yes they did. I take that back. They did make one strong recommendation with a lot of options and alternatives and etc. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman if I may amend -we've all ready approved something without an amendment. How do we. Hatcher: Just amend you motion and we will vote on the amendment. ~~ Rutherford: Actually, at this point if you just clarify your motion to what you met to include, I'll act accordingly.l: Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, if I may amend my motion to include all of staff comments for recommendation by the City Council. (inaudible) Borup: So including even the recommendation to deny? Barbeiro: Yes. De Weerd: Commissioner'Barbeiro. I know I can't vote on this since I voted against it, but are you also going to make a motion on the impact fees and applying to the improvements or that they would do both. Borup: Let me ask this question for staff. -Would the item of the trunk line impact fee, etc., would that apply to the annexation and zoning or under the preliminary plat. Meridian Planning an~oning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 25 Rutherford: I bbelieve that it would be the annexation and zoning and part of the development agreement. Hatcher: All the requirements, conditions- and everything that we want on this project needs to be done during the Annexation and Zoning. Rutherford: Correct and as a clarification, I believe the request for the Development Agreement Requirement is~in staff comments, so that would not necessarily need to be part of your motion, but the:.question by Miss De Weerd would. Borup: I think we need clarification on the amount of the fee since two different amounts have been mentioned. One staff comment that mentioned a thousand dollar fee. , In public testimony it had been mentioned and other submittals on the $1500. That is the clarifcation probably: Maybe if we have a recommendation on whether the two hundred and some thousand for the upgrade would be credited toward that fee or in addition too. Hatcher: Can I amend your motion? Okay, basically what I would like to have this-I'd like to have all (inaudible) comments from ACHD, the staff, parks and rec., the whole kitten caboodle, except for the denial of this project, be part of the commitment of conditions for annexation and. zoning. I would like to have the developer pay for the entire cost of the Ten Mile Drainage improvements over Franklin and Linder- Crestwood subdivisions so that and I'd also like to see that this project in addition to that implement the $1500 per lot trunk fee. I'd like to state for the record, and I don't know how we can legally-if there is anyway we can legally put this in there but I do not want this to be construed or considered as a precedent setting that the lift station as required would be far this project and this project only and that the sewer for the subdivision be designed. according to the gravity flow of the Black Cat Drainage. I think that is it. Barbeiro: I would still like to have- Borup: I just (inaudible) cla"rification even though,the $1000 was mentioned earlier the staff recommendation was $1500 per dwelling unit. That is on page 4 of their other staff comments, ftem2. That was specifically written that way. Hatcher:. I was .recommending $1500. Borup: Right. You just repeated Item 2 on the staff comments. That's okay. j: Barbeiro: I would still like to have Public Works recommendation for denial included. Borup: I think he all ready did. Hatcher: (inaudible) striking it. How can we recommend approval to City Council if we have staff comments recommending denial. Meridian Planning an~ning Commission Meeting October 12, 1999 Page 26 Borup: City Council going to have the comments Steve. Rutherford: I can include that in the comments with the specific recommendation from the Council or from the Commission that indicates that you approve it despite the staff comments. Barbeiro: So Steve, from what we've put together here will you be able to make sense of this. - Rutherford: ~I will work it out. Borup: Do you need another vote. All right good, thank you. ITEM 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION OF 326 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOTS BY BEAR CREEK, LLC: Borup: This is a continued public hearing so we'd like to open the continuation. Staff, any additional comments? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission we have nothing further to say. Borup: The applicant has nothing additional. She also indicated by the nod of her head that she would like to incorporate all the previous comments and testimony into this item. Hatcher: There is one thing I would like to add. I would like to add that the development, either the HOA or the developer, however they would like to.work it out, that they incur the cost of maintaining the lift station until such time as that lift.station be abandoned and hooked.to the Black Cat Trunk. That the city does not incur maintenance costs. Borup: I would like to hear some comment from Public Works Dept.~on that. Have you gone both ways or has it always been by the subdivision or how has it normally been? k Smith: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission the recent lift stations that we've done have included a maintenance agreement with the homeowners association for the subdivision to pay the cost of city maintenance of that station. It also -paid the electrical, the telephone and all the other utility costs associated with that maintenance. Borup: So the city maintains it with billings to the HOA. That way~you've got control of the quality of the maintenance. Do we have anyone from the public who would like to testify on this application. Seeing none. Commissioner's. y Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, I move we close- the public hearing. BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES BEAR CREED SUBDIVISION BY BEAR CREED, L.L.C. Case No. AZ-99-010 RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL INTRODUCTION 1. The property is approximately 150.79 acres in size. The property is located east of Stoddard Road, south of Overland Road and is designated as the proposed Bear Creels Subdivision. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Theron Scott, Queenland Acres, Inc. of 670 W. Victory, Meridian, Idaho. 3. Applicant is Bear Creels, LLC, of PO Box 344, Meridian, Idaho. 4. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Transitional (R-T), and consists of various agricultural and residential uses. 5~. The Applicant requests that the property be zoned as Low Density Residential R-4. 6. The subject property is bordered to the north by Ada County Residential, to the east by Meridian Ellc Run Subdivision, further to the east Ada RECOMMENDATION TO` CITY COUNCIL - 1 ANNEXATION AND ZONING - 150.79 ACRES -BEAR CREED, LLC 4- - .. County Rural Transitional, with agricultural use to the south, and Ada County ~ ;t ~ ~ c Residential and to the west Ada County Residential, and the city limits of the City k y ~ , of Meridian are adjacent and abut to the northeast portion of the subject property. 7. The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. ~. 8. 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. ,, 9. The Applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following manner: 326 single family residential lots, 31 common lots and one Meridian park ~~ lot. 10. The Applicant requests zoning of the subject real property as R-4 Low Density Residential which is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as~single family. { residential. 11. There are no significant or scenic features of major importance that affect the consideration of this application. RECOMMENDATION , 1. The Meridian Planning and Zoning' Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the requested annexation RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 2 ANNEXATION AND ZONING - 150.79 ACRES -BEAR CREED, LLC ,, • • and zoning as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Planning and Zoning and Engineering Department comments as follows: l . l There are major issues related to the City's ability to provide sanitary sewer service to this project. In the "HYDRA Sewer Analysis" for this project the summary states: "...Bear Creek Estates would severely impact the Ten Mile Trunk and the City's ability to approve future development which should righ~lly discharge to it. The Public Works Department recommends denial of this application." Staff strongly believes these issues are significant enough to deny this application. In a memo from the Assistant to City Engineer and from Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator dated July 9, 1999, the following statement was made: 'A major contingency on all of these projects will be whether the present sewer system is able to accept the flows to be generated from these developments. Therefore, we respec~lly request that the five public hearings be continued until such time as serviceability is determined. " 1.2 If approved staff recommends a development agreement for this project to include extraordinary sewer requirements, park development, etc. Planning and Zoning Commission offers the additional following recommendations: 1.3 The developer pay for improvements to the Ten Mile sewer line and additionally pay $1,500 per lot as a trunk fee. 1.4 The Planning and Zoning Commission in no way intends their approval of this application to create any precedence. 1.5 Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission has included Staff's comments recommending denial in their recommendation for approval in an effort to give the City Council all the information available in malting this important decision. Z:AWork\M\Meridian 15360M~Bear Creek~I'Z.Rec RECOMMENDATION TOCITY COUNCIL - 3 ANNEXATION AND ZONING - 150.79 ACRES -BEAR CREED, LLC r `} - IVleridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 56 Rossman: I didn't officially, but I will. Mr. Chairman, 1 motion that we approve - recommend approval to City Council for preliminary plat of English Garden Subdivision by Projects West at the corner of Ten Mile Road and Cherry Lane; to incorporate all staff comments at-past meetings and verbally at this meeting, and I think that covers it all. Am I missing anything? Can we take out that past-meetings comment? Hopefully the conditions you're talking about are the ones that were just stated by Shari and Brad, hopefully. Hatcher: But, we had conditions that implemented Ada County's comments that we've seen here that we don't have here. There were other comments; correct, Shari'' Borup: Can you say plat as presented to us? Hatcher: There you go. Plat as presented plus today's comments. De Weerd: I second that. Borup: I will motion a second. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Thank you. Borup: Item No.~ 3. Another continued - Brown: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Brown. Brown: The firm that I'm employed by has Item 3 and 4, and !'!I need to (inaudible) and step down. CONTINUED`PUBLIC"HEARING~ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR`R=4~ZONING)'BY BEAR CREEK, LLC -EAST OF STODDARD ROAD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND (CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 12, 1999) Borup: Okay. Understood. Anybody want to join him? Probably so. Mr. -Berg wants to leave to. -Item.-3-and-4; continued public hearing, annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres by~Bear Creek,~LLC. This was kind of in the same situation as English Gardens with the sewer question. I,think when we left it last time, the instruction was that the applicant was going to try to get together with Public Works- to discuss .that. Would we like to start with Public Works first or with Shari? Let's open this -- we'd like to -well, Meridian Planning and Zoning. Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 57 we're continuing it. Did I mention that Item No. 3, we're opening continuation,of ±his public hearing? Why don't we talk about the sewer first. Do we want to do that? Hatcher: Let's go straight to the heart of the problem. Borup: Yeah. Watson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, this particular project has consumed a lot of time and a lot of back and forth between the consultant and the public works department. I believe you've seen at least one report that has come out of our ' department that I prepared and was reviewed by Gary Smith. The conclusions in that report were that this project could not be recommended by Public Works as it was shown, and the main -well, there were several main reasons. The primary reason was that our sewer capacity in the Ten Mile trunk into which they proposed discharging by lift station has capacity for approximately 1100 additional hook-ups. This project is not within the Ten Mile sewer service area. Our concern was that if this was approved, it would severely limit the ability of the City to approve projects that did exist within the Ten Mile sewer service area as shown on the recently adopted sewer master plan. After the last hearing, they wrote and listed quite a few questions, and I provided, I think, adequate answers to them. They fol{owed up with two verbal questior~s today which one I answered earlier, one I think I got back to them tonight. I don't think our recommendation has changed any, and from a technical. standpoint, we can accommodate this right now. It could discharge into the sewer and there wouldn't be a moratorium tomorrow on that trunk. Our concern is that over the next ten years we will see a huge amount of pressure in that area, and we're not concerned only about this project. We have heard, Gary and (both, and Bruce probably as wel{, have heard of people west all the way to Linder Road inquiring about the availability of sewer and what's happening with this application. And again, that's a separate issue and speculation again. But from a sewer standpoint, it's not a separate issue. We have to plan many years down the road. We can't decide something for what's in front of us today. If we did that, two years from now we'd be in a lot of trouble, and it would be our fault. Gary put together a-memo for Mayor Corrie, and if I could just paraphrase a little bit. He says that the bottom line in this project is that if this is approved, the cify (inaudible) again plans to construct the Black Cat trunk immediately. And what treat - the Black Cat trunk, just to give you a little background, it goes all the way from Bear Creek to Black Cat Road on the other side of the interstate north of Ustick Road to a very large regional lift station. The latest estimated costs are about nine million dollars for this trunk. We estimate to procure all the right-of-way and the funding it would take approximately five years to have that system in place, and that's pretty optimistic. The other side of this is that even if we pursue that, we would be sacrificing our efforts from where the council has already directed us to pursue our efforts .which is north of Ustick, (inaudible) extension towards Eagle Road,.and towards the Eagle/Overland area. We don't have funds to tear off anything like this. Gary further goes~on, again paraphrasing, 1~l 1` Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14,..:1999 Page 58 that this is the tip of the iceberg. He recommended that if this project was approved that that lift station,actuatly be'.constructed near the intersection of Linder Road and Overland Road and encompass that whole square mile'of land an'd that` it discharge to the Ten Mile trunk near Crestwood. The problem with this particular project`of the lift station is located on-site. That's all weN and good, and they can serve something upstream. But a year from now, not even a year from'riow, we'll be looking°at the same situation; analyzing the lift station for the next person west, another quarter mile acid then another quarter mile, and it's just not very good sewer planning on our"part. And I don't have anyone hear that has first-hand experience with what's happening it the neighboring city, but evidently.; this .situation has,been going on for several years where interbasin pumping was allowed. And they're at a crisis point right now; and the situation has developed to a point where so many developments have been allowed to pump interbasin; and those fees have. been lost`thaf would have gone"to a trunk. They can't go back to these existing subdivisions a'nd charge a trunk fee. So now-some outlying. areas are hoping to.develop,~and they're being hit with this several-million- dollardeal to extend a new trunk, and they're wontlering-why they're on the hook for it when all these people that should have been paying for it were allowed to pump to another basin. That's just a' little background, and that's where we don't want to be five years from now.. If there are'any questions, and I'm sure there wiH be, I'd be happy to try to answer them.. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Watson at this time? Shari;` is there anything you'd `like to present to the Commission? Brief. We've had a presentation on the project, "I think. Stiles: Okay. Last month, Brad and Steve gave a presentation on this project: Borup: Well, mostly from Becky Bocutt, but they did -yes: There-were some comments. But l don't believe we got into any specifics. Stiles: If you need to know anything about what's surrounding there or Borup: Any questions #rom the Commission or should we move on? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Bocutt: Becky Bocutt, BriggsEngineering, 1800 West Overland, Boise. } I did an overlaying of this map to make it a little easier to look'at these so-called drainage areas. Highlighted in blue is that Black Cat`drainage area which encompasses the Black Cat trunk here, Trunk B and the Trunk A, or diversion trunk. I did not bring a line over here to include this McDermott trunk because it would come in off of another lift station. It eventually end up in this same trunk line through here, but it's not part of this area here. You can see our site here delineated in the purple along this eastern boundary. In the pink,area, this. is what is shown as the. Ten .Mile trunk. Now, keep in mind your' impact boundary does~~end righ# here at Amity Road even though this is shown on this map, it • _ , Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 59 _ does not go beyond there: Ada County, I believe, referenced that as a referral area. only. So the Ten Mile trunk area today consists of this here and then this green area right here is that Nine Mile trunk, and that's what you see south°of the freeway. Now one of the things that was discussed between our engineers and the staff was the issue of the bottlenecks; that the capacity of the Ten Mile line is compromised now due to bottlenecks that exist in Crestwood Estates. We have with Staff's help and we do apologize to Mr. Watson that this has taken an immense amount of time, these larger complicated projects tend to be that way. If I could go over to this, this you see right here is Crestwood Estates. In blue is the-Ten Mile trunk. The. bottlenecks exist from this point to this point-where it transitions down to this 15-inch line. We have exactly 2800 linear feet that would either one, have to be replaced; or two, some type of a parallel line be constructed to add the additional capacity that's currently being constricted in this vicinity. "We have calculated the approximate cost at about $205-210,000 to go in and make that improvement. We, the developer has looked at that and has determined that he would be willing to go in *** end of Tape 2, Side B *** and one, we're creating ou`r own capacity that at this point in time does not exist. It's estimated the Ten Mile, as=is today, can service, I think the numbers kicked around are between 900 and 1,000 homes. By going in and upgrading this, that would bring that capacity up to approximately 1800; doubling the ability to service. So, instead of utilizing existing capacity that the City states way would like to guard and basically put on hold for future development within that drainage area, we'd be creating our own capacity and not taking away from any properties that have a right to go within that drainage area. The other issue discussed was what's the solution, I believe Mr. Barbeiro says; what are you planning on doing? What is a long-term solution? One, this is the first step. This.has to be done whether we're around or not, at some point in time. You're going through an existing development,,we're going to be cutting in paved streets and replacing these facilities. But also, the City's talking about the $1500 assessment, and we agree that this needs to be done. And if this were assessed for those areas in that Black Cat region, then those monies could be used to eventually build that Black Cat line. I think some of the numbers Staffs been kicking around is like nine, ten thousand homes, possibly could be on the Black Cat line. The project that you looked at earlier, the Gardens project that Bob brought before you, that's within this Black Cat line. 'It's located at this location here; Black Cat and Fairview - or Cherry Lane. Here at the southeast corner. So-as you can see, it's right in the middle of this little leg of this line; however, that property is being allowed to lift back into the Ashford Greens -lift station. And this is Ashford Greens that was intended to go into Black Cat, but instead is lifting back into that lift station there. So when we talked, I believe at the last meeting about jumping over those boundaries, it's been done. It has been done on occasions. We try to keep within our drainage boundaries and keep those projects that can gravity flow. Staff made that comment, and that is correct. But with that $1500 • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 60 _ assessment, we're looking for this project $489,000 for 326 lots. Now the 210 thousand spent on upgrading the Ten Mile line at the bottleneck obviously, we would like some type of credit for that, because we~are taking on quite a burden. We've got our park, we've got our improvements there, and then we're going in and making these facility improvements also, besides installing the regional lift station. Brad states that the priority is the north area. I don't think that the City of Meridian should put every single new development north of Ustick. I think it's the biggest future traffic problem we could ever create in this valley. That many homes in that location without the Ten Mile interchange, without the overpass at Locust Grove - I mean, there is going to be issues. When cities grow, they typically kind of grow in different directions, and you try to balance that. You look at things such as interchange locations; uses in the area as far as commercial; how far are commutes; you look at all those things. When we start going way north of the city, we don't have interchanges. We don't have existing commercial developments, so we're going to see a lot of traffic. I don't think that this is going to open up a Pandora's box. I think this -can be done in a way if it's well planned, well worked out with public works, it can:be done in a very orderly fashion. We have a good project, a quality project. We adjoin the city limits. We're doing what we can for the community and I think we've done everything right, and I think a comment came from a staff member: It's a' beautiful project. We just wish it was where you could gravity sewer. Well, if it was where I could gravity sewer, we couldn't afford to do the park, and you end up seeing cookie-cutter subdivision, 3.45 dwelling units per a:,re. But when we get out on this perimeter, we have that ability. We Piave that monetay flexibility. The other thing I'd like to state lastly, we're over here. Who's to say when the Black Cat.gets to us that we will even have capacity. The city can't guarantee that. I know that for a fact because I'm dealing with a property on the Nine Mile trunk that's right here. Not at the tail-end. Right in this vicinity. Clearly delineated the Nine Mile trunk. We spent thousands of dollars starting that project, and we're told, "stop." We can't service it; we don't have any capacity in the Nine Mile trunk. So my point is, will there be capacity? They're diverting Nine~Mile into Black Cat; they're diverting Ten Mile into Black Cat; they're diverting Ten Mile into Black Cat long-term. And the point I think I made fast time was, if I go onto Ten Mile, Ten Mile access will be diverted to Black Cat. And the only way we can get the Black Cat built is to start getting that excess fund set up; fifteen to a hundred dollars per lot. And if other properties want to go in, then that's just more money to build the Black Cat line. To this point, there's been development up and down Black Cat, and nobody's put a penny to the Black Cat line or installed any of the trunk to my knowledge. Barbeiro: Until tonight. Bocutt: Yes, sir. Up `til tonight. Do you have any questions? Borup: Questions from the Commission? Mr. Barbeiro. • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 61 _ Barbeiro: I'm hoping that you're not.using the ACRD example of "build it and they will come." I'm almost getting the impression that we'll go'-ahead and build if, we'N get past capacity and then you'll have to come back around and do it. ACRD codes puts their impact fees on (inaudible) build roads later. Is it your intent then to build upon the sewer assessment.fund, and then have us build it at a later time? Bocutt: Well, that -the City obviously doesn't have the monies to construct the Black Cat trunk. At some point in time it will be necessary for the Black Cat trunk to be built. Where do we begin to obtain the. monies to build the trunk? Now over time, the City has accumulated money in their enterprise fund to extend the no-name trunk, and when you look at the number of lots being turned out each year like south of the freeway, it's 220, 250, something like that. So to think that all of a sudden you'd have all these Icts -you know, it's going to be an incremental process as those monies- come in. This project obviously can't bear to go get the Black Cat trunk, and {don't think any one individual project, even a very, very large project could go get that big trunk. There's talk about it. I've heard rumors about it that there are people that have looked at large acreages over where .the Black Cat trunk begins,. but I have not seen any applications as of yet. So you're saying is it -how else could we begin such a facility? Barbeiro: The way that I understood it was you were saying, we'll just keep building it until we fill it and then they'll have to bring us the trunk. And I'm thinking that roads aren't like sewers. Once the sewer's full, you don't just put it off for a couple of years .and. keep building on top of it. Bocutt: No. What I'm saying with -going in and making the improvements to the existing Ten Mile bottleneck, you'd be creating additional capacity that's not there. Barbeiro: Okay. Bocutt: Do you -okay. a p Barbeiro: There were two.. different - Bocutt: Okay. There are two -there are two concepts. It's atwo-leg process: what is the solution? Correct the bottlenecks that currently exist to increase capacity of the Ten Mile line at a cost of 210 thousand dollars. That would be obviously our responsibility. Second leg. would be for these $1500 special assessments above and beyond the standard hook-up fee to be implemented in the developments that are going to go in on that Black Cat trunk in the future. Barbeiro: I see. They are two separate and - Bocutt: Two separate concepts. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 62 Barbeiro: and Ididn't - I wasn't putting them together. Bocutt: Yeah. 1t's kind of a two-step process. Barbeiro: Okay. Thank you. Bocutt: Sorry. f confused you. ~ It's late. Borup: Anyone else? Any other questions for Ms. Bocutt? Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing... Do we have anyone from the public wish to -Becky, did that transparency? Bocutt: I put it back. Nope. That one's mine. Oh, yes, (inaudible) public record. Borup: Did you use it? Bocutt: Sorry. Borup: Again remembering we have had several testimonies on this, so we're looking for new information, sir. Yerrington: Okay. Kent Yerrington, 8830 Morning Mist. Becky brought up that she has one subdivision that was curtailed due to lack of capacity. What happens if a couple years from now she's wanting to build another subdivision out in the same area on this other trunk line and it's turned down because of lack of capacity? Also, there was brought up of sewer credits, and I think at one of the previous meetings, it was also brought up about park credits. So, all of a sudden, is the city really getting anything for free, or are we:turning around and giving credits in the - on the back side? Also, at the previous meeting, I brought up about a parcel that was supposedly for sale just west of Stoddard, approximately 40 acres. I have some stuff from Ada County that it is in Bear Creek's name now. So, all'of a sudden,. is he going to be wanting to adjoin this piece of property into this otherlift station? Thank you very much. Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? .Row: Will it be okay if I use this mike fiere? Borup:.. Yes, sir. Row: ~My name is Chuck Row, and I'rn a property owner that's adjacent to the proposed subdivision. I currently reside at 911 Stonehenge Way in Meridian. I spoke at the previous hearing and would like the Commission to - or ttie applicant to address the- ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 63 ,T s current plan as I understand it that this property that is proposed. is zoned rural transitio`nai and we are jumping several districts going to R-4, and I have not heard much testimony as to if that's allowed in the Meridian comprehensive plan, because we are changing the environmental use and the integrity of the existing facilities around the area. Excuse me for a moment here. The second issue, we've been kind of bombarded herewith the sewer issue, and we really haven't addressed any traffic issues. We'd mentioned those at the last hearing, but I don't k now if a traffic study's been done or if we've really addressed the potential safety hazards and the cost that the City will be burdened with as far as street lights and stuff, it' we do run into safety issues} at Over(and'and Meridian, also at Victory `and Meridian, and possibly Stoddara and Overland. I don't know if we have traffic studies for those areas. It was also mentioned the applicant would want credit back for the park area and sewer hook-up fees, so they're getting $1500 in one hand, but they're taking it back in the park fees. It sounds like they're wanting to do the same thing with providing the Band-Aid fiXS I believe it's the Ten Mile line'that they're going to upgrade, but they're wanting credits back for'th'at work. So~in the end;°~the City's probably looking. at a wash. We have several issues and the main one being the sewer, and I believe we really don'f want to have a problem on° ~ the'south~ side ofthe`freeway that looks like is starting to'develop on -the north side of the freeway with the sewer problems and the traffic; and starting to a((ow a'n R-4 zone on the south side of the freeway with fhe first subdivision basically on that~sitle'of the freeway, and with the sewer problems that we have, who' knows where that`s going to t unravel. But it's going to cause problems for us all three to five years or sooner down the road. Becky stated a couple times that she doesn't-think that we're going to have`.. sewer problems, and she doesn't think that we'll have the traffic problems: When we look at some of the areas that are zoned R-4 and the problems and-the densities that ' those bring to`an area, we really need to look at what's going to happen on the south ~" side of the freeway, and do we want Meridian to be zoned R-4 on both sides'of an area where we have now a rural area with some R-1 zoning, and it would be nice to have a ( subdivision or an area in Meridian that we have larger lots that are in the one=acre or f two-acre~parcels: Right now !don't - if there's any, I'm not aware of them or there `are very few properties that you can find that are-one-acre or two-acre plots of (and. Right now, the. majority of the"property thafi's available in Meridian are in the 8,000 to say 15,000 square-foot range. And there's a need out there. I've talked to a lot of - ~f Borup: Sir, you're going to have to wrap it up. We're already short on time. Row: Okay. I'veaalked to a lot of realtors, and they said`they could self a lot of property that's in the one and two-acre parcels if they were available. They're just not available. I guess jusf for-the record and to close here, I'm opposed to the subdivision for three main points. One, it's just going to increase the traffic; two, it's going to burden ±~ie sewer`systems. It's going to create problems~for us in the future; and the third reason is we're going to not withhold or hold the integrity of the existing community or the area that we're putting the subdivision in. Thank you. ~ m 4 ~. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 64 ,~ Borup: Thank you Anyone else? Okay. Commissioners? What's your pleasure? Barbeiro:` Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Barbeiro. Barbeiro: I'd like to address a question to Staff, please. After the discussions that we've had here, can you give me a little bit more insight on the addition of a 12-inch line that the developer would place themselves and how that would affect the current plan for sewage? Watson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Barbeiro, Commissioners, we had a meeting last week or I guess it was the latter end and it was pretty much confirmed today that this parallel 12-inch would work. I know you've heard this song before about a month and-a-half ago, computer modeling problems. Again today it was crashing on ma. I'm confident that it would work, technically. The point was made that at some point this line would have to be upgraded or paralleled, regardless of whether they did it now or not. That is not the case. The master plan that JUB Engineers put together and was approved by Council this summer does not indicate that that will ultimately need to happen. One other point on the cost to do that; there was a request, suggestion, that they be credited for some of that money because they would be paying this Black Cat trunk fee: And I don't see the logic in that because the Black Cat trunk will go through this site,.regardless. It will be constructed through there. At that time, the lift station, if approved, would be abandoned, and this.subdivision would be utilizing that trunk. The $210,000 or whatever on parallel line would be a throwaway, a temporary fix. Barbeiro: The $210,000, if I'm reading it write was 2,800 lineal feet of 12-inch line, and that may be - if we go ahead and do that line, and then we come back in with the. Black Cat line, would they -first we're going to abandon the lift station, would they then abandon theg parallel line? Watson: Not necessarily. Jt would be there,. existing: Nobody's going to go spend the money to go dig it up. It would be-there - it~wouldn't be required. Barbeiro: You said it would continue to be there. Would it continue to be operational? Watson: Uh-huh. , Barbeiro: In conjunction with the new Black Cat line that it's going to pass through? Watson: No. They're totally separate systems. The parallel line that they're proposing is a fix. That additional capacity would serve this subdivision, and it will be in place, but when the trunk, the Black Cat trunk, gets to their property, that lift station will be ,~ ~• f Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting . 4/. 'r September 14, 1999 Page 65 _ abandoned that is within in Bear Creek. The service will be transferred from the Ten Mile service area back to where it belongs in the Black Cat service area. We don't want to go on forever with maintaining that lift station. It will be abandoned. Borup: Any other questions? f d ~ :u Barbeiro: If I could have° Becky come back up, a'nd I could ask her a question, please. We were talking about the addition of 2800 lineal feet of 12-inch line at a cost of $210,000. Thaf equates to - Bocutt: ~ Seventy-five dollars a linear foot. Barbeiro: Right. And at 326 lots, about $650 per lot. You've also offered the option of an additional $1,500 for a slush fund? For the trust fund. Bocutt: New trunk construction fund. Barbeiro: Yeah. The new trunk construction fund. Bocutt: Which $1500 with 326 lots would be $489,000. Barbeiro: After consultation with your client, what is your preference; to run a parallel line or the-$1500 fee? Bocutt: Well, both would be necessary. We would want to pay,-obviously, our fair share of the Black Cat trunk, and if the Black Cat trunk, `a section of it, traverse this property, I think that's what Brad was indicating, then, obviously, that would have to be built with the project: is that what you were saying, Brad? The future Black Cat? Watson: Right. The alignment. will go through this property. Whether it's actually constructed with this project, I would say that's doubtful since we're six miles away from where it ends up. Barbeiro: So let's go back since I'm =I've three separate issues that we had in our last meeting: The additional fee above and beyond what the City of Meridian would charge, the basic fee the City of Meridian would charge, and now'the added option of a~parallel line which would be about $645 per household. , fNatson: That's not a fee. That's part of the rural development`feek Bocutt: The developer would construct that. You mean if you allocated if`on a per-lot basis? Is that what you're trying to do? ~ i ~ridian Planning and Zoning ~ptember 14, 1999 . age 66 Barbeiro: Right. Committee Special Meeting Bocutt: Uh-huh. And calculate that? Barbeiro: What is the basic Meridian fee? Is it $1500 and then you were going to - in your last discussion you were going to add another $1,000 per - :.Bocutt: Oh. The standard fee -sewer hook-up fee? Watson: Fifteen-eighty. .F Bocutt: is it $1500 or $1700? Watson: Fifteen-eighty. Bocutt: Fifteen-eight: The standard hook-up fee, sewer hook-up fee's $1580, yes. Barbeiro: Okay. And in your last meeting, you offered an additional $1,000 per lot? Bocutt: Correct. Barbeiro: Okay. Bocutt: That was put in our original application; yes. And then after Mr. Watson's review of the potential number of homes being built in that Black Cat service area, he estimated that a more appropriate fee would be $1500 per lot to provide adequate monies for the Black Cat extension. Barbeiro: So, what is the credit that you're trying to ask for? Bocutt: Okay. One of the things that we discussed is the $210,000 would be a facilities improvement and would .increase capacity of the Ten Mile. It's not a throwaway because you're increasing capacity that does not currently exist .due to the bottleneck, okay? So if Ten Mile has capacity now to service what is planned, then why does the plan.show a diversion to the Black Cat? Obviously, the Ten Mife doesn't have capacity. to service everything within the Ten Mile service area. So we're creating additional capacity. Now, as far as the' credit, we viewed that by creating that additional capacity: could you be eligible for, like, late-comers fee because you did create some of that capacity? So that would come out of, like, the $489. That was one of our discussions. Now: that was not discussed with your staff. It was just discussed between us and the applicant. Barbeiro: Okay. Thank you. ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 67 _ Bocutt: And that would be, obviously, the determination by the City. Barbeiro: Thanks, Becky. Bocutt: Thanks. Borup: Did that answer your three? Anyone else? Any other commissioners? Hatcher: I would be inclined to look at that request for credit as offset by not building a portion of the trunk by the project because of the distance, so not enforcing wriat we just enforced on the previous project tonight, they're not going to incur those costs of building that portion of the trunk, so I would see that as a credit. So I'm questioning why as for a credit because they're -what you're getting back in return for increasing the line is actually allowing you to build your project. Without doing that, you don't have the sewer capacity, or it's questionable whether you have the sewer capacity. So I think it's kind of agive-and-take situation. I don't quite understand why you're even asking for a credit on this. Borup: Well, see, I think that's something that could be in a recommendation. Hatcher: Okay. Johnson: I'm Greg Johnson. I live at 2433 Can-Ada Road. These proposals aren't in concrete. if Staff has indicated that there is currently capacity in the Ten Mife for the project and another 600 homes; if the City chooses not to correct the bottleneck right now and go ahead and build these houses and create, they would have $498,000 to, if the capacity in Ten Mile gets to the point that there is no more, they could go ahead and take care of the bottleneck, or they may choose to use that $498,000 to them build the Black Cat trunk and alleviate the problem that way. It may be ten years before that issue gets there, but if we keep adding money to the pot, there may be enough to either build the whole Black Cat trunk or it would get built to the point that maybe their link is only two miles. And then we could do something similar that is being proposed on the south, or the no-name trunk. Those fees as they come back in may reestablish that fund, and then the whole Black Cat trunk could be built. Those options can be left open as I hear him explain that maybe if the Black Cat trunk got built and. we had to diversion at Ten Mile, they wouldn't want to correct the bottleneck and spend the money there for that. We're open to that option, too. If the City would like us to go ahead and build it, then we would like to at feast be credited for whatever that cost is towards this sewer trunk fee that is being assessed. I am not able to pay both of those. If we do one, we need to do the other. I'm not opposed to building, I believe it's an 18-inch trunk that would go from Stoddard Road eventually to Meridian Road as this section of the Black Cat trunk; we're not opposed to putting that in across our development. We would be • .. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 68 _ glad for that fo go in and be the collection that comes into the lift station, if that's what's desired by Public Works. We will build that as, I think, the standard policies. We build those to and through our project, and we'd be glad to build that. Borup: Any other questions. Johnson: Does that make sense? Barbeiro: Yeah. Borup: Commissioners, howwouid you like to proceed? Barbeiro: May I ask a question of Staff? Borup: Yes, sir. Barbeiro: It is currently the recommendation of Staff that this project not be approved based upon your prior discussions with the City of Boise's happened, and leap-frogging this whole (inaudible) everything in the middle's going to be stuck. Now the developer has and you've discussed with him the option of the 12-inch parallel lines. With the placement of the parallel line, how does that change your recommendation or does it not change your recommendation? Watson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Barbeiro, Commissioners, first of all, for the record, it was the City of Boise, it's another neighboring city that will remain nameless. Again, if they parallel this bottlenecked area, there will be increased capacity up to a finite point. It will accommodate their development. It will accommodate those eleven- ten, athousand, eleven hundred hook-ups that we say we have capacity for right now and a little more. In the short term, it would work. Our concern and Gary's primary concern, which i know doesn't set well with you because you look at these individually as someone from the audience has alluded to, there are more pieces of ground that will come into this. And we can't go through this every couple moths, this whole lift station .issue and doing the model runs and figure out where this is going to be and if this can be serviced. Gary's recommendation was that if this was approved that we encompass that whole area and take care of it right now and not have to do this continually every time another 80, 40 -acres is added -added onto this service area. And also, just for the record, there's some questions as to whether we could guarantee capacity in the Black Cat. To the extent shown on our official planning documents that was approved by Council in June, we most definitely can assure capacity in the Black Cat. There are other circumstances around the Nine Mile drain that limits its capacity. It was designed when the area of impact was not as far out as it is now. ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 69 _ Barbeiro: What would be -you said if we approved this project, that Public Works would then go,back and develop to plan to service the entire area? I didn't follow that. ThaYs Gary's recommendation? Watson: Yes. So that we don't keep doing this 40 or 80 acres at a time. Every time we do this, it's a very Jengthy analysis, and it consumes a lot of time, and it consumes a lot,. of your time, obviously. We'd have to do, basically, a subregional master plan to take care of this, in our opinion. Borup: What are you thinking? Barbeiro: I am really lost with. so many options put in front of me and not having a deep understanding of how the sewer system works, other than what I have learned over the last... two .months in our :public hearings. .. Hatcher: Well, can I confuse it even more? Barbeiro: Yeah. Please do. Hatcher: 1'd .like to get some further clarification from Staff. You recommend, if this was to be approved, that a lift station be built in proximity of Linder to encompass the square mile of that area. I understand why you are proposing that, and that way we don't have lift station. upon lift station and so forth. Anything in that area goes to one IiftFstation and thus to what's currently the Ten Mile drainage. But for the entire issue at hand is whether the Ten Mile drainage can carry this one subdivision, what about the rest of that square mile? Where's that coming from? Watson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hatcher, Commissioners, that's very true. Accompanying that subregional master plan would be a plan to build the first portion of the Black Cat and the Ten Mile relief sewer that could accommodate those discharges, and that would require much direction from Council, and as a reminder, they have already directed us to .pursue sewering in the north portion of the city, and that is a big funding obligation right now. it would be a problem. Hatcher: So, let me, if I understand you correctly, if this project was approved, you'd recommend -you don't recommend approval first of all, but if it was approved, a lift station should be constructed in the approximate location of tinder to accommodate that square mile. With that being said; your department then would try to allocate funds or City is .obligated to .allocate funds so that the Black Cat trunk will be built up to the portion where the Ten Mile diversion connects to it so that it could carry the additional capacity? i Watson: That's our suggestion. • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 .Page 70 _ Hatcher: And the half million dollars that would come from this project through the $.1500 per-lot fee would be used to build that portion of the trunk? Watson: Yes. Hatcher: Thus, this big problem of where's the Black Cat trunk coming from would actually be started? Watson: Correct. The question would be to Council, do you sacrifice what you have already directed us to do to fund this option? Hatcher: That's a sticky situation. Barbeiro: It's stinky, too. Borup: Any other confusion? Commissioner De Weerd. De Weerd: Other than we don't have, we still don't have a report from ACHD and we still don't have staff comments on the project. Hatcher: That brings up another point I did want to bring up. Borup: We didn't have staff comments on the previous one, either. De Weerd: Well, I think this one's a little bit larger. Hatcher: The issue was raised on whether a traffic report was done on this project, and yes, it was. It was done by Doby Engineering, it's dated May 28, 1999. Without reading every bit into it, what I look at here is the basics. Base conditions for the Meridian Road, south of Overland, it's south of Overland is rated as A. Overland west of Meridian. is rated as a C, Victory Road west of Meridian is rated as an A, and those are baseline conditions. Taking into account, if I'm reading this report right, taking into account the addition of Bear Creek, the Overland/Meridian intersection in all directions except for one drops from - to a rating of a D, and the best is a C. And- then I look at these other intersections, Victory and Meridian, both east and west bound and Calderwood and Meridian, bath east and west bound drop to a D, an E, and an F. I'm - I love the project. I think it's very valuable to the city, but there's no way that -- I mean, we've already heard so much from ACRD that these are unacceptable traffic conditions. ., Borup: We do have an ACRD report. Hatcher:-: We do. i Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 71 Borup: Yes. July 29t" was when it was received. It was in the last hearing. De Weerd: Did we have it at the last hearing? I didn't get one. Borup: It was in your packet, yes, from the August 25t" meeting. Hatcher: I've got a -yeah. It's right here. Borup: (inaudible) layout ACRD had recommended a couple of stub streets added. Hatcher: Adding center turn lanes on Stoddard. Borup: They've got ahold - Hatcher: Yeah (inaudible) Borup - (inaudible) very sensitive (inaudible)- 27 site-specific items. Hatcher: Yeah.. We're looking at center lanes on Stoddard, center lanes on Overland. They're asking for a lot of improvements. Borup: I think they were looking at the size of the project. Commissioner Barbeiro had made reference earlier this - so much information and confusion. He asked to one comment that was made tonight that maybe carries some weight with me was, because I know I previously had. concerns on capacity of the Ten Mile trunk line, this pumping into it.would diminish that capacity. But the aspect of the parallel line at Crestwood sounds like, if those numbers are=correct, would take care of all the capacity of this subdivision plus some. And so the issue of reducing the capacity on that line, to me, immediate issue as far as that part is concerned. I'm still concerned on the overall planning, and, you know, that trunk line needs to get started. But how do you start it . without getting some money and starting somewhere? Hatcher: Well, I - Borup: Half a million dollars is a start. Hatcher: I tend to agree with you on that. Borup: But the (inaudible) increase of capacity of the Ten Mile is the one factor that I think is -that was the direction of last time was come up with a solution. I don't know if that's the ideal solution, but that's a solution. The ideal solution is to build a trunk line. But $8,000,000 is a different matter. • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 72 Hatcher: Well, that's the question from-Staff and maybe legal counsel. Hidden in the direction that we have discussed for the last 20 minutes, I know Bruce has made the comment in our last meeting that it would be establishing a precedent, or this could be a precedent-setting decision. I would certainly hate to establish a precedent because I think this is a unique condition that I don't think can be replicated down the line on another project. I don't want this leap-frogging and attaching onto one another. Being that this is at the boundaries between two drainage zones, and it's eight miles from the point source of a-trunk that doesn't exist. Borup: Should we put others on notice not to expect a precedence? De Weerd: Yes. Hatcher: Most definitely. No matter what we do, I do not want anyone to construe it as being a precedent whatever it is that we decide to do. Borup: Okay. I agree with that. Which brings us to the point: What are we goi~ig to do? I would like to move this along. Hatcher: I'd like to address this traffic. Maybe mull .over the sewer a little bit. Has the applicant and their engineer had a chance to review in depth the ACHD's comments and all the extensive improvements that they are requesting? Bocutt: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hatcher, yes. We've met with ACHD in a technical review meeting. They give us a draft report which we review, and if we want to dispute any of their conditions, then we have the ability to go to the commissioners. We agreed with all their conditions of approval. This went on to the highway district commissioners, and the project was recommended for approval. Hatcher: Have your staff or your traffic consultant re-evaluated their traffic study based upon ACHD's recommendation? I'm looking at intersection conditions of C, D, E, F with these ACHD' improvements, where do we stand? Has that been looked at? Bocutt: The turn lane at Overland and Stoddard would obviously increase capacity and allow for stacking room there on a left-hand turn. The turn lanes on Stoddard would therefore allow us room for stacking so we didn't interfere with any traffic because it currently is a two-lane roadway. As far as the designations on the intersections, some of them may vary, others may remain the same. We use those designations just because something is and E or an F, it is still acceptable. That's what Dave Splett, the traffic engineer who was evaluating another project, indicated to me. Now, obviously, , we want the optimum. If you're in your car, you want to be in an A, B or C intersection because it's determined by length of time one has to wait. Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September ,14, 1999 z ._ ,, Page 73 Hatcher: Yeah, and I understand that. If we want to talk acceptable, a gravel road gets you from Point A to Point B. , Bocutt:; Correct. a Hatcher: Is that acceptable in the middle - i Bocutt: Correct. Hatcher: -- in downtown Meridian? Bocutt: So that is the determination. What is an acceptable time one must wait at a signalized intersection or to make alert-hand turn? Hatcher: Well, just on a personal note, I drive Overland every day. *** end of Tape 3, Side A; beginning of Tape 3, Side B *** I know exactly what I have and I have a pretty good idea what this would do to my commute. So I have first-hand knowledge of what it's like. Bocutt: Commissioner Hatcher, one thing to keep in mind is not all these lots come online simultaneously. 326 sounds like a .very large number, but in reality, you're bringing on a phase per year. Phases typically, consist anywhere from 40 to 6q lots, and you typically do a phase per year depending on the market. So this project, I think at least on the preliminary plat, it states, I believe, there's six phases, seven phases, something like that. So the impact, the traffic impact, would -may be different. What I'm saying, five years down the road. Overland is schedule for rebuild along there, I've been told, from the intersection of Meridian Road westward. The monies from the impact fee for Roaring Springs, Boondocks, will be utilized to improve that roadway. That's what ACHD indicated to me, because I questioned them why were those facilities allowed to go in, but yet no improvement other than sidewalk was made on Overland , Road? And they indicated, well, we're taking those impact fees and we're going to go' in andrmake improvements on that intersection. Hatcher: What was their timing and what was the distance to the west that they indicated to you? Bocutt: I know that they probably -they'll. have to take it as far as the western corder of that Boondocks facility because that's on that western border is that entrance. Hatcher: That doesn't even get us to Stoddard . ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 75 _ Bocutt: Is that correct? So do we need the R-4 density? No. We do not. But we have some lots that fall within the R-4 standards. So that is why we requested that particular zone. De Weerd: Okay. Borup: Okay, Commissioners. It's now 11:38. Cotell: Can someone still ask a question? Borup: Public hearing's still open if you'd like to come up. Especially if you '"think it'd help move things on. Cotell: Yes. I've got a question for Becky. Borup: Could you state your name, please. Cotell: My name is Will Cotell, I live at 2875 Stoddard Road. Becky says they're putting a turning lane on Stoddard and one on Overland. How's that going to help people trying to get off of Victory onto the Kuna Road or off of Overland onto Meridian Road, `or Meridian Kuna Road? How's that going to help the traffic there? I don't see an;~ tie in at all: We've got people trying to get on that Meridian Kuna Road off of Victory right now, and we've had so many people killed there already, and that gentleman right there is talking about the ratings with that intersections. Somebody ought to pay attention to him. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Atkins: I'll be short, I promise. Joan Atkins, 400 West Victory. I'm the one being surrounded. Just for the record, in accordance with the special hearing and your directions to Staff, comments were supposed to have been prepared by Planning and Zoning for this meeting. They were supposed to have .been prepared in writing by the tenth of September. I made that phone call directly after the special meeting that said they would be ready in writing so that as a member of the public, we could review those and respond to them as well. I know the sewer is a huge issue, but there are other issues we'd like to have addressed on this project. There are some things that affect our life on a day-to-day basis. I don't want my pond to become the sewer treatment facility, please, but I'm also interested in the other things that have to do with t~iis project. This is a big project. I can't imagine there's not one written comment. l looked at the (inaudible) yesterday morning. There's nothing but sewer. There isn't anything else that's been addressed because, frankly, I think Staff believes that issue is so overwhelming because there is a master plan that has been carefully engineered, carefully thought through, that that issue was so overwhelming with the sewer, they 4 Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 76 don't even address the other ones. Haven't even gone to analyze them because their allocated their-time as expeditiously as possible. So I'd.hate to have a decision made when we haven't had a chance to have their analysis. They're knowledgeable in this area.' We haven't even seen that. You haven't seen it. So I'd like to go on the record to say there's nothing. to review because it doesn't exist. Thank you. Borup: Just a comment. We have seen it since last April. We've been looking at it, but -- Atkins: There's no -excuse me. Borup: We haven't seen the staff comments, but we've seen the applications, and we've seen the submittals. Montgomery: I'm Dennis Montgomery, 855 West Seasonal Creek Lane, and on the accounting on this, I think there's been one thing that's been missed. We keep talking about the half million dollars that's going to be (inaudible) in the fund, but he's already stated that if he puts in that extension and 12-inch line, he wants credit for that. He can't afford to do both. If he does that, you. only going to have $300,000, not half a million dollars for that Black Cat extension. Borup: (inaudible) requirements this Commission recommends Montgombery: Pardon? Borup: (inaudible) requirements this Commission recommends. Commissioners. De Weerd: Well, I would just state again, I would prefer to have staff comments. In addition to this other woman, I agree. This is a big project. Borup: Mr. Barbeiro. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I would like to concur with Commissioner De Weerd and move that we continue the public hearing. Borup: With -any instructions to Staff? De Weerd: To have staff comments? Watson: I guess I would, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would add to that that it's literally impossible for us to, and for this Commission, to adequately address or even consider approving this project at this point without staff comments beyond the sewer issue. I mean,~apparently Staff considered the fact that sewer would be disposi+we of • Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 77 _ this particular application, and that`there would be no consideration for approval, but without staff comments, I can't prepare a recommendation. We're going to have fio go through alaundry-list like we did on the last application as to what the appropriate conditions are going to be, and it's 11:38 now. Well, we're going to need a lot more time-to go through afl these conditions that Staff is going to recommend over and above the sewer issue. So it's kind of tied your hands for the large part if you're considering improving the project. My recommendation, l agree with Commissioner Barbeiro, is this project needs to be continued to the next public hearing date so that we can get staff comments, and the public can review those staff comments, and the developer can review the staff comments, and they can be prepared to address them in a public hearing. Borup: Okay. That sounds reasonable. It's hard to say if it's going to be considered at all,:we need the. staff comments. If the commissioners are not looking to consider at all, then that decision can. be made tonight. Watson: Yeah. I think that's fair. If the inclination'is to move to the - if there's a motion to deny the project, I think that can fairly be heard today, but if there's no motion to deny, l think it needs to be continued. Borup: Did someone start a motion earlier? Barbeiro: I did begin a motion to continue the public hearing with direction to Staff to have staff comments prepared; although, they have been called expeditious. Borup: Okay.: To October 12th meeting. That's our next meeting. It does have a full agenda. Hatcher: Yeah. Put it on the top of the list. Rosman: Okay. Mr. Chairman, do we want to - I was going to say do we want to close the. public hearing and just table the decision, but with the staff comments, people are going to need to address them and testify. Please remember that your testimr~ny will carry over to the next proceedings, so you don't need to show up and provide the same testimony. If you have something new to offer, certainly feel free to appear and provide that new testimony and address the staff comments that are provided. Borup: Okay, Commissioner Barbeiro, did you want to finish your -did you finish your motion? Barbeiro: I believe so. Borup: Did I hear a second? Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee Special Meeting September 14, 1999 Page 78 _ De Weerd: No. Borup: I know. I would like to. Hatcher: I'd like to add to that. I'd like to have some feedback from Parks and Recreation on this project since they're being given a park. I do not recall, nor can I find anything from that department. Borup: That'd be a good point. We normally don't ask for their comments. Hatcher: No, but on this one I'd like to see it. Watson: There also could be recommendation that the developer have their traffic study updated in light of the recommendation of the Ada County Highway District for the next hearing if that is a particular concern of Commissioner Hatcher. Borup: Would you like to add.to your motion? Hatcher: Absolutely. Yes, absolutely. Maybe even get Larry here to address it. He loves coming-here, I know. Borup: Okay. We have a motion. Hatcher: And l'll second it with the amendments. Barbeiro: And I do concur with Commissioner Hatcher (inaudible) Borup: Add to your motion? Okay. Barbeiro: (inaudible) Borup: (inaudible) concurrent seconds? Do we have any discussion? Alf in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Okay. It has been continued to the October 12th regular meeting. Okay. Now, Commissioners, I'm very concerned about the hour and the amount of people that are here. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION OF 326 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOTS-BY BEAR CREEK, LLC -EAST OF STODDARD ROAD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND. 2 ~. . .u ry~ 4 1 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: September 14 1999- APPLICANT: BEAR CI7EEK. LLC __ ITEM NUMBER: 3 ' REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 150 79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR R-4 ZONING) AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: -_ CITY. PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY- FIRE DEPT: .. CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: COMMENTS No new information submitted CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: ~ ,,~1~ - NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ~ ~ fi~r~ ~ ~~ C~ ~~ OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. PFMR02 ~ 99 N E W M A S T E R U P'D A T E ASPRIELM 8/31/99 Parcel S1 ..4 .44400 a Area -4~ Type Qty Value ACTTVF Name SEAR CRFR_x T,LC Ol0 4~~72 Data From ~ nn 2 . X00 St~~o~ Master Buyer ~ 5.00 300~o Bank Code N1E1 C/O ~gQ Address ,tit .~ N T~TSCC)VF v wAV 3~Q 99300 Prepaid - STITTE $klOY? ~]~ 59ti00 L.I.D. _ BnISE ~ 9~Q 49~~0- Bankrupt - ~37i~ _ nno~ Sub.Code _ Last Change 99/08/23 By ASR2 ALLEN Desc. pAR ~44(l0 nF E2NW4 SEC 24 3N 1W .u.nnn~r_~ ~~ Annexation *NO Total 229322 Notes *NO Gx'P 000 TYP 000 AP Exemption ~3N01W.44400 ~ "~N 1W 4 Hardship Property Zoning gZ_ Flag * Address 0 .0 ~ ~ STODDARn B,]Z_ MERTDTAN ID f~~h42-0000 D.D. _ Space 'T'ype`1 REAL Roll 1 PRIMARY Occ. 0 NON-OCC Action: _ F2=Select F3=Exit FS=Corrctd Notice F6=Letters- F9=UR F8=Assoc Address F11=Deed 4 j~ECEIVED SEP 14 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK OFFICE ~. Meridian Planning an~ning Committee Special Meeting ,`. August 25; 1999 ~ ~ Page 12 .' Borup: Did he give any indication to you as a time frame. Freckleton: No he didn't. s Borup: Is he going to need more than one month? Don't know? I think we can proceed ahead without the letter and accomplish the same thing. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. I would move that we continue the English Gardens Subdivision request for preliminary plat approval until our September 14th meeting. Hatcher: !second it. Borup: We have a motion and a4second. Any discussion. All in .favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: 'Thank you. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr..Barbeiro. Barbeiro: Do ~rJe fi2ve a count of hearings set for September 14th? Borup: No we do not, but we just added to if. Whatever we got, we've added fiNO more to it. ITEM NUMBER 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR R-4 ZONING) BY BEAR CREEK, LLC-EAST OF STODDARD ROAD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND. Borup: Staff. E Siddoway: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. As all ready noted, this is another project before you that has issues with sewerability. It is also waiting for the Black Cat Trunk in order to be sewerable~. It is a 326 single family dwelling lot subdivision on 150 acres known as Bear Creek Subdivision. It is located west of Meridian Road between Overland and Victory Road. You should have. staff comments from Bruce Freckleton regarding the sewerability dated August 23 and 1 wiN turn the time over to him for comments. ***'''~'~**END OF SIDE ONE'''''S*''** Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission.. The first time this was before you we asked for complete sewer analysis on this area, since that time Brad Watson in our office has completed that sewer analysis and the results of which should.. be in your /, Meridian Planning and~hing Committee Special Meeting 'August 25, 1999 Page 13 packets. It is a pretty extensive little report. Executive summary, page 1 of 6, last paragraph, last sentence. The public works department recommends the denial of this application based on sewer, the inability to sewer the project. I would just let the report` speak for itself. twill answer any questions you might have after`the applicant has a chance to address it. Borup: Thank you. Is the applicant here?~ Bowcutt: Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering,. 1800 W. Overland, Boise. I am representing the applicant on this matter. This is north facing upward. Bear-Creek Estates is located just north of Victory and on the east side of Stoddard. Road and just south of Overland where you've got the Boondocks, the Roaring Springs and some other commercial development on the northern portion. It is approximately 150 acres. We are proposing 326 single family lots on the 150 acres. Our total density is 2.16 dwelling units per acre.. When we started this project, we met with the Meridian School District and we met with the Meridian Parks Department and we met with Public Works and Planning and got input. We did not get a warm welcome from Public Works. It was basically stated that they would not make the determination to accept the lift station to pump into another trunk. That if that decision was made it would be a decision made by the City Council. We did get a warm response from the Parks Dept. The 18.62 acres will be donated. We provided your parks°director with some examples of other projects where the private sector has donated the land and funded the improvements. We stated in the record that we submitted that we would provide sprinklers, we would sod it and then we would also build this parking lot here and they we intend to do some landscaping .along the front so that we've got an continuation of that landscaping. In exchange for that we would be getting some park impact credits and that is typically how it is done and that's what we discussed. How that works is the development community plays the banker and they fit the bill up front and you have instant green for soccer, ball fields, etc. Then over time as building permits are pulled, and they pay that:. park impact fee, some of those- monies goes back to the developer. Typically, they do not recoup-all of their expenses. It's worked successfully in other communities and that's what we proposed here. One question that arose, we had a neighborhood meeting about a week ago since there was so many people here with concerns and opposition when it first came before you and was deferred, we provided them an opportunity to look at the plan up close and to talk about it and try to answer as many questions. One question that arose was you've got the park there, but what is your density if you take the, park out. it appears to be extremely high density. I did that and we're at 2.16 with the park in and that is typically how your density is calculated. If we remove that park, we are at 2.47 dwelling units per acre, so we're not even at 2-1/2. This project has very low density. We are trying to provide an upscale community, larger lots. Our smallest lot is just shy of 94-9500 square feet. Our biggest lot is 35,758 square feet. We have three different sizes of lots provided good depth in the lots trying to keep a minimum of 115 feet to make sure these people have adequate backyards. We have incorporated these micro pathways to make connections to .the park; so we've got good access. We kept them straight for visibility. We put what we call pocket park back in that vicinity. That would be used for drainage and just a small Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, -1999 Page 14 park. That is .88, just a little over 3/4's of an acre. Meridian Road is located here. This is existing Elk Runs Subdivision you see here. Caiderwood Street is stubbed to this point. Calderwood is designated by Ada County Highway District as a collector. It's a 60 foot right of way, 41 back to back. None of those homes front on it because it is designated as a collector. There is a fence that runs across the rear of these lots, and then there is about 4 foot of dirt and some weeds and sidewalk. This south side is landscaped. It looks very nice. We provided buffering all along Stoddard and aN along Victory. Thirty foot is the minimum and then we bring our landscaped areas. We oscillate them and create little pockets where we can put either water features or rocks and what it does it breaks up that corridor effect as you drive down the roadway. if you have ever driven down say McMillan, between Cloverdale and Eagle Road and if you look at the Legends Subdivision, it has osolating birms and fences along McMillan and it breaks it up and gives it a nice look. In some of the culdesacs we've got islands that provide landscaping plus parking. One of the things that people state that live in a culdesac is they wish-they had some place for their visitors to park. We have provided on some of these culdesacs, that amenity. We believe that this is a good project. We understand the issue of the sewer. We have reviewed the report. We have talked to the staff and discussed it.. We did not cause this problem and we don't want to be a part of the problem. What we want to do is try to come up with solutions to solve it. We are making that initiative. In my letter that I submitted to the Public Works Department we stated that we would agree to a $1000 additional sewer assessment per lot. Above and beyond the standard hook up fee, which is a little over $1700. Those funds obviously could be utilized for trunk expansion to go in, work over the bottlenecks that exist. The lift station that we propose we stated that we will install it design it and if you don't want-we pay to have you maintain it through our association dues. The City would incur no costs. But if that is unacceptable, the alternative is through private companies out there is that what they do, is maintain lift stations. !have provided documentation to the Public Works Dept. on what the average cost for maintenance of the lift stations runs. It is between $3000 and $5000 annually. It takes up about 2 hours per week for one employee to go out and visit that lift station and then they go in and they spray it. The city of Boise is where the data came from. They indicated to me that they'd pass on that maintenance to the homeowner with what they call a surcharge. That is on their monthly bill.. for that lift station. We've done many lift stations in other communities and it is typicaAy done when you have an area that sewer is reasonably available but the property will not gravity. Now,'all cities have what they call trunk line boundaries. This ,is one right here. This is the subject property that you see. As you can see, the subject property the boundary comes through this parcel. Some of it is in this Ten Mile Trunk which or Meridian Trunk which goes and dumps into the Ten Mile Trunk. Some of if is in this Black Gat B Truck, which doesn't exist. -Now, what-the other cities have said, I talked to the City of Kuna and they said,.well, we look at it first crime first serve. Everybody has limited capacity`, on their lines, in their sewer plant and firsf come, first serve. When they come in with their construction plans and final plat, at that time we reserve that capacity for that development. My discussions with the City of Boise on their trunk lines, I said what you guys utilize service areas. They said yes we do. I said do you ever go over those service areas? They said all the time. It's done to continue the grown and pay for trunk extensions and plant upgrades. I said well what do you Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 15 mean by that? They said, well if you take great big trunk lines 42 inch, 36 inch and run them at extreme depths, that is extremely costly to the city. If the development community does it, they still have to reimburse -some of those dollars have to go back to the development community. So they said with lift stations what we do is we are maximizing. our capacity. We are getting those hook up fee, we are getting sewer assessment fees, but we are not putting out any capital expenditures in order'to serve them at that time and so we build up our reserve and then that basically funds the trunk extensions and they-view their lift stations as temporary. Any~lift station I have done is called temporary lift station. Temporary regional lift station, whatever. That is typically what they~are viewed. as. Some of the-one particular project now has jumped over -3 different sewer service areas, so it's way off from it's service area. They stated we designed at 70% capacity so we always have a little bit of, room for some additional service and this system has worked extremely well for us. In discussions I have had with staff, I don't think anybody has given me a definite number on what;capacity are they designing to. I've read the report and the report talks about CFS's and it is very complicated, but when you .compare that with other reports that were written on analysis, something does not jive. There is another project coming before you and it has a bottleneck just like this Ten Mile Trunk, but yet, it's been indicated that it is satisfactory to dump into that particular trunk. Where do you draw the line. I have a project that is within a boundary that we were proceeding with six months ago and we were told-don't proceed on that cause we met with the staff before we started, so they knew we were working on it. Don't proceed on that because we don't have capacity in that trunk-that Nine Mile Trunk has no capacity. 1IVe stopped all work on that one and it is within that sewer boundary. This is a juggling act. It is. If you read the report and you look at the conclusions they are basically saying Ten Mile Trunk has 900 to 1000 home capacity. Eventually~it'is going to reach it's capacity and we have a bottlenecks. If you read discussions on the Nine Mile Trunk,-they are stating it is at capacity. South of the interstate we .are reaching a problem where we've got some capacity problems. We need to work on the bottlenecks or come up with some alternative solutions. The statement was made earlier about ajoint`-effort by the development community in the City to solve these problems. Well we are working on one by extending Five Mile Trunk across the interstate over in-the Eagle Road area, just west of Eagle Road. That extension would service a new high. school on a project that I was involved in and the cost of that extension is, 'I think we estimated approximately $300,000 and it is (inaudible) the freeway. There is an instance where a group got together and came up with a solution but there were statements that that trunk would be at capacity. In that report it talks about the north side the north portion of the city is our priority area. I understand that but I think'that one thing that the city has.to look at is balancing that growth. Are we going to want to put 10,000 new homes between Chinden and Ustick Road and Locust Grove or Eagle and Ten Mile. Are we going to want to put that many people in that particular area where we don't have a ten mile interchange. We don't . have an overpass at Locust Grove. There is some big issues as far as infrastructure that we've got to look at. And in the interim, like I said it is a juggling act. We would like to try tosolve the problem and we think that we've got some ideas that wilt work. I am not going to dispute the numbers that they have provided. I don't think that benefits anybody. I am relying on their expertise and their testing of these lines, but I think Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting, :.August 25,.1999 Page 16 we've got to look-instead of just saying no, deny that, we've got to look at some solutions. I think that we have some solutions~and to say that well, $326,000 in a fund, that's a drop in the bucket. Well what about the almost $1800 that would be` paid in hook up fees in addition to the $1000. When you add the $326,000 and figure $1700 per lot,- which is less than what the hook up fee is, it's $880,200 monies coming into the city at final build out. That is the other issue to, they always assume final built out when you look at a project like this that takes place-over probably anywhere from 4 to 6 years, depending on the market. Lastly, in conclusion, this is a hard decision and I don't have all -the answers, but I think we ought to start making headway to solve the problem and this is initiating that headway to solve the issue of parks, to solve the issue of sewer capacity in this area and looking at alternatives and fund raising to get these lines where we need them. Thanks. Borup: Any questions for Becky from any of the Commissione_ rs. Any other parties like to speak on -I guess maybe you do. Johnson: My name is Greg Johnson. I reside at 2433. (inaudible) Road. I am a managing member of this. LLC that has submitted this project. I won't talk about details on the project, but I would like. to address this sewer issue of Black Cat Trunk. From a. developers standpoint, I know that at the bottom of the report the recommendation of staff as some consortium of developers will eventually come together and this 7 to 9 million. dollar project will happen. Developers are a little like farmers. I haven't seen any of them get together on much of anything over the last 20 years that I've been doing this. It's very difficult. You are always trying to maybe out maneuver the competition to be able to compete with a little edge, so to speak. For a-group to get together with enough property to do this, maybe it will happen in the next 20 years. I don't know. I think it is really unrealistic to think that it would. We have offered a solution of collecting a trunk fee. We know that our project doesn't fund the whole thing, but if the projects to the north such as Ashford Greens, as an existing project this is a huge trunk and it probably was unproportional for Ashford Greens to have to build the .trunk to and through their property like a standard procedure in Meridian. In most development, you build the trunk to and through` your property. That would have built a substantial portion of this trunk. That was waved because it was such a huge trunk that we should at least be collecting fees for that trunk. That project that was presented-earlier that would use this facility eventually, if they don't build it at least collect an appropriate fee so that somebody can build it. The City can use that to-build it. fn the staffs comments it said that it,would take 7 to 8 thousand homes in this trunk area collecting $1000 per house to build it. That seems like a huge amount but did a very conservative estimate of what is expected of 2.5 density for the area served by this and there is 20,000 homes that will be served by this trunk, including the diversions from Ten Mile and Nine Mile Trunk which are reaching capacity just as staff has told you. Some of that development will happen up at the head of the trunk-up at the north end. It all does not have occur here in Bear Creek and on the Ten Mile Trunk. If 2,000 or so houses are provided on the south side of the freeway by revamping some pipes. that are undersized and other things in small projects, that capacity can continue and we can continue to grow on the south side of the freeway and growth can take place on the upper end of the Black Cat i _. Meridian Planning ands Wing Committee Special Meeting '`~~ August 25, 1999 Page 17 Trunk and eventually it can be built. Just the first portion of the Black Cat Trunk and a 24 inch relief trunk over to the Crestwood area would generate substantial volume of permits that then could be built. If we are a few hundred thousand short when it comes time that we've reached capacity to do that, one of the solutions that I have reached in another community is we are building the facility which the community can not afford and in return we are receiving sewer credits which we will-we are receiving prepaid sewer permits, I guess is what is actually is. But when a number gets down to say a quarter million dollars or so, then the development community can figure out ways to fund thoueand help the city through a crisis and we will eat this elephant a piece at a time. I think we have a wonderful .project and it will be a great benefit to the community. Maybe we need.to have a committee to establish to address how we get the Black Cat Trunk built and to actually establish a system. We would be glad to work on'that with staff or members of Planning and Zoning and whoever. (think ~a serious problem that J needs to be looked at is if the Black Cat Trunk does not get built, and the figures are right with 900 homes, our statistics show that right now we are building about 120 homes a year south of the freeway. rThat only takes about 5-1/2 to 7 years. If it keeps increasing at the volume that it has been, it will be about 5 years. If we don't do something now, then all development stops there. Boise ~is all ready sitting a quarter mile west of Cloverdale and pumping sewage in Rock Hampton Estates. That "' developer has other land west of there. We have other land west of there. If Meridian doesn't continue to provide service to this area, the county has stated that 10 years was a reasonable time, we will apply to Boise for those services. We don't have any choice. We've sat on the ground long enough and we have to develop it-and Boise is willing to take those things and the county will probably say Meridian, can you do this. That `` would be removed from the impact area. It has happened north of the freeway and it is starting to happen south of the freeway. I think it is time that as a community we organize and develop a plan and then proceed with it so that we can plan this community and continue with it. That is all I have to say. Thanks. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Johnson? ;~ De Weerd: Maybe a comment. Mr. Johnson we are right now updating our . Comprehensive Plan and Johnson: We have a couple applications on that. , De Weerd: No, I mean as far as involving the public into that process, so I don't think I saw you at our first meeting but I would invite you to our second meeting. Johnson: I'd be glad to come. De Weerd: That's September 15th at Chaparral Elementary School. Some of those issues are being looked at because this is a map for planning- the future for Meridian and those are the kinds of comments that we need to receive. Meridian Planning and~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 18 Johnson: I appreciate that Tammy. I was asked to serve on one of the committees told them I would. I was out of town when they had that first meeting. Thanks. Borup: Thank you. Mr. Freckleton, you mentioned you mentioned you may want to make a comment after the applicants presentation. Are you still wishing to do that or shall we proceed. Freckleton: Chairman Borup, members of the Commission. I just want to touch on a couple items. Well, just really one. in Brad Watson's report for the English Gardens project, the previous agenda item, he is in the process of working on a Black Cat Trunk line fee. He is going to' finish up those calculations next week and put them before Gary Smith, so that is something we are definitely at is to impose a fee on everybody in that service area for this Black Cat Trunk line extension. That's all. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, there has been a great deal of discussion with regards to capacity's and extensions. I do not know the existing capacity and the planned extension. Can we get a little more information on that from Bruce and enlighten us on how the capacities and extensions would effect this particular subdivision. .Borup: You talking information beyond what was in the report? Barbeiro: I would like a highlight of the report. There is so much in (inaudible) and it is a little hard to digest. Borup: You didn't digest all that? Okay. Did you understand the question Bruce? Freckleton: I believe so. !will just try to summarize a little bit. When trunk lines are designed, they are designed to serve a certain service area. The main lines or the trunk lines are sized accordingly to serve those areas. The situation you have tonight is you've got a project that is outside of it's designated service area wanting to basically pump back into another service area. In do so, what is does it eats up capacity of the service area that has been designed to go to its proper trunk line. Also, in Brad Watson's report, he talks about the carrying capacity of some of those existing mainlines, particularly in Elk Run Subdivision being overwhelmed by the flows. (don't know. Did you need anymore? Barbeiro: The other question is that the applicant had discussed the idea of first come first serve, as opposed to serving an existing service area. What is Public Works policy of about ignoring a service area and jumping over that first come first serve basis. Is it intended that we only seek to develop those areas in a service until a new service area exists. Freckleton: It has been Public Works position to try'to stick to the service areas.. That has been our position. In our opinion it creates problems. The applicant talks about this project solving problems and I don't see it that way. I see that this creates problems by having to have a lift station pumping into another service area. It is just creating ~: Meridian Planning and ~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 19 problems for the service area that is designed-the trunk line in the service area that is designated to go to. Like I say, Public Works position has been that we stick with the service areas and how they are designed. That is why we do the facility plans. We do the studies to try to size lines for those service areas and that has been our position. Barbeiro: The applicant went in on discussion about let's al( get together and solve the problems. What solution to this problem has the applicant brought to you? Freckleton: Commissioner Barbeiro Brad Watson in our office has had more dealings with the applicant and their Engineering firm. Their proposal is to -sewer via a lift station back into the Nine Mile drainage area. That's their solution. I have not heard of any proposals for trunk line extensions or anything of that such. Barbeiro: As they described the solution as you just stated, it is a temporary lift station, so I guess the question with (inaudible). What solutions have they proposed? How long do they intend to have the temporary lift station and how would that temporary lift station be disassembled and when. Borup: Is that a question you would like to propose to the applicant before we proceed? Barbeiro: Yes, I would like to propose that to the applicant. Borup: I don't know if they can answer that any better than Mr. Freckleton. Barbeiro: The presentation was quite lengthy in let's solve the problem. What's solutions does the applicant propose to let's solve the problem. Borup: Other than the $1000 surcharge. Barbeiro: The $1000 surcharge is only money toward a solution. What is the solution that the money would be applied toward. Borup: Okay. Does the applicant have any comment on that? Bowcutt: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Barbeiro what we were looking at as far as those monies was possibly start that Black Cat trunk or look at fixing some of these bottlenecks. You've got older sewer lines, is my understanding that are smaller, and then as growth continued on south then they have bottlenecks. Crossings along freeways-this one happens to be in Crestwood. Nobody from the city is telling me it will cost X number of dollars to fix this bottleneck or what other options can we take to fix it at this point of time. We'd like a quick fix.. I don't know there is necessarily a quick fix. These things take time. One thing that we did discuss was trying to form some committee to look at this Black Cat trunk and say okay, eventually it is going to have to be extended. It's got to be extended because the staff has indicated in his report that regardless of us, you've got 1000 unit capacity right now, but if we are out of the picture, once those 1000 units are taken up, that line can't service its designated area. Meridian Planning and ~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 20 It can't go all the way down that map as proposed. So it is going to divert into the Black. Cat trunk eventually. So is the Nine Mile trunk which has reached capacity. Eventually, those two trunks have to divert to Black Cat, which is what our designated trunk is on the majority of the property. We say this is a step to try to figure out what we are going to do. The city is going to have to take this step at some point of time. The development community needs to step up also. One of the other thoughts that we brought before them that Boise is doing now, is off peak hour pumping. You have your peak hours for your residential use when people are home. Like when the Super Bowl is on, in New York it causes problems because- everybody runs to the restroom during commercials. There are certain peak hours. That's a true story. Anyway, so one of the things that Boise has looked at as you have a storage subsurface storage enclosure, then on the off hours or during the night after 2 am, then the pumps kick on. There is just a gradual small flow into the pressure line which pressures into the main, the gravity line and then your big pump kicks on in the non peak hours. This increases the amount of capacity. that the trunk can take. This is -the line that they are doing this one is at capacity. It is the trunk line that did away with (Inaudible) sewer district. Those are some ideas that we have that we'd like the city to look at because we think that they are viable. They talk about we don't want you pumping into Elk Run. Well, we had two options that we looked at. The closest was obviously to pump to Elk Run. If you go to the north, the trunk line is in Overland Road in front of those homes across from Boondocks. If you drive up the street at Boondocks at Overland. The trunk is right there. I did that with Interstate Center and took the trunk up there and it put service lines to those houses. The pressure line would run up Stoddard and hook into Overland. We'd pick up water, pull water down Stoddard. We also had a spot that if a well was needed there would be an area for a welt site for the city. Barbeiro: As Bruce has described, it is customary that service areas and those developments that are outside an individual service area do not get priority within a service area. There is some confusion on my part with regards to the service area that this subdivision is in is part of Black Cat and a portion of it is out of any existing service area. Bowcutt: No sir. The majority of it is designated for the Black Cat Truck. The southeast portion of the property is designated for the Ten Mile Trunk, or what they call the Meridian Trunk which goes into Ten Mile. So a portion. of it-it kind of cuts it out. Borup: You've got a plat on the screen. Bowcutt: Through this area here. That line is running through this property somewhere in this location in this vicinity. So, this area is supposed to go into the same trunk that Elk Run is in which is designated-this is very complicated and I apologize for this being such a complicated application. The Meridian Trunk Line comes in and this is"what we looked at flowing into. This trunk line dumps in to the Ten Mile Trunk which is going in a northwesterly direction. Meridian and Ten Mile Trunk are the same. There is a line across this property, I am just estimating here, where this portion is designated to go into this trunk or the Ten Mile Trunk. This portion (inaudible) north is designated to go Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 21 into the Black Cat B Trunk, which does not exist. What I've talked about is the option is the lift station would be located at a point where ail of this gravitates to that lift station. That some point of time when a trunk pumps across, that lift station could be eliminated and that affluent could go on a gravity. We run a pressure line up here into Overland and hook into the trunk. The trunk is up there. We bring it down there. As far as you said what has staffs position been. Bruce is correct. Staff has, to the best of their ability, tried to stay within the drainage areas thinking that we want to protect those properties that we have designated. However, what we found is those drainage areas are estimated. There are properties that are in drainage areas buf can not gravity sewer. We found that out. We have other properties that were on the fringe of that designation and estimated that they couldn't (inaudible) gravity sewer, but they could. These lines are estimates. That is typically what we find with all other jurisdictions. They are not a hard fast black (ine on the map that says you can't go past that line. They are not that way. This property is in the fringe. The line, that surface line, is zig zaging like this so I am right on the fringe. I am not in the middle of the section trying to jump into a fine that is way over. I run on the edge and as indicated by the City of Boise, when they have projects on the fringe they go to one or the other line, which ever line gets there first. The fringe properties-that's how they work it. They want the hook up fees. They want the sewer assessments to build their infrastructure and the temporary lift stations is how they've done it successfully. I've talked to Public Works and begged them to talk with John Tenson with the City of Boise and have him discuss how successful they've been with this strategy because the city is reaching a point where you guys are growing fast. Fastest growing city in the state and we've got to look at how we are going to serve these people. Thanks. Borup: Thank you. This is a continued public hearing. At this point I would like to invite-do vve have any members of the public who would like to stand up and testify. Adkins: My name is Jack Adkins. I live at 400 W. Victory. For purposes of where that is, it's that piece that runs right on the southeast corner of that development. North and south on an 8 acre parcel right there. There is a number of issues that I don't know what the status is, but there is questions !want to raise with respect to those issues. Having spent a number of years on the Idaho State Board of Accountants and having been chairman of the board, one thing, we as accountants have this old saying that says figures don't lie but liars figure, and that is high density. That's R-4. I know how long my property line is and those are basically 8-10 thousand 11 thousand square foot lots. That is high density. As high density, it is not really compatible with the surrounding areas which are mostly acreage's or low density. If you look at Pebble (inaudible) Estates, that's not development property. That is the size those properties are going to be. My property is not development property. That is the size that property is going to be. That's pretty high density for the surrounding area without question. Another issue would be traffic. i don't know how many of you have tried to turn on to Overland- off of Stoddard during busy hours at this time, but it is pretty tough to do because traffic backs up all the way from Meridian Road to Stoddard. Victory Road; as you will notice right at the end of my piece of property, there is a big curve there. Quite often we take people out of the field there. Take people out of the canal there, because .Meridian- Planning and ~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 ° Page 22 that is a pretty unsafe road there. Very narrow, very crooked. The Meridian Victory corner is probably one of the worst accident corners in this county. It needs to be traffic signaled there if there is going to be any development out there. Those are all things that need to be addressed. Other issues-my property I have a pretty substantial pond on my property right next to the property line there, which is certainly going to be an attractive nuisance. It is certainly going to be an attraction for children. It is about 20 feet deep. I would like to see something done about fencing and birming in excess of the required minimums. I don't think a six foot fence is enough to take care of that problem. Another issue of course would be, what are you going to do with the agricultural run off. That area is the agricultural run off. Right along my property line to the west is where the drain ditch runs. It runs right down my property across the north boundary of my property and right along. the east boundary of this. property. I don't know what they are going to do with that. That is a lot of run off. I have no idea what the plan is for this park. That is great that they have a park. I hope that it's a deed restricted park to the city before anything happens. The other thing that l would tell you is, is that my property is certainly not an old farm house that is ready to be torn down and developed. It is relatively a new home and I would certainly like you people to consider the°responsibility to make sure that the value of that property is not harmed by this development. That is what I have. Borup: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Adkins? Thank you sir. Anyone else wish to; testify? Rauch: My name is Chuck Rauch. I am a property owner off of Stoddard. I have five acres which is just west of this development near the center area`of the finger area that comes down between the acreage's on the property. One of the decisions that I made when I was in the process of purchasing property was looking for property that was not adjacent to a high density development. I looked. at the Ada county maps and different areas and understood that this particular area was a rural transitional designated for 5 acres or larger parcels to be developed. If that was to maintain that zoning, the problem with the sewer would be greatly minimized versus the number of houses that is proposed by this development. With the large number of houses that is proposed, it has been mentioned that traffic is going to increase. There needs to be traffic signals looked at, maybe being installed along Meridian, Stoddard, Overland-if this was approved.. I think there would have to be a lot of work that would need to be done by both the city and the applicant. Taking a look at these issues and being able to provide answers on how they would address those particular issues. Aside from the problem that is created by development, with this number of houses with the sewer. A question that I would have for the applicant and for the city also is if the park-with a park that is proposed like this, I believe the applicant donates the land and gets it set up but then it needs to be maintained by the city. if there is not funding for this park, then we -what happens is you have a park that gets dried up and is really .not usable and becomes a problem for the city and for the surrounding neighbors. I guess just as a comment, I guess I am opposed to the development mainly because of the problems that this number of houses creates for that community and if you look on the applicants map, this development basically divides some rural area almost in half, which changes the intent .Meridian Planning and ~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 23 of the people-that do own property there currently-what they have and what they hope to have in the future. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? Yerrington: My name is Kent Yerrington. I live at 8830 Morning Mist in Boise. I also own a piece of property in Pebble Lane Estates. I just don't think it is right with the amount of sewer this is going to generate in your pumping it into another trunk line, your going to cut the development to that trunk line was originally designed for. In the future, if this trunk line is at capacity and your going to-other developments are going to have problems in the future because they won't have the capacity. That's my thought. Borup: Thank you. Montgomery: My name is Jeannie Montgomery. I live right next to the canal. I have not formulated any speech because I wasn't planning on making one. I agree with the statements that have been made. It is more or less reputation, but I want to emphasize that I think we all agree with the speakers that we have had. We really don't want this built around us. We like the country. That is why we are living there. I know from my limited experience with zoning that if you want to divide a big consideration is the surrounding area. They are not considering the surrounding area at all. We have space and that is a high density development. The traffic will be a real situation. It's difficult to get out on Overland or the Meridian Kuna Highway. At-the meeting that they mentioned, we expressed interested in one or five acre development and they thought that would cost them too much money. I think there is a lot more at steak here then their expense. Thank you. ~ Borup: Any one else. Thank you. Commissioners. Hatcher: Yes Mr. Chairman. I've got a question. I think I'd like to address this to Bruce. Just for my own clarification, based upon everything that we have heard tonight, if Bear Creek Subdivision was to go ahead and implement the $1000 impact fee-per lot plus the hook up fee, so on and so forth, the money that is generated from those fees would that money off set the cost that would be required to fix or temporarily alleviate the bottlenecks in the Meridian drain until such time as the Black Cat Trunk can be generated. The second part to that question would be would there be any fees left over after those bottlenecks were fixed to be applied to the Black Cat Trunk? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hatcher, in Brad Watson's report, page 5 of 6 down on the second paragraph under conclusions and recommendations addresses that very issue. If you -like I could read that so that we are all on the same page here. An immediate solution is construction of a portion of a portion of the Black Cat Trunk and associated off shoot of the lift station in Whitestone Estates. The constriction in the Ten Mile Trunk would then be around 2.3 CFS existing in '99 which would allow an additional 1200 to 1300 hook ups into the Ten Mile Trunk. That portion of the Black Cat Trunk would still be very costly as it involved approximately 3 miles of gravity sewer, Meridian. Planning andring Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 24 construction of a large lift station on Black Cat Road and nearly a mile of pressure main to the waste water treatment plant. Brad did not have a real concrete estimate but he says several million dollars. I don't believe there would be any left over money. Hatcher: I've got another question. VVe were talking about this Nine Mile Trunk and based upon what Becky was stating, that trunk stubs at the east-side of this property line, which is also-is that correct, first of all? Meridian trunk, yes. It stubs on-the east end of this development. Freckleton: The Meridian Trunk Line comes through Elk Run Subdivision which is the development, your familiar with that. Okay. There is a culdesac at the extreme southern end of that. You can see a narrow lot that comes outback out to Meridian Road. The Meridian Trunk Line at this point of time terminates at that culdesac. It is proposed for it to come out through that narrow lot back on the Meridian Road where then it can be extended further south. Hatcher: But there is no extension to the west through Elk Run. Freckleton: I believe there is a stub on Calderwood. In Calderwood there is a stub line there. Hatcher: So not to say that this entire facility or this proposed project can be services by that stub, but it was obviously public works intention that that line eventually be extended, ..even though that is the termination point to a different zone or area. Freckleton: That: is correct; and Becky's previous statement about the service boundary's not being set in stone, that is absolutely true. When we-look at the design for a development, if there is still. depth on the sewer lines at the point where they determine such as this location, we will require that they go ahead and stub it to~their boundary. The purpose of that is obviously-it can be extended a certain distance further and pick up some more land. The service areas -what our intent is, is to gravity sewer. The service boundary's are set up for gravity sewer back to the trunk lines. Not pump, but gravity back in. That is a prime example. We had some left over depth at that point.and so we had them go ahead and put a stub in knowing that we could probably pick up some additional property to the west. At that point in time when Elk Run was,developed, there was no proposal for anything to the west and so it was kind of playing. the devil's advocate at that paint of time. Hatcher: For further clarification if you could answer or Becky could answer, how much of Bear Creek on the northern portion for the proposed development can be serviced through gravity of that existing stub. A third of it, half of it? What is the depth of that existing. stub? Freckleton: Becky do you have anything on that. I don't recall. If I remember right. it was five or six feet deep, but I can't remember. Her statement was that she is guessing maybe five to 10 per cent. Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25; 1999 Page 25 Hatcher: So not a substantial amount. Only one more question and that is in regards to this project. Obviously, it is kind of the cart before the horse, but the project itself is more or less, on the end of the Black Cat Trunk because the Black Cat Trunk has not even been built yet up on Ustick and Black Cat. Seems to me a little ridged to expect that this project be serviced entirely by Black Cat Trunk when the thing doesn't even exist yet. I understand the sewer problem. I am compassionate on both sides and have no definitive feeling, but to just flat out deny the project because it is at the end of a proposed trunk and it is adjacent to existing facilities, it seems to me that there is some on-going communication that needs to be done between the development groups, the engineers and the city. I don't see that there is a resolution to this yet, at all'. There is no definitive direction. There is no proposed solutions other than denial of a project that I think is favorable to the Meridian city. That is my two cents. Borup: Tom do you have any comments you'd like to make? Barbeiro: Based upon what Becky has said with regards to other projects in Boise that they (inaudible) for projects to go into fringe areas. I can understand that the developer would think that possibility exists here too. if the developer is also taking a risk knowing that in the past, the City of Meridian has not necessarily gone outside of the boundary's of service areas. I think the developer has taken a risk here, knew the possibilities of this project, would not go through and has read through a very lengthy report just to find from our Department of Public Works that the project not go through. The developer has then come forward and said we need to find solutions, but as offered no solutions .other than temporary lift stations. The developer again has taken a risk. I would rather put it back to the developer that understanding the lengthy report that the Dept. of Public Works has put together, it would be left to him to lesson his risk by proposing solutions to the sewer problems, based upon the report that the Dept. of Public-Works has anered him. Borup: Thank you. Tammy? De Weerd: I think that the statement about being rigid in our boundary's is true, and I guess the risk that the developer took was giving us a development that we rarely see sitting up here. This is a quality proposal. It's a density we do not see up here. It's open space is a model that we also don't see up here. I hate to go against department's recommendations because they do believe that they are the professionals. They know the intricate part of the planning for the city, but on the other hand, I think the city has to be flexible in a sense where we don't know what future developments are going to be and if we deny this because another cookie cutter R-4 would be denied because of that-I have a problem with that. There is no guarantee what our future applications are going to be. I do know that this application has lower densities in the areas that are up by Pebble Lane Estates trying to be sensitive to the densities up there, while realistically I still have yet to see any developments that are annexed into the city that are less then 3 per acre-even that. So, you know, I am torn because I don't want to go against the departments recommendation, especially when Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting • August 25, 1999 Page 26 they are the experts on this and they spend a lot of time in the planning. I would be inclined to support this application. Borup: Are we ready to close the public hearing and proceed with a motion? De Weerd: If there is no further staff comments or comments by the application... Borup: Well we can still get staff comments unless the applicant would like to sum up, but I think we are ready to move ahead. Does the applicant have any. final comment before we close the public hearing? Have you been up here before? Bowcutt: Just one statement. I understand Commissioner Barbeiro's concern. What permanent solutions have we come up with. I would like you to know that we just got the final report faxed to us yesterday. I had a draft of it I believe a week ago, but it was not final form, so as far as coming up with a permanent solution or -I have not had a lot of time to do that. I'd like to go on the. record. De Weerd: Becky, I do have a question that I failed to ask you before. in my material, I don't see a ACHD report in here-the traffic impact. Bowcutt: Yes ma'am there is a final report. i don't know why you don't have one. Briefly, a traffic study was done by Dolby Engineering submitted to ACHD. The traffic study was reviewed. ACRD asked us to build a center turn lane at the intersection of Stoddard and Overland Road, which is off site, but they stated it was necessary, and build a center turn Pane all down Stoddard at our entrances. Each entrance would have stacking room and turn bays and then construct along Stoddard, sidewalk along Victory and then they asked for additional stubbed street other than what l show and asked me to shift the stubbed on the northeast. That is basically what the report says. It did go to the Commission. The Commission did approve the staff report and the project. Barbeiro: Becky am I to understand that you have implemented those changes in this existing plan? Bowcutt: Does it reflect ACHD's comment? The stubbed streets? No sir, no sir. If you would like me to draw them on there, I could. Barbeiro: It's not necessary, thanks. Borup: Tammy, that report is in with Item Number 4. Mr. Yerrington, did you have a quick question? ' Yerrington: Yes I do. I was just wondering is this going to set a precedence. I mean the (inaudible) was a farm, I don't know if it sold but it was for sale, just west of Stoddard. So now that wants to be developed and be pumped into this same deal with another lift station, are you setting a precedence by saying it is okay to pump into a trunk line that was not designed for that area. Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 27 Borup: I don't know if we can answer that. l~know as far as I am concerned it does not set a precedence. We look at every application on its own merits. I think most of the Commissioners agree with that. No? Mr. Barbeiro does not agree with that. Barbeiro: I don't agree with it because what it does,-apart from setting a president, it leaves a potential developer with a sense of a lessened risk, because now since this project, a fringe project has been approved, it now has a belief that this project is now a part of the. service area and the property next to it now becomes a fringe property, which would fail into the same category as this property is today. You keep realigning it, adding and adding fringe property and continue to add properties within a service area that were not initially designed for that service area. I would say that what may not set per say a precedent, it leave a potential developer with a sense of lessened risk. Borup: Very well put. Did staff have any final comments. Go ahead and do it now. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I did have one question for the applicant. Becky, when you were sketching up there, you had indicated that the lift station was in the- southwestern corner of the park. Preliminary plat I have shows it on the northwestern corner. You also indicated that the pressure line would go north on Stoddard to Overland and then connect in to the Ten Miie. My preliminary plat shows it going through the property and tying in to the existing main lines in Elk Run Subdivision. Borup: I think she gave that as a second alternative. (Inaudible audience conversation) Freckleton: Okay. In summary I guess I would just like to touch on Brad's report a little more. He states Bear Creek Estates should not be recommended for approval based on the following reasons. Item number 1. Depending on Lift station sizing, a 30 to 60 per cent of the remaining capacity in the Ten Mile Trunk would be used up, severely limiting the ability of the city to approve on 500 to 800 dwelling units or commercial equivalent in the Nine Miie and Ten Mile Sewer Service areas. Item number 2. Approval of Bear Creek Estates would likely precedentsetting and additional proposals would be submitted to the city for development of areas in the Black Cat Sewer Service area. Accumulation of lift stations would accelerate the depletion of capacity in the trunk even more than normal development served by gravity sewer. Item. number 3. Additional lift stations would require additional maintenance and consequently additional costs in personnel. Borup: Thank you. Brad, did you have a comment too. Hawkins: I would just like to say that because of these outstanding sewer issues that were not having any resolution, Planning and Zoning staff has not prepared detailed comments and we would like the chance to do that before the public hearing is closed. Meridian Planning and. ling Committee Special- Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 28 Borup: Again, this current public hearing is on annexation and zoning only. We have not addressed preliminary plat yet. Just a reminder for everyone. Commissioners, what is your pleasure? Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we continue both public hearings that being one we have not opened, which is number 4, based upon two items. We now have before us the Dept. of Public Works report. Based upon this report, the developer knows that the risk he is taking putting this in a.fringe issue has been not recommended by the Dept.. of Public Works. This would allow the developer the opportunity to proceed with long term, permanent solutions that he could propose to our Public Works, prior to the next Planning and Zoning meeting. The other is per Brad's notes, we do not have staff comments that he would like to include in this, and that again would also allow the developer to address those staff comments and correct them. !move that we continue the public hearing. Borup: The staffs comments were on the preliminary plat, is that correct? The-staff °~comments we did not have was on the preliminary plat. Barbeiro: Okay sv that would be in reference to the next item. Regardless, I would move that we continue the public hearing, based upon my first comments. De Weerd: Second. Borup: Any discussion? De Weerd: I would just like to respond to Bruce that I don't think whatever action is taken on this would seta precedent. !think each application is based on only that application and the merits of that application. Again, I stated that all we can do is look at what we currently have and how it effects future development. If it's a value and an asset to the community, it should be considered based on that.:l believe that the developer said that they would maintain that lift station through their homeowners association or through a private contractor, so I think a couple of those have been addressed. I would agree with Commissioner Barbeiro. Maybe this gives further opportunity for the developer and public works to talk on this and I would look forward to staffs comments. Borup: Maybe just one clarification on the motion. Was there a date in mind? Barbeiro:' I'd like to ask Bruce if in his opinion if 3 weeks would be sufficient time for a developer to prepare something of a permanent solution after the temporary lift station and it is my belief that 3 weeks is insufficient time. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Barbeiro, I guess I would have to defer that question to the applicant. You've heard our position. I feel the ball is in their court. Barbeiro: Since we have not closed the public hearing may we Meridian Planning and ~ing Committee Special Meeting • August 25, 1999 Page 29 Borup: Right. Yes we can. I assume your not talking about a permanent complete solution. Your talking about getting some ideas started and- Barbeiro: As the developer said, we must make solutions. We must solve these problems. (Inaudible) opportunity, but I don't think 3 weeks is enough time to prepare that. Borup: Was that Greg that made that statement. He probably wishing he had not said that now. De Weerd: Well, the public hearing isn't closed. Borup: No. Mr. Johnson could you comment on that or Becky which ever would be appropriate. Johnson: We were all ready delayed 60 days because staff couldn't get this sewer report accomplished the first time. We would be glad to offer solutions if we could be given an exact definition of what the problems are. The under sized pipes in Crestwood, if we know the length of them and what size of pipes they need to be replaced with, we can get costs for those things. Apparently, there is also some under sized piping between the Landing Subdivision and the freeway crossing. If we get the length of those and what needs to appropriately put in there, we can estimate what those costs would be. I believe that with this development and with other developments that is happening along the Black Cat Trunk that that particular bottleneck could be resolved with the fees from this subdivision and if they will start collecting them from the subdivisions being developed. This second solution is to build the northern portions of the trunk and then divert additional flows from the Crestwood area. We don't have those facts from staff yet. If staff can get those fairly readily, yes we can provide some concrete solutions. I think the main solution that we have offered is to establish a trunk fee for this area. All the areas served by the Black Cat Trunk and start collecting the fees so we will have funds to start fixing the problems as they come up and as we reach capacity in the different areas. That is our solution to it. If we simply put our heads in the sand and say we are going to build 900 homes and then we are done, then it is never going to get built. Borup: Did that answer your question? Barbeiro: No. The question really-can a feasible between the Dept. of Public Works and the developer be presented to us within 3 weeks. Borup: That information is not available in the report? Brad do you have any input on that pertaining to that question? Hawkins: Chairman Borup. This report was prepared by Brad Watson. Meridian Planning and ~ng Committee Special,Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 30 Borup: Oh! That makes sense. Different department. Mr. Freckleton, do you have any comments on that? Freckleton: I would only ask that the applicant put these requests in to writing and address them to Brad Watson and I will get together with him Monday morning and we will talk about these things. Brad is out of town this week. Becky just indicated to me that some information that Brad submitted on electronic media was incomplete as well. There is some things that we do need to look into. Borup:- Was that readily available. Your aware where the bottlenecks are and capacity of existing lines and it's just a matter of pulling that.information off. It is not things that need to be recalculated or anything to that extent. Freckleton: I don't believe so. Borup: Okay.. Thank you. Mr. Barbeiro we are still waiting for a date certain to continue this public hearing to. Hatcher: Mr. Chairman. In regards to this issue of the sewer. I agree with Commissioner Barbeiro that September 14tH is by no means enough time and !would like to continue or table this issue until the following meeting but would like to know when the next date is. October 12tH De Weerd: Unless we want another special meeting. Borup: Right. De Weerd: This has been continued before. Borup: The application came-was that the April-meeting? If anybody stiN remembers that. Barbeiro: It is then my proposal-let's go ahead and continue it to September 14tH and see what.the Dept. of Public Works and the developer can prepare in the mean time. My motion is to continue the public hearing to our next regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning meeting on September 14. De Weerd: I still second that. Borup: We have a motion and a second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if I might.. Borup: Yes Mr. Freckleton. Meridian Planning and~ning Committee Special Meeting August 25, 1999 Page 31 Freckleton: I would imagine that you would like some time to review the information once it is put together. You don't want to get the information the night before. You will probably want at' least a week to look at it. That only limits them to two weeks to get this ,put together. Borup: We certainly would like a week; but it has never happened yet. So we would like it the Friday before. u Freckleton: I just throw that out. Borup: Okay. What l am saying that would be a nice requirement, but is the staff willing to put"this requirement on themselves. (Inaudible) . Freckleton: As long as we get the request in a timely fashion and we know exactly where we are headed with this thing and we can pull the information up. I can't speak for Brad, but Brad is the one who does the analysis on these, so he has been very responsive in the past. ITEM NUMBER 4: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEAR{NG: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED BEAR°CREEK SUBDIVISION OF 326 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOTS-BY BEAR CREEK, LLC-EAST OF STODDARD ROAD,& SOUTH OF OVERLAND: Borup: I think probably most the comments probably all ready made. Does anything they wish to add. Hawkins: Mr. Chairman. No further comments at this time. Borup: And you would like your comments from your previous application to be included in this. Hawkins: Yes, again Planning and Zoning staff has not prepared detailed comments on this because of the outstanding sewer issues. We will prepare them for the next meeting that it has been continued to. Borup: Okay, thank you. Applicant wish to come forward and make comment. Rossrrian: Mr. Chairman, did Commissioner Barbeiro"include Item Number 4 in his motion to continue. I think he did. Borup: No, he made reference to it with intention of doing it when it was opened. Rossman: Okay so for clarification of the motion that was just decided to continue related only to Item Number 3. k MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING: AUGUST 251999 APPLICANT: BEAR CREEK LLC ITEM _NUMBER: 3 REQUEST: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR R-4 ZONING) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED MINUTES ~~~ }~~tCf4~Nl/ ~ ~~~~~5 CITY ENGINEER:r CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED LETTER MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: ~~- ,, P NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: ~, ~~ IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. r~..c ,i _, .. k . f ~r Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE City Council Members CHARLESROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 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 City Clerk Fax (208) 888-4218 MEMORANDUM: ' To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor & Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 • Faz 887-1297 R,Fi cA~i~~u~s~~3, 1999 AUG 2 ~ 1999 City of Meridian City Clerk Office Re: BEAR CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION -Request for Annexation & Zoning from RT to R-4, and Preliminary Plat Approval for 326 Single-family Residential Building Lots on 150.79 Acre by Bear Creek L.L.C. We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the application. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: 1. This application was originally scheduled for the July 13, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Staff requested that the application be continued until such time that a detailed computer analysis be completed to determine sewer serviceability. Attached you will find a copy of the 8/13/99 HYDRA Sewer Analysis results by Assistant City Engineer Brad Watson, P.E. As you can draw from these results, "Beaz Creek Estates would severely impact the Ten Mile Trunk and the City's ability to approve future development which should rightfully discharge to it. The Public Works Department recommends denial of this application. Bear Creek Sub.AZ PP.doc A~99-010 PP-99-020 July 15, 1999 City of Meridian - 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 888-6700 ~~E~~ ~' 112 8 1a~q ~~~~ hf alt~riclian is; v ~;ca~°lx Office Dear Councilmen: Enclosed for your review is general information relative to schools located in the proposed project area. If you have any questions, please contact Jim Carberry at 888-6701. Reference: Bear Creek Subdivision ElementarysSchool:.,,- .,Mary,McPherson Elementary School ~..;~ •. . Middle School: Meridian Middle School High School: Meridian High School Comments and/or Recommendations: Mary McPherson Elementary School is over capacity. Meridian Middle School is at capacity and will remain so until the fifth middle school comes on line in the fall of 2000. Meridian High School is also at capacity. We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house one hundred nine (109) elementary aged children, eighty one (81) middle school aged children, and seventy four (74) senior high aged students. Even though, we are in a difficult position and need your help in dealing with the impact, of growth on schools, we will approve this development. Sincerely, ,., z ~,; <, , . Tim Carberry, - Administrator of,Support .Services ,,.. .,;.. _. ~ ~ ~ . M BOARD OF TRUSTEES Rex Harrison • Wally Hedrick • Holly Houfburg • David Wynkoop • Steve Mann SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell ' ~a ~, • Mceridian Planning & Zonning ~`~ Formal Complaint Against Bear Creek Subdivision From: Tony &, Darla Aramburu 691 West `Hartack Court Meridian,ldaho 83642 884-3714 -Kentucky Ridge- Estates M To Planning and .Zoning Board: We would like to express our concems`~with this new subdivision located at Stoddard and Overland Road and the impact associated. with this subdivision. • The additional 326 homes will add a minimum of 300 cars to these streets which are not iri any condition to accommodate any more traffic with the addition of Roaring Springs that has .been very ` successful in drawing additional traffic. 4 . • The School system in place is not functional to'add~this amount of additional .children when all said and done. Right now children in Meridian are being shipped throughout the city just to get kids an ~~ education they are intitled to. • If this,subdivision is to proceed we believe that the Developer should be responsible for impact fees required to handle the additional homes~up front in order to fix the problems first- rather than~addressing-the`m later. This plan should be in place before ~x, any dirt is moved so that we do-not .have a make shift agreement in the end. e. ~~ ., ~,, _ ~;. r _ We ask that the Board be fully aware of all impacts before allowing '' any more growth in the area. This responsibility is large°but does effect more than the local Residence. ~ C k Sincerely, ~> Tony & Darla Aramburu ,. y. .. r R~ 1''~ia~,~~_ I -'L.l , AUG 2 5 199.9 ` ', City°of Meridian City Clerk Office p~ z 3 ;, ~ _~ 0S/25/1999 14:17 4635010 MERCY PAGE 02 Scott Macaluso • 736 W. Hartack Ct. Meridisn, IA • 83642 • 88a-3277 ~ ' i R. ~ August 25, 1999 , .A ~~ r 2 ~ i999 Meridian Planning & Zoning Committee City o f 141 e r i d i a " ~- City Clerk Office Dear Sir or Madam: I am unable to attend tonight's meeting due to work and I would like to voice xxty opposition to the re- zontug of the property adjacent to Stoddard Avenue, across izoxn the Roaring Springs Water Park. As a residea~t of Kentucl,;y Ridge Estates, I feel that the devclopmcnt of this axes would detract from the country feeling that we value iu the Meridian area. 'T'his .Country Feeling was one of tlt+e pzimary masons my wife and I~ chose the Meridian community to build our home and rsise our fann?ily_ + ;ill ~jiY4i' L ", ,.~,~,ji, 1 `w~au,~d li~:e to remind the cotrunittee of the oommitment they have made to tl~e residents of Meridian. F':. `'i'irj~al~. ,~+, ,;uGj,~.~ ~c~ditiona1324 hamcs would add to the strai~a of an already overtaxed system trying to supply .:~ ~~?r .:;., ~~ ` ~~services, educational opportunities, water, sewer, road repair and maintenance. ~i r..?..~. . t., _- ~~ ~ii~. .r ? y ~ ~u jr+ ? ? , ~ r concexra is the huge uncxease in traffic that these homes would bring to the area already ~ ~ ' ~~.iE~~h~lti9 f li r+j~j~~t, i' , red because of the rcccnt addition of commercial and zesidential traffic converging into r~~.~~~aM~~~~~h ` ~++~ ~ ~ d1~~ ~'~~' ~ una Road and I-84 interchange. This is the only freeway acecss available to West t~i_ '~'`'r `i;~"'+;" " ?~:' ;' ~..n~ Kuna residents. A traffic control dev ce already is needed for the eastbound exit of I-84 `~cj~ ~~ji~ih~"rii~~ i '"}?'~"'~.`•'l!fl!`!~ ~~ `j' ''`' ~ `afEic continuing North on Mcridian/Kuna Rd. I coascrvativcly cstirnatc that this proposed I~Slh~ii~?p?~ ion would add over 630 vehicles cxeatin a txaffxc n htmare. As it stands now, am Il~f,hhG~~,j ?. ~E;i~;:j;:; ~ ~~~ ~ `:` ~ stable driving through downtown Meridian to shop due to the present traf$tc situation. I will ,,,;~t~i;+nl~~j~~ " ther avoid Meridian with the addition of the proposed subdivision and the hazards do my family '~`'~'~'~~`~~'~~"fit`?~l~t it poses. I thank you for your time and look forward to hearing from you about xny concerns. Sincerely, The Scott Macal~uo Fa~»ily Registered Nurse President, I{entucky Ridge Homeowner's Associarion AUG 25 '99 15 24 4635010 PAGE.02 ~,, _, `~ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor PUBLIC~WORKS /BUILDING DEPARTMENT GARY D. SMITH, P.E. Public Works Director September 3, 1999 Ms. Kathy Stroschein Briggs Engineering, Inc. 1800 West Overland Road Boise, ID 83705-3142 RE: Proposed Bear Creek Estates -Sewer Modeling Information Dear Kathy: In response to your letter dated August 31, 1999: COUNCIL MEMBERS CHARLES M. ROUN"t'REE GLENN R. BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 1'. Enclosed is a copy of a portion of the overall master sewer plan map, showing all existing and future sewer 10" and larger in the area of the proposed Bear Creek Estates Subdivision. Each sewer link is identified by a unique number on the map. 1.a. Three spreadsheet tables are enclosed listing the results for the 10-Year Projection for the Ten Mile Trunk in the area of Crestwood Estates to the Vineyards for 1) Bear Creek discharging to trunk with 0.5 cfs lift station, 2) Bear Creek discharging to trunk with 0.75 cfs lift station and 3) no Bear Creek discharge to Ten Mile Trunk. These three tables contain all the information I understand is being requested. 1.b. The area south of Victory Road, between Locust Grove and Eagle Roads, will discharge to the Ten Mile Trunk in the future according to the 1998 Sewer Master Plan Update adopted by City Council. There is the only option other than replacing or parallel • ~ ~~~ piping many miles of sewer through existing subdivisions and commerciaF development. 1.c. The portions of the Ten Mile Trunk that have the least amount of excess capacity (i.e. "bottlenecks") occur in the same location regardless of what areas are discharging to it. The capacity of a sewer line is independent of the flow in it -only excess capacity changes. Excess capacities are listed in the spreadsheets enclosed for the various modeling scenarios. 1.d. Appears to be same request as 1.a. above. Please advise if not. 1.e. Appears to be same request as 1.b above. Please advise if not. c:\bw\c14\briggs. bearcreek.9299.1tr.doc Page 1 of 3 200 East Carlton, Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 887-221 I Fax (208) 887-1297 r .~ Bear Creek Estates 09/03!99 2. The capacity, or maximum flow allowed, is based upon 90% depth over diameter. For the 15" pipe with the least amount of excess capacity (Segment 783) 90% d/D is 2.15 cfs while full flow is 2.18 cfs. 3. Infiltration and inflow rates used for the existing portion of the collection system is categorized into low (100 gaVacre/day), medium (500 gaVacre/day) and high (1350 gal/acre/day). These rates were based upon in-f+eld flow monitoring conducted in the fall of 1998 and used to calibrate the existing model to actual conditions. All future sewer, or "design pipes", were given the medium designation. This is the same designation as is used on the majority of the existing Five Mile, Ten Mile and South Slough Trunks. 4. Flow monitoring was conducted at the lower end of the Ten Mile Trunk near Ustick Road. A copy of that flow monitoring hydrograph is enclosed. 5. Again, there exists capacity for an additions! 1,100 to 1,200 D.U.'s in the Ten Mile Trunk without construction of either Diversion #5 or #6 (see master plan map for location of diversions). This has nothing to do with the Nine Mile Trunk, as it is, or shortly will be, at its limit taking into account all platted land and vacant land along Locust Grove Road from 184 to Victory Road. As stated in Paragraph 1.b previously, the area south of Victory Road between Locust Grove Road and '/< mile west of Cloverdale Road will discharge to the Ten Mile Trunk and a portion, eventually, also to the future Black Cat Trunk. 6. HYDRA can model a reservoir but it does not appear that it can it can easily model a pumped storage situation in which the specific time period during which it can pump is defined without extensive pre-design of the reservoir-pump station. I am forwarding the hydrographs, in Excel format, for both Bear Creek and Ten Mile Trunk without Bear Creek (Link 783} for your use in analyzing a possible pumped storage situation. 7. I assume this refers to the Ten Mile Trunk in the Crestwood area. The most critical pipe segment (Link 783) is flowing full and, according to the 10-year model, the surcharge level is 0.00 feet. The 10-Year model essentially coincides with reaching capacity in the Ten Mile Trunk if neither Diversion #5 or Diversion #6 is built. 8. The amount of flow projected to be generated from the area south of Victory Road between Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road in the 10-Year Model is 0.51 cfs (peak flow). 9. The entire trunk, including downstream of Crestwood, has a specific amount of capacity. Varying degrees of extra capacity could be obtained depending on how much line the developer wants to install and for what distance. If he chose to upsize or paralle) the entire 10-Mile Trunk, it would accommodate much more flow it but that option is not likely financially feasible. 10. The HGL far the Bear Creek 0.5 cfs lift station is lower (2586.93' upstream manhole) than the Bear Creek 0.75 cfs lift station scenario (2587.17') in Pipe Segement 783. Perhaps the profiles you have are incorrectly identified. The actual hydrographs for these two scenarios are enclosed. c;\bw\c14\6riggs.bearcreek.9299.ttr.doc Page 2 of 3 P ., °~ HYDRA Sewer Analysis ~,. For. Proposed~Bear-Creek Estates Subdivisiotl . ; #_ 'August 13, .1999 City of Meridian Public Works Department ~~ ~~i3 l~9 ~~ P i Table. of~Contents Executive Summary ................................................ . ............... 1 Project Basis .............:............................................................... 2 Sewer System 6ackground ....................................................... 2 Problem-Statement ................................................... ............. 2 Modeling'Summary ...... ................................. ........ ......... 3 Land Use Assumptions : ........................... ......................... 3 Existing 1999 Model ...:.............................................................. 4 Modifred 10-Year Model .... .................................................... 4 Scenario #1 ............................................................................... 4 Scenario #2 ............................................................................... 5 Scenario #:i ............................................................................... 5 Conclusions and Recommendations ......................................... 5 Tables ~ Figures Land Use Information For Various Modeling Soertarios ............. Table 1 Excess Capacities (1999) in Selected"Sewer Segements ......... Table 2 Sewer Profile in Ten Mile Trunk; 10-Year Projection w/ 0.5 cfs Bear Creek Lift Station ................................................ Figure 1 Sewer Profile in Ten Mite Trunk; 10-Year Projection w/ 0.75 cfs Bear Creek Lift Station ............ ............................... Figure 2 Hydrograph of Segment 783 in Ten Mile Trunk; 10-Year Projection w/o Bear Creek ..................................................... Figure 3 Hydrograph of Segment 783 in Ten Mile Trunk; 10-Year Projection w/,Bear Creek ....................................................... Figure 4 Hydrograph of Influent tQ Bear Creek Lrft Station ..........:........... Figure 5 Map of Land Use Areas w/ 10-Year Buildout 96's ...................... Figure 6 ~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/13/99 HYDRA Sewer Analysis for Proposed (Bear Cn:ek Estates Subdivision (8/13/99 Public Works Department) Executive Summary Bear Creek Estates is a proposed 150-acre, 326 lot subdivision South of Overland Road and west of Meridian Road lying withih the future Black Cat Sewer Trunk service area. The developer proposes to sewer the subdivision via a lift station kx:ated which would pump ultimately discharge.into the existingTen Mile Trunk. Computer sewer modeling indicates that, at present, the Ten Mile Trunk can accommodate approximately 1,100 additional dwelling. units before reaching capacity. Additionally,_the Nine Mile Trunk is essentially at capacity taking into account all the planned development north of Victory Road. Consequently, development south of Victory Road, which is in the Nine Mile Trunk service area, will have to be diverted toward the Ten Mile Trunk. Ten-year growth projections in the Victory Road area estimate at least 1,100 dwelling units (or commercial equivalents) will be developed. Allowing Bear Creek Estates would reduce this amount Furthermore, approval of Hear Creek Estates would set precedent likely allowing additional developments to pump sewage out of the Black Cat service area into the Ten Mile Trunk service area. Because lift stations must be sized to accommodate flows higher than. the expected peak flow, lift stations "eat up" capacity faster than development served by gravity sewer. The 1,1 ~ dwelling unit capacity would be reduced to approximately 800 to 900 dwelling units if served by lift stations. An appropriately sized lift station for Bear Creek Estates, which would have enough capacity to serve twice its size, would use up around 60% of the remaining capacity, in the Ten Mlle Trunk. . Construction of the first portion and lateral of the Black Cat trunk to Whitestone Estates would allow diversion. of some flow away from the Ten Mile Trunk. This section of line has .approximately 2.3 cfs, or 2,400 homes, capacity. No cost estimate has been done for this section of the Black Cat but it is likely in the $4 to $5 million range. The developer proposes that the City impose a $1,000 surcharge on home builders in the Bear Creek development. At this rate, 7,000 to 8,000 homes would have to be built in the Black Cat Trunk service area to pay for its construction. This is at least seven times the capacity of the Ten Mile Trunk they would have to pump to. In summary, Bear Creek Estates would severely impact the Ten Mile Trunk and the City's ability to approve future development which should rightfully discharge to it. The Public Works Department recommends denial of this application. c:lmodellbear creek2lfinal report.doc Page 1 of 6 ~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/13/99 HYDRA Sewer Analysis For Proposed Bear Creek Estates Subdivision (8/13/99 Public Works Department) Proposed Development I?roject Bear Creek Estates is a proposed .150=acre, 326 lot subdivision south of Overtand Road and west of Meridian Road. _ The proposed subdivision is bounded by Victory- Road on the south and Stoddard Road on the west. The developer proposes to sewer the subdivision via gravity sewer to a lift station located within the subdivision which would pump to an existing`8-inch line in EIk Run Subdivision which ultimately discharges into the.Ten Mile Trunk. The entire project area is in the Black-Cat Trunk sewer service area. Sewer System Background The Bladc Cat trunk will cross-184 north and east of this location, tum into a 42-inch pipeline in Black Cat Road north of Chevy Lane and ultimately feed a large regional lift station approximately 5/8 of a mile north of Ustick Road. The proposed Bear Creek subdivision is approximately six miles from the planned regional lift station. Very preliminary cost estimates for the Black Cat Trunk are in the $7 to $8 million range. Because of the large cost, overall size of the project and emphasis on other trunk line projects, it is not expected the Black Cat Trunk will be constructed, at least to the proposed Bear Creek area, within the next ten`years. The City Council has instead placed its emphasis on the development of sewer service north of Ustick Road around the proposed No~Name Trunk. Problem Statement The Public Works Department is conoEmed that the Ten Mite Trunk is rapidly reaching capacity and that cross-basin transfer of .the sewage generated by this proposed subdivision will accelerate. reaching capacity.of the line and prevent approval of development of areas which title intended to discharge to the Ten. Mile Trunk. A computer HYDRA model of the sewer system was completed by JUB Engineers and provided to the City in June of this year. The report which accompanied the model indicated that there was, at the time the model was calibrated in the Fall of 1998, approximately 1.2 cubic feet per second {cfs) of capacity left in the Ten Mile Trunk (roughly. 1,270 homes). The model also indicated the Nine Mile Trunk was essentially at capaaty and that ali development south of Victory Road-must be diverted into the Ten Mile Trunk. Finally, °the Sewer Master Plan shows a future 24inch tn,nk line, -part of the Black Cat Trunk, traversing the proposed Bear Creek project. Consideration must be made to accommodate that line and its potentially' future connection to the remainder of the Black Cat Trunk. c:\modellbear creek2lflnal report.doc Page 2 of 6 Modeling Summary ~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/13/99 The JUB model contained three basic modeling scenarios: 1}existing Fall 1998, 2) 10- yearprojection and 3) ultimate buildout. The model was modified by the Public Works Department to bring the existing model current by accounting for the development that has occurred in the area south of 184 {including Thousand Springs, Sherbrooke Hollows, Salmon Rapids). This existing model was used to determine the amount of excess capaaty in the existing Nixie Mile and Ten Mile Trunks. The 10-Year model was also modfied to conduct the analysis for Bear Creek Subdivision. The JUB 10-Year model was a simpl~ed version in which the outlying service areas not currently sewered, but expected to develop in the next 10 years, were simply connected to the upper ends of the existing sewer lines. The Modified 10-Year Model, developed for this analysis, utilized the ultimate collection system model and input the outlying service areas in to their appropriate pipe segments. This more accurately reflects the peak flows that will occur in the system by taking into account travel time, attenuation of peak flows and to allow use of the future diversions in Victory Road, if necessary. The Modified 10-Year Model also included construction of the proposed lift station for Bear Creek Estates. Preliminary modeling showed that the lift station discharging into existing 8-inch gravity lines in Elk Run Subdivision, as is shown on the preliminary plat, would severely surcharge that system. No further modeling of that option was completed and the .proposed pressure main was rerouted to discharge directly into the Ten Mile Trunk down stream of its confluence with the Meridian Road Thank (in the Mr. Sandman Motel area). Land Use Assumptions The most important, and difficult, aspect of sewer modeling is projecting what areas are most likely to develop and as what type of land use (although general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan is still used). The 10-year land use projected by JUB Engineers in their report was closely examined and revised based on interest that has been shown by the development community in the area south of Overland Road. Table 1 lists comparisons of land use activity among the four basic scenario's; 1) Existing 1998 (JUB Existing Model) 2) Existing 1999 (Revised to include previous year's development) 3) JUB 10-Year Model (10-year land use projection) 4) Modified 10-Year Model (revised to reflect expected development) To include the proposed Bear Creek Subdivision in the analysis, Land Use Area 173 was simply changed from "0% Active" to "41 % Active.° Land Use Area 173 consists of 210 acres with a buildout projection of 735 dwelling units (DU's). Bear Creek proposes approximately 326 DU's, or 41 °~ of the total 735. c:Vnodel~bear creek21fina1 report.doc Page 3 of 6 ~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/t 3/99 Table 1 also lists the areas, density, residential lots `active', commercial acreage 'active' and the total number of DU's in both the .entire City and the upper Ten Mile Trunk service areas. The actual difference between JUB's and the Modred 10-Year models in number of DU's and active commercials acres was low. JUB projected 1,612 DU's discharging to the Ten Mile Trunk while the Modified model project 1,495 DU's while the commercial acreage was the same. The differences are in Land Use Areas 152, 170, 171, 185, 189 and 203. Table 2 shows the results of several different modeling scenarios. Each column represents a separate HYDRA run and its assoaated land use activity in the table below it. The pipeline segments with the kjwest excess capaaty were identified early in the modeling process. The upper portion of the table lists excess capaaties in each of the ~ -~ constricted pipeline segments for each mode! run. For estimating purposes, 1.0 cfs equates to approximately 1,060 DU's. Existing~-1999 Model The Existing 1999 Model run showed that the Five Mile Trunk is essentially at capacity when taking into account all development that has been through at least the preliminary plat stage and several small undeveloped areas. The model also shows that there is only around 1.1 cfs capacity left in the Ten Mile trunk in the Crestwood Estates area. While that single pipe segment could likely still function at slightly surcharged conditions, there are additional segments in proximity with an excess capacity of only about 1.5 cfs. This indicates that stretch of the Ten Mile Trunk is rapidly reaching capacity. Further complicating matters is the fact that, since the Five Mile Trunk is, or shortly will be, at capacity, any development south of Victory Road between Locust Grove and Eagle Roads will have to be diverted away from its natural service area (the Nine Mile Trunk) to the west and the Ten Mile Trunk. MODIFIED 10-YEAR MODEL Scenario #1: Ten year Growth aroiections, no Bear Creek Subd. Assumptions: 1) no diversion at Diversion #8 (all going to Victory Road toward Diversion #7), 2) all flow between Diversions #7 & #8 is diverted into Ten Mile Trunk, 3) assumes Div. #7 does not exist. aThere is capacity for approximately 2.3 cfs in the Ten Mile Trunk up until it joins with Meridian Road Trunk. This equates to around 2,400 DU's. This portion of the trunk is not, however, the constriction in the system. The 15-inch trunk through Crestwood #4 near Linder and Franklin Roads has approximately negative 0.14 cfs capacity in the this scenario. This occurs in Line # 783. This scenario corresponds to Results Set `8399C' and the percent buildout shown in the corresponding table. Qnlycne-segment of the trunk is overcapacity in this model run. Scenario #2: Ten year growth proiec~ions with 0.75 cfs lift station in Bear Creek Subd. c:lmodel~bear creek2lf~nal report.doc Page 4 of 6 h ~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/13/99 This scenario (Results Set 8999D) assumes the same diversions as the preceding. However, Bear Creek Subdivision is assumed'to be built out and the lift station is put into the model with the pressure main discharging to the Ten Mile Trunk in the Mr. Sandman motel vicinity. One problem with modeling this scenario is sizing of the lift station. Under-sizing the lift station and allowing development of Bear Greek will prevent other potential development from occurring in the area and proliferation of additional lift stations could occur. Conversely, over-sizing the 1'~t station contributes higher than what may be necessary peak flows to the gravity system. This model assumes a lift station capable of pumping roughly twice the peak flow generated from Bear Creek alone to allow additional development in the area. The peak flow generated by Bear Creek is projected to be 0.31 cfs. This model uses a 0.75 cfis duplex lift station. As shown in-Table 2 in Column 5, the gravity system is over- capacity up to 0.73 cfs in the Crestwood Estates area and surcharged approximately 0.7 feet. Five segments of the trunk are surcharged in this model run. Profiles of the Ten Mile Trunk in this area are attached. Scenario #3: Ten vear orowth arojections with 0.50 cfs lift station in Bear Creek Subd. The preceding scenario may be a somewhat low estimate of the potential future peak flow. Because the addition of Bear Creek's lift station would undoubtedly set a precedent for allowing lift stations in the area, additional lift stations can be expected to be -allowed that discharge to the Ten Mile Trunk. With two or even more lift stations operating, their peak discharges will, at times, coincide causing very high flows in the gravity system. However, a model scenario in which the lift station more closely matched the expected peak flow generated by Bear Creek only was conducted (Results Set brck89). The peak lift station flow was set at 0:5 cfs. This allows for error and a safety factor above the projected 0.31 cfs peak sanitary fkrnr. In this scenario, Ten Mile Trunk is over loaded by up to 0.57 cfs and surcharged over 0.4 feet. Three segments of the trunk are surcharged in this. model run.. Profiles for the same location as shown in Scenario #2 are also attached. Conclusions and Recommendations The proposed Bear Creek Estates alone would use up approximately 30% of the remaining capacity in the Ten Mile Trunk. When combined with other nearby areas that would likely develop based on the precedent set by approving Bear Creek, it is likely that over 60% of the remaining capacity would be used. This would limit development between Meridian and Eagle Road, south of Victory Road, to approximately 400 dwelling units or commercial equivalents. An intermediate solution is construction-of aportion of the Bladc Cat Trunk and associated off-shoot to the lift station in Whitestone Estates. The constriction in the Ten Mile Trunk would then be around 2.3 cfs (existing '99) which would allow an additional 1,200 to 1,300 hook ups into the Ten Mile Thank. That portion of the Black Cat Trunk would still be very costly as it involves approximately three miles of gravity sewer, construction of a large lift station on Black Cat Road and nearly a mile of pressure main to the wastewater treatment plant (several millions of dollars). c:lmodellbear creek2lfinal report.doc Page 5 of 6 w ~~r Creek HYDRA Analysis 08/13/99 The portion of the Ten Mile Trunk downstream of the major bottleneck in the Crestwood Estates area has, generally, a 2.0 cfs capacity to the railroad. This entire run of pipeline is approximately 2,000 lineal feet. Reconstruction of this segment, however, would still be limited by the 2.3 cfs capacity upstream between the 184 crossing and the Landing. In summary, Bear Creek Estates should not be recommended for approval based on the following reasons: 1) Depending on lift station sizing, 30 to 60% of the remaining capacity in the Ten Mile Trunk would be used up severely limiting the ability of the City to approve onty,500 to 800 dweNing units (or commercial equivalents} in the Nine Mile and Ten Mile Trunk sewer service areas. 2) Approval of BearCreek Estates would likely be precedent-setting and additional proposals would be submitted to the City for development of areas in the Black Cat Trunk sewer service area. Accumulation of lift stations would accelerate the depletion of capacity in the trunk even more than normal development served by gravity sewer. 3) Additional lift stations require additional maintenance and, consequently, additional-costs and personnel. Tlie developer has proposed that the City impose a $1,000 surcharge on each building permit within the proposed Bear Creek Estates Subdivision. This would generate around $325,000 assuming full buildout. If a similar fee were imposed on all building permits within the Bladc Cat Trunk service proposing to discharge to the Ten Mile Trunk, approximately 7,000 to 8,000 building permits would have to be issued to collect enough funds to build the. portion of the Black Cat Trunk out to Meridian Road. This is over seven times~the capacity of Ten Mile Thank into which those developments would have to pump. Ed. - At some point in the future, a consortium of developers, either with or without the City's financial assistance, would likely have to come forward to fund the construction of the Black Cat Trunk. The City currently has at least three other sign cant priorities for . sewer line expenditures: 1) Five Mile Trunk Relief Sewers, 2) No Name Trunk and 3) South Slough Extension. Until the development community steps forward financially, development within the Black Cat Trunk service area south of 184,is severely hampered. x= ~_ , r j.. ~~ r c:lmodel~bear creek2~inal report:doc ` Page 6 of 6 `~ ; ~ A w o o o o e o o o o o 0 0 0 '~ 8 ~ $ ~ o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u ~ ~ ~ III~~~ ~ ttttttvvvvvv o o O O O O O O O O O O $ 88 ~ 3g wo oo o o 0 0 0 00 og tf ~ ~ $ i eg ~~ n~ g g bd np o 8p gip ' ~ F ~ po$ ggg gg $$ $ $ o oo $o o ~o e~ a r G ~ OR ti~2 1~ F g i: a tl ~ ~d :° ~ t ~Eg t7 ~ 8 O w 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 !! C N ~ O R 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °u 0 J aa Q~ w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p O gg Q a 7 Pi x ~~1ljjjj O 7 ,~ c F ~ r78 gw oo o o o 00 00 o oo g o Y e_ ~ `~ " -` op ~ $ O ~ ~ 0 00 + 0 0 00 00 o p g i e ~ O ~ ' E ~ ~ r O O ~ t dj 0 0 0 g g 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 O O R O f ~ ~ d ~ ~ J ~ G ~ H ~ c • tY f ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ g ~$ ~~ ~ 8~ ~ > > U ~ ~~ ~ e ~~ = : y=jr i Pl~ lAN IaO A A NN AA A id /09 A O V~1 SQT ~9 pq }~ R ~ a O R ~ mow 9 ! R 8 ~ ~~1 !yY 4 ~ qq V ' gg R~ $ $ ~ ~R g~ b a e ' NA tdp & R_ g ' ~ ~Q ~ g~ 8~ ~F :8 ~ $ 8 ~ i~ ~ n~ ~8 gp 8 fi $R ~ $ ~ ~ d ~ 3 R 8 88 88 R ~ ~ ~~ 88 ~ $B R ~ ~ 0 i r .. a ti r. .. ,. ,~ . • 8 f~ ~Y # i '~g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o g o o ~ ., a 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O ~ O b ~ t O ~ ~R !dg 4 o 44 oo 4 a ~ 4 4 o 4 0 4 o 4 e 4 o 4 o 4 g 4 o v o ~ e $$ ~ ~g g ~ $ $ o e ~ N e e o • ~ $ ~ ' +++~f ~ 44 8g ' 4 g 44 8~ 44 gg 4 o 44 o$ 4 4 ge R4 oo g4 ~8 R g ~a W H ~~ g C C A ~ R 4 ~ 4 R 4 ~ I : V l j AN 3 N N NM h n Nl N N NN Nl '~ s € 9 F ~ 8 lV ( ~~C py S I fV ~H ~(pq 1~ E ~1~Y R ~ Oq H1~ ~~ S W C c a W ~ C ~$ O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O ~ r 6 p ~ OH O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ C s ~pp O ~ p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g a S p C ~ £° u o5 o v7 ~ go ii oo ~ffi oo Q oo o$ oo oo a _ ~ o~ e ~ ~ s ~ ~ro oo g$ ao $ oo o~. eo oo r ~c 8 O `o p ~S ~~ ~~ $ R4~ ~~ ~S g FR a x a z4 g 4 wa RR wa RR wa R w RR ww RR ww 44 wa 44 wa 44 ow ~ g .$ ~g ~ ' ~ ~ ao o F1v ~ ~ ~ 08 g ~g R~ 88 ~R o8 68 E8 'a S3 S1S F~ $~ 5~ $8 t;i8 Q$ ~$ ~p . - o~ e p X~ $$ R~ ~ ~:S BB S8 $Sa ~ q ~F y a a S • i E N ~~ ~~ e• y ~ Y ~ m go ~~ O~ O po ~1. Pf A 81O 01~O q 19 fV 1~ l7 O O P O Q ~; O q q C r r Q ~-( o V 0 p oo t01A ~ < t Z (( Z~ Q 8 ~ o R ~ ~: ~. l~ . ~ oo b ~ O O O ~ 8 r O O ~' q (~ G ~ ~ $ ~m J W~ r 0 0 Q 3~ ~ee Y~~ O ~~ ~"' ~~~ ~ pppp O/ O ~Y ~ QQ Od r G t pi ~ 9 t pp OA /7 V ~D Q N LV N N p 0 CI Ol 0 qq N 0 I+f Q 0 p V 0 y P 0 ~' ~ 0 q C 0 ~ o ~ q o 1A h Z ~~ p O r O r ~ ~ n 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ p 0 o 0 r ~ 0 ~O ~ ~ ; ~p~ ~ aD J p ~ G .2 O ~~ o 0 Y p0 ° ° ° ~ ~ ~~ ~ q r~ °p ~ O a l n 9 t g~n V ~O w t`I mm O ~ O a r ~ O o r m C ~ O ~ia O ~ C ~ oro°q ~° Z Z~ g ° iQ $ n ~'- o $ ~ o a o ~ ~ g ~ ~~ JJ ~ J N m a' ~' 3 , a ~ s~ ~~ OO VV 'l O Ol~ OOII ..f mw ~S CC~~ O ~ ~ d '~ gyp. O O P 0 q )t A N ~ V aC O C R O (V O ~ gl h. fV 7 g r q NP tV e a f - l~ A ~r O e0 r q O r y 2 $0 0 0 p 0 ~ ~ 0 0 m W <. g 0 0 h p 0 0 0 0 ` Z ~ ~ O C LL J W m ~p ~ R7 ~ ~ o ~~ p J ~ c i `zW r'j 'j 'y jj ~~~ ~' ~ ~ G ~~ O {{ A 0 l ( 0 V m N l7 ~ r ~~pp Rf g ss pe N ~~ D C ~ r ~ C ~ ~ ~ r N r ~ << ppoo tb a p Hf poS tl r ..~ ~ ~ O q ~ 0 0 0 gj O O f~ N O O 4 Z Q r W J W - ~ a ~~ pp ~ q q'p$' ~(~ p~~ / ~ ~ ~ A O A W N lN Q m W tO ~ (V ~ r aNO, N ~ r l? Nr ~ - S a- Q O~ r ~ N ~ ~~ ~j0 0 p 00 ~ ~ " ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 W N 0 0 ~ ~ $ ~ J ~ } ~a o~ ~~,~~ ~ ~ li g ~gq ~ ~ ~m p W O ~ ~a p w Q ~ ~~ 8 V~v w w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ GOV W W ~ ~ I m W ~ m w ~ tA W ~ t~ LC aD ~ m ~ m W ~ m W K ~ 8 vl W ~ ar~ W ~ y~5 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ w .. c ~ ~ Z g O $ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ `o M d' ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & Q E .T ~ ~ O t$ t n e z~ . . s s (~ C ~ ~ Q ~ R A ~p5 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ a 2 , ~ ~ q ; ~~ °~ p ,fl c ZS ~ ~ ~ ~ .9 a°0 ~ - ~ *~~ $ 6~ ~ a6 ~2 £ c ~ ~ W Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~_ ~ ~ c w ~ ~ c7 ~ g ~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ g ~~ €~ ~ ~o 'aro ~ r°n~ ~~ uf w € ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w •' w "38 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~~ A- gQ ~ ~ ~N q ~°-~ ~~ ~ rr r m~ ~-r ~ r ~~ rr ~ ~ ~ r W~ rr ~ ~- ~ e- ~ r R ~ ~ v a ~i • '' ~ i j r j j ~i } i j i i i i i i j i i i I I i i ~ i I i i ; i i ~ i ~ i j i ~ i i I i ! i ~ i ' ! ! I I I j ! I 1 I I j 1 1 I i 1 l i i i i i ~ j i i i i j i j I f ~ i j~ i i i i i ~ i i ' j i i i ! ~ I i ~ j I i i i i 1 i i ~ j J ( 3 j j j s i ~ i i i t+ j i i j i ~ + j i I i ~ i i i i i ` i i i i i i ~ I i i i i i i i Iti ~, i i i i i i i i i j ~ ~ i i i i i i i ~ i j i i i i i i i i r i i I i i I i i i i i i i I i I i i i i i i i i i i i ~ 'f i j i i i i i i + i i I i i i i i i f i t -i 1 1 I i i j i i i i i i I I i i I~ 1 1 i 1 I i 1 I I 1 I t i i j j i 1 I I ~ i ! i I I i j I i I I i I I i { i i i i i t i i i i i i i i i I i i i i j f i i i { 1 1 i ` 1 I !- 1 I 1 i i 1 i i I ! ~~ t ! I 1 ~~ 1 j 1 j ! I i l j i f ~ i i I I I ~ j I j ! I ! ~ '°•j i !, ! i i i i i i j i i i~ i i i i 1 t I t v i i i i i i i i j i i i i i ~~ i i ! I i i i i i `N ~ is i i i': { j 1+ i i i i i i i i i i i i ip ~ ~ j c~ i ' i i i i f t f I ~ I t i i i i i i i i i I ~ i i + i i ! ti 1 t i I I i I i 1 i I I I j i i i ' i i ; i i i ~ i ! i i i ~ i i i ~ C i i ~ i ; i j f i i i • ! i i , ~ i i i i i i j i+ i i i i i i ~ i i i i j } ! i i i i j ~ I i i ~o p i 4 i" i i ~ i 1 M i i i ~ i i i i i ! i ' t i i ! i 1 =' ; i I i i ~f f ~I ~~ ~ I ~j ~I I I ~i i ~m i ~ ~j ~i j t ui! ! i i r-j ~; ~' i nj i ~j i i I i i F S S a S • 0 t ~ Y '~ s t h y ~ ~. r a ~ d ,.~ 3~ v ~ ~ >n t s ~ r ~ ~.v o~ c c~~~ ~e°~,g ~~~ ~~~ d01~~ In~Q'ti ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~O ~iW ~Q _ ~~~ J{J ~{Q[ ~ `V j ~I~~,N UO~~ _ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ 8S0 800 in ri ~i ~ ~i Ti <i ~~ N ~OM~ C ~ [Nf~~pA c> ~ar0~ m J ~ e- r- e GDIhM ~ ~aaa aaa •• U i- www www. ... ~ ~ a z n ~v a: ~ ~. ~ y ( ! ~ 1 ! , 1 A. i i ! ~ ! ~ i ~ i 1 .. i i ~. ; ~ ! j # _ ~ .^ a ' F 1 i ~ i ~ ~ 1 ; 1 t~ ~ i 1 a ~ ~ yy ~ ~ ' t i i i i i i i ~ i i 1 i s s i i ~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ y, i i i ~ ] ! j i f '~,` I i ! 1 i I J ~ i f i i r i ~`~ j i ~ i , ~ 1 ~ ; ! ~ ~ ti ~ ~~ ~ i i 1 ~ ! j i j i ~ - i f ...` i i i i ~~ { I i i 1 f I i 1 ! i ! I i i 1 i 1 i i I I i 1 ! ~ j I ~ 1 i ~ i i ~ i i ! i ! 1 I t ? ' I 1 ! 1 I I ~ I I i ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 i I L i ~ } ~ ij ~ ~ f 7 ~ I 7 t ~ 7 i ! ~ ~ 1 ~ Vj 1 i 1 { 1 ~ 1 1 i i i + ~ i ! i ! t I ! i i I i 1 1 I 1 i i I ~ 1 ~i ! i ! i i s I i i ~ i ! i i i i ! f i i i i ! i ~ j i ~ i i i i 1 ; i i ! I ~ i I ~ ! i i i ? i i s i ~ i ~ ~ ! i i i ~~ i ~ 3 ' ~ ! i~` 4 ~ ~ ~ ! ~ I ! i ` I I! I ! ~ s 1 3 j /).1 , 1 ~ I ~ ~ !? ! ~ i 1 ~ f i ~ i j ~ s 1 J 1 a /J/ i ! ~ i 1 7 ~ i t 7N ` M i ~ ~ i ~ ! 1 i ~ ~ i ~ i i i r ~ ~ i i i i i i ~ ; + i 1 ~. 1 i f i i i Ni ~N+ ~ ~i i + `_ ~. tNi ~ i i l I : 7 - ~. ~ 1 i~ C f ~O l ? O ~ ~i j ~ c7 2V ~S ~ ,` ~ c ~ ~i ~ ~i ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ 1 n ~ ~ a0 Ol to ~" Q^~ ) t ~~'~ °°~u~i. ~~~ 8~~ ~~~ ~ ~l~~ ~~ 888 s88 ~'N1N1n ~fi~1~ n 1 ~V(OV ~f'7O ~~ T ~~ ~ w ww www U ~ - ' ~ Q' Z ~t~t~ cp ~~~ j ~ 1 i i i i i i i; i i f i i i i I I i I I { I ( f i I I t I I I ~ I ~ I i 1 i I 1 i i i i i 7 i r I i 1 j 1 I I I i 1 I 1 1 i I ! 1 f . i i i i i ( ( ( i ! ~ I I i i ~ J i I 1 i i i I i d' i i ? j ~ ' f 1 i {~ 1 I 1 I I i i i ' f f ~ I ~ I I f 1 j i ~ i ~ i i i i i j J 1 i i j i ' + ~ + , , i I i I i i i i ~ 7 i ' ; ; i ~ i j i ; i i ; !~ o~ I ~ i i i i ~ ~ i ~ i i i i J i 1 J I ! 1 ! ! I I i i i i f 1 1 1 i 1 1 I i i i i 1 i f I I 1 ~ i I 1 I 1 1 I i i i i 1 I i 1 7 ~ 1 I I ! 1 1 I I i i i i i i ~m i i i i i `~' i i i ~ i i i i s t i i i z i i i i i i i i i i i i i ~ ~ ~ i i I f f I 1 i ! 1 1 i I ~ i i i ~ i I i I 1 I 1 ! I i I 1 i i ! 1 7 ! ! 1 ! ~ ~. ' i ` i ~ i ~ ~ i i i i i i t i i ~ i ': i i i i i~ r, i j f i i i ~ i t i t 1 I ~ i i i i 1 1 1 1 I i s i i 'N i ! ! i ~ i; { i i i I 1 N 1 I ! r I i i' i I ~ i r~ I '~. i i i i i i i I '' I I I !I I 1 I 1 i ~~ I i i ! i i I 1 r I 1 ! 1 1 f ! ! I I ~ I i i i I F ~~i i f 1 ! i ! I I ~ I I i 1 1 1 ' ~ I ,:i 1 f' 1 1 1 1 I I I i ~ I I i + i i I ! i ~~ i i i i i i to t i t i i i i 0 I i ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ i (' ~ i i i i i + i t i i i j i ~ i I i 1 ~~ i ( f i + i i I ~ 1 ~~ ~ Of~ i ~i ! ~I i t i i i i y i i ~i ~~ Q L ~ `~ `~!c ~ ~ ' f~ ~` ~ ~, ~ _~ Q/ ~~~~ _ ~ by p C ~~IA ~~~ st~0 ~v~ O ~ a ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ o~~s ~~~ _ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~aD(~1, ~~D ti _ ~~~ , °~ ~~~ • C IU~~ IAl~~ ~~~ ~N~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ..000 SSO In to In !/~ r - ~ t- to IA 10 s- ma - a -- ~la pp pp ~O('?~ yy ( Q ONi d ~`tt ~~ J ~~~ ( p ~l'7 l7 O ~~ 1~ W W W W W W U a ' ~ ~ te ~v ~v°~ I . ; ~ ~ i i i N ~ t~ .~ i ~ a i - i j i s i i rf i ~ n i s ~ ~ i r i ~ i i' ; f i M i t s t i i i i ~~ i M i I f i ~ ~ ! i ' % ' i NI N. ~ Ni N ~i ~i ~i ~~ i` c ~ Si ~ o ~ c`~ , °. rnSirn , oa~~i C7 c ~j N C ~i N cal ~l pp pp p p.<Of00 1 ~O~ p C9 NNN ~~~ ~ l ~ ~ 0 ~~~ ~~ pp pp pp T ~~~ °~ 7V~ a~ION hp~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O~O~ ,t~, ~{~ j a0etr ~O~ ~~ ~~~~" O SSS SOO ~ ~~~ (n NNE ~~~ e-~~ ~ p ~:~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 5 p C1th-O `~ ~~ p ~~p ~ C9 '9N ~~~ l O ~~ ~~ ~aaa t-- www aaa www ate m z ~ r ~~~ ; Mt~c i ~. 'c ~ ~ s ~ ~ a f ~ w ~ _ ~ ~ ~ a crr ~Sa ~ q ~ Ica , A ~ d d •~ T ' a o ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :s °' a a O a _ is ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ k ~ a a ~ ~ ~ p p Lei t~ o a ~ c s a ~ ~ ~ ~ o aq m efi ry ¢ aq m st q N r- r .-. r- .- O O O O P~~II~~f ~14-~ul+~l~ ,~- M a `~ _. `~~ i B • ~~ ~` F~ -- l,~ ~l~ _F.: _ti b c nc w w i ~ n ~ v , ~r ao r; a r{ ~ c~i cr .- c~ .- ~ a ~ a ~ c . ~ a n ~ o ~" a .r Y a i c s w ~ ~ c . ~ _ ~ ago Iti ~ ~ ~ r 4 D ~ CI as ' ~ ~ L Y 'O Q r' 0 ~_ ~ € ~+ ~ °~. 'rn ~ ~ 4 a v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~} ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R~sBA oat }I4r~ yl+~li .. : p : ... ., .R ~, -. ~` ~. Q ~. N M r pN f+f ~' N O N n N N Q- N N m r m d N 0 ~-+ a ~ _~ ~ •~ ro G co rr/,~ N r (7 O V Q 09 lp N N ~ O O O G O O C O O C.. puo~ag/~aa,~ ~iqn~ ui nno~~ ~~~ a N ~C 7 R' 0 0 0 a ~ o ~ < ~ o ~ > s 5~ O tai ~'i a ** TX STATUS REPORT ** w DATE TIME TOiFROM 06 08124 13 01 12083452950 200 E. Cecltor~, Stn 201 u+Iei1d19f1.10 d36s2 ~ ~+.~ . Fau 98T--1297 Fau AS OF AUG 24 '99 13 07 PAGE.01 PUBLIC WORKS MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC--S 05'33" 015 066 OK City of Meridian Planning & Zoning Dept. TOQ ~~ BOwCUH' Frotre Sonya pay Froe 3 y 5' Z9 50 oata~ 9~ z~! ~ q q :Phone: ~ P~ex a~i 5 (Indudng caverst~eet) R~~BeQr`CreeK -g-1~3es 5ub.-Con^me~tit~= O Uegent ~~ Revleyv p ply Cp~~ p Please Reply O Please Recy~cie -Cwnmeets: Meridian. Planning and' ing Commission Meeting July 13, 1999 Page 50 MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL°AYES. ITEM 13. PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR R-4 ZONING) FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDNISION-BY BEAR CREEK, LLC-EAST OF STODDARD ROAD AND SOUTH OF OVERLAND. MacCoy: Item 13 is another one of these series, 13, 14 is continued. We will have a' public hearing, it open now. ` MacCoy: Shari? Where is she? Put the cat out too, would you. Stiles: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner's. Of the three projects we've requested you continue, this is probably the most severely restricted because of the sewer impact. This is Meridian Road. Lotridge owns this, I believe. This has been rezoned to a CG. We have (inaudible) subdivision here. Coun#ry Corner here. I believe this is Roho Enterprises, the salvage yard or whatever. This property is approximately 160 acres and would extend all the way from this point down Stoddard. Boon Docks would be over in this area. Boon Docks and Roaring Springs Water Park. Extend all the way from here down to Victory Road. They have met with the City Engineer, Gary Smith, on several occasions. Each time they've come in, Gary has said no. They preceded to submit this application•proposing that they would have a lift station that would pump ,back into another drainage area-not the drainage area this property is intended to go in to. It would go down this -feed into this trunk sewer here and the preliminary calculations that were done by Brad Watson, of the Public Works Department, are-it would severely surcharge that line-meaning that there would be no capacity available for any further development that was intended to go into this sewer line. As part of the carrot that they are offering, they are proposing an 18 acre park to be donated to the City to be developed as far as irrigation and seating far a Park area. It would be a public park and I believe also that they've made a commitment that they would as the building permits came in, those building permits would be charged an additional sewer interceptor impact fee to go into future extension.of the Ten Mile Creek--OH Black Cat trunk. The Black Cat trunk is proposed to actually go--go along the harden drain through here, Bruce? It seemed like it was coming across this corner somehow, the future interceptor. For those reason, staff recommended not only to continue it. 1 believe the Public Works Director stands his no. `One thing that will happen if this is approved and if this is allowed to go into this area, we will have requested the entire mile on the west side of Stoddard,that will also want to develop now. If you have any questions. MacCoy: I think you hit it pretty weft. A11 right. Thank you Shari. Is the applicant representative here tonight? l already told you it was to be continued so I guess they went home too. It is a public hearing and anyone` here that is in favor of this would they Meridian Plannin and~nin Commission Meetin 9 9 g July 13, 1999 Page 51 come forward and speak in that behalf. Not in that frame of mind, anybody that would like to speak on the opposition of this thing come forward and speak. Go ahead. Yerrington: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission my name is Tris Yerrington. I reside at 2150 W. Uctory Road, which is approximately 3/ of a mile west of this project. My main objection to this project is with the change of the zoning and the density that it creates. The property is as l am sure you report shows, is currently zoned RT, which allows one dwelling per 5 acres. This is this proposed subdivision would increase the density by somewhere between 10 to 15 times the current allowed density and definitely change the whole character of the area out there and do away with the wisdom of the previous coning which was to create a buffer zone between the dense development on the north side of the freeway and the agricultural. areas out on the south side. So that is my main opposition. I am also opposed to it because of increased traffic concerns and apparently because of the sewer problems it would create. MacCoy: Any questions for him? No. Thank you very much. Any one else would like to come and make forward a statement~here. Yerrington: My name is Kent Yerrington. I live at 8830 Morning Mist in Boise. 1 have a piece of property though right off of Pebble Lane Estates. My main concern is also the amount of density also if this is going to be continued, I think it should be continued when we have some information on the sewer and what Ada County is proposing for Stoddard since all the exits are going to be on Stoddard and even on to Overland Road, with increased traffic on Roaring Springs and in that area. MacCoy: Very good. Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, Commissioner's how about a statement on continuing this. Borup: 1 have a question for Bruce, I think. Mr. Chairman, wha# information do we have on the Black Cat trunk line. It sounds tike (inaudible) this area was designed to be to drain through a Black Cat trunk line. They were talking about temporary---going through the (inaudible) sewer line. Was that talking on a permanent basis or a temporary basis. Freckleton: ~ Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Borup, the proposal is a temporary fix pump into the Elkrun. It would eventually gravity into the Black Cat truck. Borup. So they'd be doing double lines in some areas then, running opposite directions then. Freckleton: Well, the way that #hey has i# aN laid out, they had the sewer all draining down to I believe it was down toward the southwest corner of the park area there, which is show. Which is about where the trunk line will be coming through. At this point and time, the trunk line is-clear up, well it serves Ashford Greens, it servesTurnberry Subdivision a , .,: ~~ Meridian Planning and~~ning Commission Meeting ~~~~ July 13,..1999 Page 52 Borup: Ten mile to us. Black Cat does. Freckleton: Correcf and that I believe is where it is stopped right now is right there at Turnberry is all the farther south it runs on Black Cat. The line that is in Black Cat right now is a temporary 12 inch line. It's not even the permanent truck line. As you may be aware, on that trunk line, that is one that is required to have a permanent regional lift station that is somewhere~off in the future as well. Borup: So at this poin# there's no design dates or const"ruction dates or anything?~3 .~ Freckleton: No. Borup: But there's some rumors on that, that (inaudible) Freckleton: V1%e don't deal in rumors. Borup: That's the rumor. Starts- tomorrow. My question is what I'm wondering how far in the future are we talking for that truck line? i mean is this - .. . Freckleton: That's one of those crystal ball questions: 1 don't know. , ~: ~ ,.. MacCoy: I just heard today from a meeting I was in that it's in the millions of dollars we're talking about to get this stuff put into operation. Where is the money coming from? Freckleton::. l believe just the lift station alone is a million plus for that regional lift station. Then you have that trunk line. It's probably 36 or 42 inch pipe coming down Black Cat Road. It's very expensive. Borup: So the temporary pumping could run into several years. MacCoy: Anything else? ~, Borup: No, I guess the rest of the detail -can come out in the computer model. De Weerd: ,.Well I'm concerned too about ACRD. Why haven't we got that on this one as welt as Sundance Village? Do they operate to the beat of a different drum? How can we consider this without traffic impacts? MacCoy: We can't. That's a fact{ We don't get AGHD, we don't complete our work. De Weerd: Do you .have any clue? Are they going to look at fhis before - I would like them to look at this before we have it on our agenda again. # '~ ~ =5 MacCoy: There seems to be a lot of unknowns here. t ~ Meridian Planning an`~ning Commission Meeting ~i July 13, 1999 Page 53 Stiles: The original date that 1 had was that the Commission was to meet on this on July 7m but. I have no final report from them. De Weerd: (-could assume that we could do this, continue it until the 25~' and -what? Stiles: We certainly could. De Weerd: Okay, well then without postponing this any longer or prolonging it, (will move that we continue the ~ublic hearing for annexation and zoning for Bear Creek Subdivision until August 25 . Barbeiro: Second the motion. MacCoy: Any discussion? if not, all in favor? MaTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDNISION--BY BEAR CREEK, LLC--CONSISTING OF 326 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOTS-EAST OF STODDARD ROAD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND. MacCoy: Shari, staff comments? Anything you want to add or reiterate on this one? Stiles: Please incorporate our comments from the previous public hearing into this public hearing. MacCoy; Okay, again no applicant is here. Anybody who wants to make any other statement either pro or con, which there is only five of you in the room right now. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I move to continue the public hearing for the preliminary plat for Bear Creek Subdivision to August 25tH Barbeiro: Second the motion. MacCoy: Aii in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROPOSED SALMON RAPIDS NO.S--BY FARWEST, LLC--CONSISTING OF 22 BUILDING LOTS ON 6.55 ACRES-NORTH OF VICTORY & WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD. ~~ 4 .. L~, -.,... ,~:. ~ ,~ '1S, }'~~y r .qyl' 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 July 13, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Bear Creek, LLC for annexation 8~ zoning of 150.79 acres of-land which is generally located East of Stoddard Road & South of Overland. The applicant requests a zone of R-4. Further more, the application requests preliminary plat approval of proposed Bear Creek Subdivision, consisting of 326 single family dwelling lots. A more particular description of the above property is on.file in the Gity 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 day~of June, 1999. PUBLISH June 23 & July 7, 1999. ~1'~i~~#j,t,,,{~/,I,IrLIAM G. BERG, r v w _ 6.a~ «, ;, 9~ ~ :; h t~~; )11 CLERK t_ MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JULY 13. 1989 APPLICANT: BEAR CREEK. LLC AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 13 REQUEST: ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES OF LAND (FOR R-4 ZONING) AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED LETTER ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ,~, ~ i,~~~ ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: ~~ « Y CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS _ (~ NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED LETTER ~1f~a SETTLERS IRRIGATION: ~ '~ J r` IDAHO POWER: P US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMA71ON: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ' ~ ~` ~i' HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO-~3,6~cE '~ ~~ (zo8~ ss~-22tt RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (2p~)y88 -4813 PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD J U IV 1 1 1999 DEPARTMENT (2oa, 8s4-ss33 City of Meridian Cittr C3erk ®ffice 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations E to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: July 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 7,.1999 HEARING DATE: July 13, 1999 FILE NUMBER: 'PAZ=99-010 ~~ REQUEST: OR R-4 ZONING F PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION) BY: BEAR CREEK L.L.C. ` LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: EAST OF STODDARD RD & SOUTH`OF OVERLAND RD TAMMYDE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT C ITY ATTORN EY 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)` IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY.(ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISI€ REMARKS: HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good .Place to Live ,, Counc;- embers CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLICBWORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208)887-2211 GLENN sENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-48~~~~Fr~P~L NNING AND ZONING RON ANDERSON DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD ~ (208) 884-5533 J Rl iU 15 1999 City cf Meridian i_i.~~~ t;z~;i~l~ Office 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 and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City.Clerk by: July 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DAT,,:~E~r: June 7, 1999_ HEARING DATE: July 13, 1999 FILE NUMBER: .PAZ=99-010 REQUEST: ANN TION 8~ ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES (FOR R-4 ZONING FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION) BY: BEAR CREEK L.L.C. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: EAST OF STODDARD RD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND RD _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH~BORUP, P/Z ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C KEITH BIRD, 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) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) f /~` YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: CC? - / `7 ~" .4- ~ ~~ ~onf e ~ ~)3~~~ 1 Y'~ l HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY = Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT B Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (2os> 8s7-22 t I RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 'PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD DEPARTMENT ~~C,F~~ (208) 884-5533 I ~ • ,f ~ ~ trR(t!~ TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEYELO.PMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~ Office To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: July 6, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 7, 1999 HEARING DATE: July 13, 1999 FILENUMBER: ADZ'-99-010 REQUEST: ANNEXATION ~ ZONING OF 150.79 ACRES (FOR R-4 ZONING FOR PROPOSED BEAR CREEK SUBDIVISION) BY: BEAR CREEK L.L.C. LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: EAST OF STODDARD RD & SOUTH OF OVERLAND RD _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z KEITH BORUP, PIZ ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C KEITH BIRD, 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 MERIDWN POST OFFICE(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM 8~ FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (A~~N~NEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: ///!7 ~~-~-r ~~~r ai ~rnxl ... _., . ~ r ~ ~ ~ t ~ _ 7 SUPERINTENDENT Christine H. Donnell -_.. Y..~~~ - ~~~-u r uv June 17, °1999 R~~~~ -` " ~ City of Meridian J U N ~ ~ 19~~ 33 East Idaho G'j~ ~~ ~~~ Meridian, Idaho 83642 Dear Councilmen: Enclosed for your review is general information relative to schools located in the ro ose project area. If you have an uestions, lease contact Jim Carbe p p d YQ p rry at 888-6701. - Reference: Bear Creek Subdivision ,~ ._, Eletrientary School: Mary McPherson Elementary Middle School: Meridian Middle School High School: Meridian High School Comments and/or Recommendations: Mary McPherson Elementary School is over ca aci and will remain so until the fifth middle school comes on lme in thetfall of 2ppp is over capacity School is over capacity. Meridian High We can predict that these homes, when completed, will house thirty-three (33) elemen children, twenty-five (25) middle school aged children, and twenty-three (23) senior hta~ aged students. Igh aged Even though, we are in a difficult position and need your help in dealing with the im a growth on schools, we will approve this development. pct of Sincerely, ., JIm' Carberry, ,. , Administrator of Support progr.~s BOARD OF TRUSTEES Rex Harrison • Wall- Hedrick • HoII~. Houfburg • David W},nkoop • Steve ~4ann . ~ ~ 3-1-~/2 V~ill'requrrc-l„a....-~-- ^ food establishment ^ swimming poo s or ~ ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store F _ - ' ti. ^ 14. Date: ~! ~[_/ S 9 Reviewed By: ~l~lL~~Y ,. F ~..~ !^ ~ Review Sheet NHD 10191 r~, rev. 7f9T s .. r y. .. ,,. ~ ~ ~, CENTRAL CEN AL DISTRICT HEALTH~D~PARLL ENT •• oisTR~CT Environmental Heajth?Division /~ LT ~ k ~ yReturln to: ,/~` I Y ^ Boise" DEPARTMENT. 1 " R_ECiE~-V~~ ^ Ea le J," g ezone _ i ~ ~ '- •~ ~`~~~d " ,• ~ ll Al i ~ 1000__ ^ Garden,City Meridian Conditional,lJse # C ~ Kuna Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ^ ACZ i r 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ' t 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ~ , ^ 3. ;Specific knowledge as fo 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 ^ waste flow'characteristics ^ or bedrock from original grade ^ other ^ 6. ~~This office will 'require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens`to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. w 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and t water availability: ~ f ^ 8. A }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 z ^ individual sewage ^ individual water , ^ 9. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, ` Division of Environmental Quality: ^ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ .sewage dry lines ^ central water ^~ '10. y„ ~ 7 ~ .Run-off is not to: create a mosquito breeding problem. , ,^ I I. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. .~ ^ 13. 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 ^ 14. a Date: ~/ ~~/~S/9 " Reviewed By: ~'~~/~r' w ~. CDHD ID/91 rcb, ~. ~/9, 4. ~ ~-_ # Review Sheet 4 y, +. RE~~~ l ~X J U ~ 1 7 1999 City of 1l~eridian City Clerk Office ORGANIZED 1904 ~iuc~ia & ~l~~tdlii~ ~Ifinigatto~ ?~ca~zict 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 June 15, 1999 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 Will Berg, Gty Clerk City of Meridian 33 East idaho~, Meridian, ID 83642 Re: AZ-99-010 'Proposed Bear Creek Subdivison for Bear Creek LLC Dear Commissioners: The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the annexation and zoning for the above referenced application. Sincerely, ~~~ Bill enson, Asst. Water Superintei NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION BH:dln Cc: File -Shop File -Office Water Superintendent .,~ ,,~ r,:+ r.`~-~ ~ a.': '` '*~~0 r~ PPS ,~ ~'a ~~ , .,~~__ _ RAS~o_~'1 1~\~}~ x L7-~ ,, r^s~ .; a s ~ . ~} < -s . ~ ; + ~ ~ ~ ~3~, °t - r r _ rt s k.Y 3 :.,, ;y. ,', APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 _ _ _ .. , ~. .. HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ~ ~ Mayor . ROBERT D. CORRIE '~ A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT Ci C il M b CITY OF MERIDIAN (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 ty ounc em ers PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO _ BUILDING DEPARTMENT GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 RON ANDERSON (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD City Clerk Fax (208) 888-4218 DEPARTMENT ~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ (208) 884-5533 • Faz 887-1297 JUL 0 9 1999 ` City or Meridian MEMORANDUM: City Clerk Office July 9, 1999 To: Planning & Zoning Commission/Mayor & City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Enginee~'~%~~ Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator ~- Re: Beaz Creek Subdivision Annexation & Zoning/Preliminary Plat Sundance , LLC Request for Annexation & Zoning/CUP for 300 Apartments English Gardens Request for Preliminary Plat M ' Due to the fact that computer modeling for these projects was not able to be completed (see attached memos from Brad Watson, Assistant City Engineer), we have not been able to complete our reviews of the project:` A major contingency on all of these projects will be whether the present sewer system is able to accept the flows to be generated from these developments. Therefore, we respectfully request that the five public heazings referenced above be continued until such time as serviceability is determined. Continue